Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 23:26:25 -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: <3518FBA1-F501-4C6D-9C98-15CD86A99A88@mac.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
You can be going 80 in California and get passed by a CHP ( California
highway patrol ) !
I figure it's so busy there, and crowded, and the tiniest glitch, like one
small accident ties things up for hours, that they figure if it's all
flowing well, just let it go.
Heck, sometimes even a pulled over car can cause stop and go traffic to
start piling up.
Just on the side of the freeway even. People slow down to look, it backs
things up behind them easily. Crazy.
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
Kim Brennan
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 10:45 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: That recent post bashing Tiico..one on Yahoo subaru too.
Different world in the east. 75 mph is tops in most places, and 65-70
is more standard. I recently took I-70 from DC to Chicago and the
turnpikes back to DC. If I cranked it up to 80mph I was passing
everything in sight. Most of the time I kept it around 70 mph
(slightly faster than most of the rest of the traffic). After all I
was pulling a trailer...
Same was true on I-81 north to Canada and on the highways between
Toronto and Quebec City. Less lanes, less people (paradoxically) and
slower speeds than Southern California.
I remember taking the 15 from San Diego up to San Bernadino and
nearly getting run over for "only" doing 75mph. I stayed in the
rightmost lane and was passed by everything.
On the other paw, driving in the Seattle area, I was nearly pulled
over by a cop when I was doing 58 mph in a 55 zone. He followed me
for about 3 miles, before pulling off and turning around to look for
other prey. In Tacoma/Seattle, anybody doing more than 60 mph stands
out like a sore thumb.
On Nov 2, 2007, at 1:25 AM, Scott Daniel - Shazam wrote:
> 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
>>>
| 
