Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 20:25:02 -0400
Reply-To: Sam Walters <sam.cooks@VERIZON.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Sam Walters <sam.cooks@VERIZON.NET>
Subject: Re: 2.1 L Engine rebuilds
In-Reply-To: <1a1.3884eb66.30193abd@aol.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Emil,
I think your email has two mistaken premises. First, that your engine
is necessarily on the way out because it has 150k miles. If it has no
impending signals of failure, keep treating it right and you might get
another 50k or more miles out of it. In some ways the 1.9 l engines
were more sturdy than the 2.1 l ones. But it isn't necessarily bad to
start learning about the conversion choices. But first, be sure you
keep treating it right with the proper oil and filter, regular changes,
proper coolant, etc. Also make sure that there are no fuel line leaks
if the engine has the original fuel lines.
Second, I don't think your premise the most conversions are geared
toward 2.1's is correct. There are many conversions done to the 1.9l
powered Vanagons. The Vanagon frame is the same in both cars. The WBX
engine support bar, which may or may not be used depending on which
conversion you do is the same. The transmissions are interchangeable so
the adapter plates are the same and the gearing is essentially the same.
(There was a small change in the ratio of 3rd gear some time about 85 or
so.) The things that are different between the 1.9 and 2.1 Vanagons
and relate to engines, the FI systems, are almost completely removed
when you take the engine out. What is left that you attach and wire
to the conversion engine is almost the same. Yes, there are some slight
differences in the cooling pipes, but not anything significant.
But the point is that for each of the more common conversions, you can
do it to either of the WBX powered types of Vanagons with the same
degree of difficulty / simplicity. Though it is more trouble, a
reasonable number of people have done conversions in which the installed
a water-cooled engine into an early 80's Vanagon that was originally
powered by an air cooled engine.
So, the pros and cons for the various conversions are virtually the same
regardless of where the "host" vanagon for the conversion was an 83.5 -
85 (1.9l) or an 86 - 91 (2.1l). Your van with the ASI Camper
conversion will weigh more than a plain passenger van, but you will need
to compare its weight with a Westy to get the full implications of
whether weight will impact your engine choices.
There are email groups for a number of the conversions where you can get
lots if information about that particular conversion.
And for rebuilds, all of the major WBX rebuilders do 1.9's as well as
2.1's. In the last 2 years, I have put almost 40k miles on a 1.9l
engine rebuilt by NW Connecting Rod and it is still running strong. I
bought the van when the PO had about 8k on the rebuild. There are some
people who have taken a 2.1 and just dropped it into an 1.9 powered van
and used the Digijet FI system to run it. Supposedly works very well
with some saying the 2.1 is even better with Digijet than with the
Digifant that came with it. Of course, the downside of a simple 1.9 l
rebuild is that you still come away with a van that has a rather low
powered engine.
Sam
--
Sam Walters
Baltimore, MD
89 Syncro GL, Zetec Inside
85 Westy Weekender
85 Mercedes Benz 300D Turbodiesel - to become veggie oil powered
All incoming and outgoing email scanned by
automatically updated copy of Norton AntiVirus.
