Date:         Wed, 31 Jul 2002 09:49:54 -0600
Reply-To:     Simon <simon@FARRSIDE.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Simon <simon@FARRSIDE.NET>
Subject:      Re: WBX bashing
In-Reply-To:  <007c01c238a3$1a8f0340$0d00a8c0@LAGOS>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

Well, yes, thanks for reinforcing my point! It reminds me of what some
Apple folks once said about the original IBM PC- "A half-assed,
hackneyed attempt at the old technology." The aircooled engine was good
for it's time and implementation, the I-4 was and is good, the
wasserboxer just had no good reason for existing. VW proved it could fit
an I-4 in a Van; it should have continued to do so in 1983.5!

On Wednesday, July 31, 2002, at 09:01  AM, Clive Smith wrote:

> Well we all know it was just the aircooled engine with a water jacket
> wrapped around it, hence all the pipes. Try doing that without external
> pipes with an existing design! And don't keep forgetting, that Europe
> doesn't experience quite as many of those problems it seems you do
> there -
> and there are no doubt 3 reasons for that, as there is for every
> accident
> that happens.
> <clip>