Date:         Thu, 5 Jun 2008 08:17:40 -0700
Reply-To:     Don Hanson <dhanson@GORGE.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Don Hanson <dhanson@GORGE.NET>
Subject:      Re: Subject: What about replacing Vanagon engines with more fuel
              efficient ones? (long answer)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"

Hello,
When I began my search for a more efficient vehicle to be my non-towing,
lighter duty, traveling vehicle and camper, the Vanagon attracted my
attention.  I was, however, put off by the often-mentioned (in the Vanagon
reveiws I could find) relatively poor reliability and the recurring problems
owners often seem to have had with the WBX motor.  Now, before you purists
'go off' on the "Well, my WBX has a million miles and I never even had to
change the oil" tirade,   I am only relating what I found to be the general
consensus about the WBX motor in a Vanagon, gleaned through wide reading and
research.  I read "relatively poor reliability" as meaning if you kept a WBX
Vanagon for a few years, you could expect some common and predictable
problems with the motor and you could expect to, at sometime during your
ownership, deal with an expensive engine repair (or two) as a matter of
course.  I didn't want a vehicle with a motor with 'known' weakness.
  I was also wanting a bit better  gas mileage than what  I found quoted for
stock motor vanagons. The mileage I found quoted was from
about..about...16-21 miles per gallon.    I'd seen, occasionally,  a very
few write-ups on transplanting a gasoline inline four VW motor into the
Vanagon, in the same configuration as the Diesel powered vanagons use. That
interested me, but these seem to be "out of favor" and not widely in
service, or at least, not much rap on the Net about driving them.. (After
having ridden in a Diesel Westie, I didn't want one of those...Too very
slow.  Too overvalued by their current owners..)
  I happened to see a gas inline four (a '92 Cabriolet (rabbit) 1.8liter
Digifant II) a plain '84 listed for sale nearby and went looking.  Came home
with the '84 that I've been driving now for about 30k miles.
  While the little VW  inline four doesn't get super mileage in a Vanagon,
it's better than the average WBX on gas.  Driven as I do, it gets 24-26
miles per gallon.  I bet, soon enough, someone will come out with
aftermarket chips and other mods to make that figure go up...wouldn't be
difficult, since the same basic motor is used in newer VWs and is more fuel
efficient.
    Kennedy Engineering makes(has for years) an adapter plate to bolt that
type motor into your present van...You can re-use most of the WBX motor's
accessories without much fiddling around and the inline four gas motor goes
into the stock engine space with no mods (being the same block as the
Vanagon diesel)  Any competent mechanic could do the install, it wouldn't
take a "transplant specialist".  The one I bought was done by the seller's
local 'service station mechanic'...
   The inline gassers go for around $300 US, last time I looked (almost a
year ago, so bump that figure to $600 US by now...)  The Rabbit-style inline
fours are plentiful.  Qualified VW mechanics are all familiar with them.
They are very dependable.
   The over-all  power seems similar.  Perhaps coming a little further up on
the RPM range and slightly more hp than a stock WBX , but still somewhat
underpowered, compared to a Subie-Van.  Mine will hold 75mph without feeling
'stressed' on normal interstate runs..
  So if you are getting,  say 20mpg with your stocker, you *could* /should
get a 20% (+/-) increase in fuel efficiency...Those are "my" numbers..I am
sure others on the list will come down on those numbers, defending the WBX,
calling BS on me...Whatever..this is "an" answer to your original
question..I am sure there are other answers, too.
  I am glad I went this route.  I have not been driving my Ford diesel
truck, hardly at all now,  for almost two years..since I got the van..I've
done four extended camping vanagon trips down the west coast of the US,
Portland, Or.  to Mexico without any problems..an alternator failed is
all..Good low maintenance trouble free vanagon..Like it.
  Don Hanson

Date:    Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:52:55 -0600
From:    "Katherine J. Maas" <kathmaas@TELUS.NET>


I=B9ve recently resumed active daily reading of the Vanagon postings, after
a
long period of overwork, and I find fascinating the discussions of how the
fuel crisis is (or not) going to impact our ability to continue to enjoy ou=
r
vehicles. I was reflecting on this myself recently during a two-week campin=
g
trip from Calgary to the west coast of Vancouver Island. The mileage I get
on my 87 Westy used to be very attractive! But less so now that it costs me
$65+ to fill my tank. It certainly made me a bit less prodigal than I
normally am in my tooling about once reaching my final destination.

I=B9m wondering whether replacing the engine with something more fuel
efficient might not be the answer. Has anyone tried this? Even if your
intention was not at the time to go for fuel efficiency, did you replace
your engine with something that ended up being more fuel efficient? What wa=
s
the replacement engine? Who did the work (I will definitely NOT be doing
mine)? Was it hard to find someone to do this? Hard to find the engine? And
how are you enjoying the results? Are you glad you did it? What are the
advantages, disadvantages?

Katherine & Vanita (87 Westy)