I'm waiting for this technology to be available for conversions!!!!

To "Air" is human. what a "divine" idea!!

<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/automobiles/autospecial/24air.html?_r=1&a mp;em&amp;ex=1193371200&amp;en=b6d24f853e5ac33d&amp;ei=5087&amp;oref=slogin>

http://www.engineair.com.au/airmotor.htm

Plenty of space for an air storage tank in a Vanagon too!

Jack

-----Original Message----- From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of Neil2 Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 5:32 PM To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM Subject: Re: Replace WBX with more efficient engine? Well....

Here, here, Diesels are just fine . . . in Florida.

On 6/5/08, Stuart MacMillan <macgroup@comcast.net> wrote: > > Folks, > > Do the math. Calculate your savings (10%? 15%?) over a year, and decide if > it's worth it. Probably not, since you can save as much by slowing down, > or > even with a product like this: www.ca40g.com (I have no interest in this > company, but I've tried it and it did work for about a 10% improvement in > my > Scion xB (30 to 33 MPG hiway over 10 tank fulls). I'd be curious to see > what you folks find if you try it. I'm going to try it in my EVC this > summer. It's a bit of a PITA to deal with though, its an oil based liquid. > > > People swap out the WBX for more power and reliability, not economy. It > takes the same amount of power to move the heavy, un-aerodynamic Vanagon > Regardless of what engine is in it, so a slightly more efficient engine > will > give you slightly more mileage. > > Put in a diesel if you really want economy, and you'll have the best of > both > worlds--you'll be forced to drive slower ;-), and you'll get terrific > (relatively speaking) mileage! > > Stuart >

-- Neil '82 Diesel Westy Peace of