Date:         Tue, 6 Apr 2004 09:55:57 -0400
Reply-To:     David Brodbeck <gull@GULL.US>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         David Brodbeck <gull@GULL.US>
Subject:      Re: State of the Art in Engine Swaps is....?
In-Reply-To:  <4072A7A8.1050609@fyi.net>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Tue, 6 Apr 2004, Eric Zeno wrote:

>                   Good laugh!  BY FAR!  These are over priced
> complicated Jap, junk.  IF they were so good it would have remained the
> same engine design without change, for years and years.  Try an inline 4
> Cyl. VW engine.

Longevity and lack of change is not necessarily proof of a good design.
It's a difference in engineering philosophy.  Japanese companies tend to
aim for continual, incremental improvement.  German companies stick with
one design until it becomes totally untenable before they go to the
expense of engineering something new.  A good example is VW using the 2.0L
aircooled engine until it finally could not meet emissions regulations
anymore, even though it had long ago become totally unsuitable for modern
driving conditions.  (Yes, I know a lot of you have aircooled vans and
like them, but you have to admit you can't drive them like a modern car
unless you want short engine life.)  And VW certainly stuck with the
Wasserboxer for a long time considering its fundamental design flaws.


David Brodbeck, N8SRE
'82 Volkswagen Diesel Westfalia
'86 Volvo 240DL wagon