Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 19:08:08 -0700
Reply-To: aatransaxle <daryl@AATRANSAXLE.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: aatransaxle <daryl@AATRANSAXLE.COM>
Subject: Re: vanagon Digest Huffer motor post
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
I have a few thousand miles on my syncro westy with an old subie turbo unit
on a mostly stock wbx'er with no ill effects.
Run it about 5 psi of boost and its a happy camper (literally).B.Bob big
valve heads and ratio rockers on a fresh rebuild.
Some prototype pics of on my web site home page..link at the bottom.
Daryl of AA Transaxle
(425) 788-4070
aatransaxle.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Hanson" <dhanson@GORGE.NET>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: vanagon Digest Huffer motor post
> Hi Jim
> No, not the boxer motor. This may seem like blasphemy, especially here on
> the Vanagon List, but from everything I have read
> (never owned one myself) the waterboxer seems a pretty weak design all
> around. At least that is what I glean from all the rap.
> What I was thinking is an inline 4 vw motor, perhaps even the one I
> already have in my 84, which is an older 8-valve 1.8liter. I will have to
> do some further research, but I've seen mention of aftermarket kits and
> parts available for 1.8L Turbo VW factory motors, and I understand the
> basic
> pieces of the VW inline four haven't been changed much. If the factory
> put
> out turbos and GTIs using that platform, it may be feasible to bolt on a
> supercharger without overstressing the motor beyond reason. Luckily, I
> don't live in California, so the C.A.R.B. dweebs are not a concern..(BTW,
> why do they go after little guys with small motor conversions there in
> Wow-fornia and let Mexican truckers run around spewing black smoke, and
> stuff like that? moot question.)
> If one were to keep the final power output within reason, it seems to me
> like it'd work great. Hold the HP down to about what you get from a 2.5
> liter Subie. Probably the motor weight would be near 3-500lbs less. The
> initial conversion is certainly much cheaper and simpler than a Subie
> conversion, what with an I-4 being cheap and readily available.
> The guys who've stuck em onto vehicles I have seen seem to have no major
> issues with engine management. The issues seem to be pretty
> basic..Getting
> the drive belts and brackets done properly, sizing the pulleys for proper
> "pump" speed, etc.
> I am going to look into this seriously as I just sold my '72 Beetle and
> have about the proper sum of cash sitting around right now from that
> transaction...Hmmm The target would be about 150-175hp from a motor that
> is
> 3-4 hundred lbs lighter than a waterboxer and that's found in every VW
> since
> the Rabbit...
> Don Hanson
>
>> Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 09:06:17 -0400
>> From: Jim Akiba <> Subject: Re: Huffer motors..Turbo and SC...
>>
>> Hey Don,
>>
>> Do you mean supercharge the boxer? Yeah you could do it, but there are
>> serious downsides. The big three are that since the boxer is already
> prone
>> to head gasket sealing problems as most open decks are, forced induction
> in
>> anything but the lowest of boost levels is asking for trouble. Second
> you'd
>> have to change the engine management significantly enough to cause the
> whole
>> project to cost quite a bit of money, and the supercharger itself isn't
>> cheap. You'd also have to bring whatever other pieces of the puzzle that
> are
>> old and worn up to spec, you can't push the limits of an engine if it's
> near
>> failure already either because it is maxed out by design or state of
>> operation because of age, miles, etc. Lastly since the boxer is
>> expensive
>> to rebuild/replace, the risk financially is huge. If you spent 5k on
>> supercharging the setup and pop your engine, are you really willing to
> spend
>> another 4k for a rebuild to attempt it again? What is the second rebuild
>> goes? You're then 13k into it with nothing to show. The risk money-wise
>> is
>> huge, the *potential* ROI is small. Doable? Sure. Prudent... eh..
>> dunno...
>> You're right about the altitude though, in our 3500k mile trip just this
>> past month, at altitudes of 6k and above with the supercharged setup we
> were
>> still pulling good grades at 65-70 if we wanted to push it.
>>
>> Jim Akiba
| 
