Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 16:04:57 -0800
Reply-To: Anthony Egeln <regnsuzanne@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Anthony Egeln <regnsuzanne@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Diesel Subaru Conversions
In-Reply-To: <000401c644b5$c1744630$6400a8c0@masterpc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Thanks, Dennis! Again you answered one of my unasked questions. I had run 89 RON for ever then when the gas went up I re-read the manual and found that the 2.1 was designed to run on 87...and by golly it runs great, AND I have often gotten better gas milage for some reason, i.e. 19-20 vs. the steady 18 I got with the 89
Dennis Haynes <dhaynes@OPTONLINE.NET> wrote: Your Vanagon does not need 91 pump octane fuels. That sticker is for
another, older rating system. 87 ROZ/RON is fine unless something is
wrong or the ignition timing is over advanced.
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf
Of Christopher Gronski
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 2:42 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Diesel Subaru Conversions
I disagree with your calculation for two reasons:
1) A lot of people do conversions because they need a new engine
anyway, so for many the calculation needs to be done on the "premium"
charged for a diesel conversion over a rebuild of their 1.9 or 2.1
2) My 2.1 syncro lists the gasoline requirement as 91 octane right
next to the filler neck, so I have to burn premium gas. In Canada this
generally means paying $0.07 to $0.10 MORE per litre for diesel.
The math still probably works out against the diesel but when I do it,
it will likely be for eco reasons and added (mostly flat) torque.
Chris
On 3/10/06, Pensioner wrote:
> Musing over conversions, one of my many talents, brings me to consider
the
> cost-benefit scenarios. Let's postulate that we drive 10000 miles per
year
> just to use easy numbers. Discounting the normal maintenance for both
a
> converted vanagon and a non-converted vanagon, the costs of conversion
seem
> to range from ~$14000 (not a misprint) in my case to perhaps $3000 for
an
> average of $5000 (high but we have to start somewhere).
>
> If fuel costs over time are the principal reason for going to diesel
(not
> fuel availability, or the desire to side with Willie on the BioDiesel
> concert) then it makes sense to look at the fuel savings one would
enjoy
> over that 10000 miles per year. Diesel currently costs about %10 more
than
> 87 Octane and is likely to stay that way. For $2.50/gallon 87 octane
let's
> say and vanagon average fuel efficiency of 17 miles per gallon. The
gallons
> per year is easily found to be ~588 gallons times $2.50 gives $1470
per year
> fuel cost before conversion. If you go with diesel the fuel
consumption
> will probably be on the order of 25 miles per gallon. For the same
10000
> miles per year you'll pay $1100 in fuel costs including the %10 higher
price
> for diesel. You will get additional range between fuel stops but
you'll
> need it as not all fuel services feature diesel.
>
> In summary you'll save $370 per year in fuel costs for 10000 miles per
year.
> How many years to break even on the installation is left as an
excercise for
> the reader.
>
> Seems to be over ten years if your previously owned motor lasts that
long.
> FTSOE let's say it does. You will have saved $3700 towards the motor
> replacement.
>
> The above example is to be considered a conservative estimate process,
your
> mileage, tolerance, costs, will no doubt be different.
>
> "If a man professes knowledge but cannot express that knowledge in
numbers,
> then that knowledge is of a meagre and insufficient kind" -- Lord
Kelvin
>
> Numbers rule!
>
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.