Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 22:25:12 -0700
Reply-To: Scott Daniel - Shazam <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Scott Daniel - Shazam <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
Subject: Re: That recent post bashing Tiico..one on Yahoo subaru too.
In-Reply-To: <C34FFD0F.ADE3%mwmiller@cwnet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I just drove that the other day in a fast car.
I remembered powering up those hills in my 1.9TD vanagon ....which did ok.
I will say, it's another world when hills are not even an issue.
And I'm thinking of maybe getting a diesel vanagon going here for a veggy
oil system, but only for in town. Not for long distance, or high speeds or
big hills. Just for rattling around town at very low cost.
In California, the whole Bay area to Tahoe, and all points south....typical
driving is 3 or more lanes, all packed with cars, going 80, and even faster.
90 easily at times. Ideally you need a car that will go up any hill in the
state at 85 mph, with AC on, if you want to be 'current' with the driving
conditions there. Lots of places like that actually......actual speeds on
many interstates these days are a solid 80 and above, including uphill.
Fun !
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
mike
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 10:01 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: That recent post bashing Tiico..one on Yahoo subaru too.
Depends on the Freeway and the hill, try it on I 80 up Donner Pass
On 11/1/07 6:51 PM, "Mike" <mbucchino@CHARTER.NET> wrote:
> My stock,original, low miles, '87 Westy has 2.1 and an automatic. It
> doesn't perform as poorly as you say yours does. I guess your engine must
> be very tired, and is obviously lacking power, if it can't even maintain
45
> mph up a long freeway hill. It sounds like it's time for a
> rebuild.......talk to Boston Bob for the real answers to your problems.
>
> Mike B.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott Daniel - Shazam" <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
> To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 9:15 PM
> Subject: Re: That recent post bashing Tiico..one on Yahoo subaru too.
>
>
> Stock waterboxers....yup, can be real reliable.
> Seriously lacking in decent power in many situations however...
> Like my 85 weekender with 2.1 wbxr engine and fuel system, and auto
> trans....
> The best it can do on some freeway hills is 45 and sometimes even only
> 40.....
> And all the other ( too numerous in California ) cars are going 70 or 80
up
> that same hill. Like it's a safety issue even.
> You combine that with the joke head gasket system, and old tech engine
> management system, and fuel mileage that could be better...... and lots
of
> things are hard to work on too, on stock waterboxer engines, like a water
> pump job with the engine in the van - a pure knuckle ripper of a job.
> Consider all that, and the search for a better engine becomes obvious.
> Scott
> www.turbovans.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
> Zeitgeist
> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 5:14 PM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: Re: That recent post bashing Tiico..one on Yahoo subaru too.
>
> My WBX is too damn reliable. I feel cheated of my shot at vocal
> malcontentedness. My old '87 GL was too reliable, as well. I feel doubly
> cheated. My anger and remorse is palpable.
>
> Just thought I'd share my story of woe and misery with my factory
> conversion...
>
> On 11/1/07, Rob <becida@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> That made your day didn't it?
>>
>> Rob
>>
|