Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 15:25:13 -0400
Reply-To: Sam Conant <samcvt@COMCAST.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Sam Conant <samcvt@COMCAST.NET>
Subject: Re: That recent post bashing Tiico..one on Yahoo subaru too.
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
I'll be U.S. Rt 2 from Vermont to the Coast of Maine is a daunting
challenge. I know it is for my 84 Westy. {;?)
SamC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris S." <mrpolak@YAHOO.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: That recent post bashing Tiico..one on Yahoo subaru too.
> My '84 Westy will do 75 mph all day without slowing for most average hills
> on the Eastern US interstates while towing a small trailer, two bikes on
> the bike rack, and lots of camping gear inside. It's a stock 1.9L WBX.
>
>
>
> Chris S.
> '84 Westy -> http://www.knology.net/~vw/vws/hershey/
> '01 NB TDI -> http://www.knology.net/~vw/Beetle.jpg
>
> 1-888-VW-PARTS <- Recommended Expert Vanagon Part Source
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Kai Mei <kai@NEWCLEAR.US>
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Sent: Friday, November 2, 2007 1:21:17 PM
> Subject: Re: That recent post bashing Tiico..one on Yahoo subaru too.
>
>
> Yes, my 87 with 2.1 does not have any problem at all during inclines
> on the freeway at 60 mph. I'm scared that I'm getting rid of 2.3
> rebuild or something... It does have SCAT stainless valve covers...
>
> On Nov 1, 2007, at 9:51 PM, Mike 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
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
| 
