Vanagon EuroVan
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (April 2008, week 3)Back to main VANAGON pageJoin or leave VANAGON (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Mon, 21 Apr 2008 07:32:04 -0700
Reply-To:     Don Hanson <dhanson@GORGE.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Don Hanson <dhanson@GORGE.NET>
Subject:      MPG?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

You who have the syncros getting around 15mpg...Consider this: For a 4-wd vehicle that's not bad fuel economy. For an RV, that is good fuel economy. For a vehicle capable of doing both those tasks, and one that was conceived before fuel consumption was even important to most of the designing engineers, your 15 mpg is OK. Heck, it's some 25 years since the WBX motor was designed. Now here's a question for the list...Who's considered what a more fuel-effective engine transplant might be for the Vanagon? I know the diesel-powered vans got/get around 35+mpg..but they also usually go about 35mph. Some of the newer vehicles are getting closer to 50mpg and with seemingly good, or at least acceptable performance..Has anyone considered trying a modern fuel efficient motor in a Vanagon? I bet there are more than a few motors now a days, with equal HP (to the WBX) available, and yet with a fuel-consumption just a fraction of the WBX (or even the Subaru) motors...Yeah, I know the van is heavier than a new small car and certainly not aerodynamic, but it seems like 35-45mpg should be possible without being dangerously slow. Yeah, in Cali. you probably would not be allowed to change motors very easily, but California is just one state. The way insurance companies handle claims, there ought to be plenty of almost new " totaled out" vehicles for salvage, with the newest fuel efficient motors available for possible use in a Vanagon. It certainly would be great to actually go twice or thee times as far on a tank of fuel and still have a vehicle with all the utility of a Vanagon..The cost of fuel now makes looking at slightly more complex engine-conversions more interesting and economically viable. If you could triple your range..go 720 miles instead of 250 on your 16 gallon tank at $65..it wouldn't take very long to pay for a bit more complex engine transplant than the usual current options. How bout a "Scion-igon" or a "Vana-rolla" to go along with those 'Subigons?" Plenty of room back there. You could even pay for extra gearing to change the motor's output with a V-drive or whatever, if needed. Don Hanson


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main VANAGON page

Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!


Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com


The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.

Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.