Date:         Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:47:28 +0000
Reply-To:     Alistair Bell <albell@UVIC.CA>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Alistair Bell <albell@UVIC.CA>
Subject:      Re: Tiico into Diesel
Comments: To: drillock@earthlink.net
In-Reply-To:  <3BD5B5D8.6B983D8C@earthlink.net>
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"

Mark,

I'll let Frank explain why he is looking for another tranny (may be
something to do with his turbo I4 project?).

But I think that his points about engine longevity are worth noting.

Having more power for a given road speed can translate into less strain on
the engine.

I wish we had the data to compare engine longevity between various
trans/engine combos.

What is the problem with high rpm? In my case it is not noise, for at 70mph
the wind noise is predominant. I still have plenty of throttle left, the
shoebox will still pull to 80-85 (loose my nerve at that speed, not because
of engine but van seems to loose its road manners).

Fuel efficiency? Maybe I'd do better at lower engine rpm, but my average for
the years 1999 and 2000 was 28 mpg (imperial), with recorded high of 32 and
low of 25. I drive a 66/33 split hwy/twn. On the hwy I stick at 60mph.

Last summer, 3 week holiday over the mountainous geography of B.C. and
across the bald windy prairie of Alberta (van loaded to the gills and with
canoe on top) noted the following:

>1982 Westy, I4 conversion in Ś94, 193k miles on van, 110k miles on engine.

Estimated avg. cruising speed (not including steep mtn. passes): 90kph
distance travelled: 4085 km/2538 miles

gas consumption: 442.4 litres, 97 imp gal, 117 us gal
average łgas consumption rate˛: 10.8 l/100 km, 26mpg imp, 22mpg US
best łgas consumption rate˛: 31mpg imp, 26mpg US
worst łgas consumption rate˛: 26mpg imp, 22mpg US

oil consumption: approx. 0.4 l, 0.47 US qt
Max observed oil temp: 120C (long climbs in 3rd gear)
Avg. oil temp (at 100kph, external air temp 30C): 110C
(Mobil 1, 15W-50)

No coolant overheating.
Fridge stay lit during all of the driving.<

(You'll note that we didn't drive at 70mph)

At any rate, the fuel consumption, and the oil consumption were more than
acceptable.

The best transmission I could imagine for my set-up would be the stock
diesel with some sort of overdrive as a 5th gear. But the vans works fine as
is.

Alistair


on 23/10/01 6:24 PM, Mark Drillock at drillock@earthlink.net wrote:

> The only possible "problem" would be the cruising rpms of the DZ tranny.
> Stock tires yield 4800 rpm at 70 mph. Maybe some people can live with
> this but I doubt I could. If he has a DM tranny 70 mph is almost 4500.
> This drops to 4000 at 70 with a waterboxer tranny.
> 
> I am familiar with Frank's opinions in this regard and I respect them.
> The lower gearing provides more power at a given road speed. He lately
> seems to have acquired an interest in obtaining a DK air-cooled tranny.
> These give about 3700 rpm at 70 mph.
> 
> I think most people would want to get lower highway rpms than the diesel
> tranny gearing provide. It is not required though. That still leaves the
> mounting issues of the older tranny position versus the Tiico engine
> mounting position.
> 
> Mark
> (who actually owns 4 running inline engined Vanagons with a waterboxer
> tranny, diesel DZ, diesel DM, and air-cooled DK tranny among them.)