Date:         Fri, 18 May 2007 23:29:28 -0700
Reply-To:     BenT Syncro <syncro@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         BenT Syncro <syncro@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Auto conversion to Manual?
Comments: To: Ron LK Johnson <adhocMedia@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To:  <6B77EA31-7ABC-43A2-AD6C-B7418D4A3EB1@comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Ron,


I have done the swap back and forth. My last swap cost me zero. I gave the
old tranny and 2.1 with a headgasket leak in exchange for the labor. The
donor with a good running 2.1 plus good trans cost me $150 from a local tow
company auction. I sold off parts by letting people take pieces off such as
doors and interior parts for dirt cheap but still made enough to cover the
original cost of $150 plus the $100 cost to get rid of the carcass.

Don't right the project off too quickly. Creative arrangements can work
wonders.


Cheers,

BenT



On 5/18/07, Ron LK Johnson <adhocMedia@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Lots of interesting discussion, but the basic interest was due to a
> simple enjoyment of the shift experience and not necessarily
> durability. An Auto trans is great in city traffic which is the
> mainstay of my driving. But, I do expect to travel on un-paved roads
> - not exactly Syncro territory, but  definitely beyond a standard
> car's capability. The Auto would probably be fine for these very
> occasional excursions, but still lacks the satisfying feel of shifting.
>
> I think the consensus is, yes a conversion is possible (no
> infrastructure problems), but a bit difficult to do and probably
> involves excessive $$$ unless one had a donor car to work from. Using
> a donor and wanting to minimize NET cost, one could do a double
> swap... and re-sell the donor to someone who is as set on driving an
> Auto as I am on driving a Manual! Of course there is the cost of
> labor which for me was much lower 20 years ago though I had plenty of
> time to spare...
>
> thanks again,
> ron johnson
>