Date:         Thu, 5 Jun 2008 14:32:23 -0700
Reply-To:     Neil2 <vidublu@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Neil2 <vidublu@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Replace WBX with more efficient engine? Well....
Comments: To: Stuart MacMillan <macgroup@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To:  <502808410D354B33BACE0CCC5C61BFA8@StusLaptopPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

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