Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 20:08:51 -0800
Reply-To: Scott Daniel - Turbovans <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Scott Daniel - Turbovans <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
Subject: Re: The real story about the invention of the WBX?
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
reply-type=original
well Karl.....
I really must say.......when You present your case for Diesels. I am pretty
convinced.
No denying what you say and how you present it.
I thought of you when I wrote that........that 'mostly' diesels have bene
quite good for you.
I'm not so sure that 1.8 Turbo is so cost effective engine to own.....I hear
they are touchy about some things...
and do have expensive problems sometimes.
the 2004 jetta guy just reported those figures and his expereince to me. I
realize that's a PD engine and shouldn't have written 'injection pump'.....
though that's how he expressed it. One thing I do know that's most likely
true is it's not that old a car and it cost him a lot in repairs, and I feel
that it being a diesel was a factor. I sure don't say the 1.8T version is
better- they're scary too from what I hear.
I appreciate all that you say......
and I still get the impression people are having expensive issues with
diesels, TD's and tdi's based on what I read and hear about.
and yes.....gasoline engines blow too.....
but, and not having done actual tracking of hard numbers.......it seems that
there are significant and expensive vw diesel failures here and
there........a bit too frequently in my opinion.
our diesel is about 2.60 a gallon here, while gas is 2.15.
anyway.......just as long as people enjoy their diesels and feel that they
are getting good value, even if they do cost at lot in repairs sometimes.
I'll have to try tracking that.
it would be most interesting to see what Consumer Reports says about modern
VW cars and tdi's in terms of cost of owning one, and reliabilty.
There's an outfit that really tracks that stuff....
though I'm not sure that they distinguish be engine type.
I also think it's healty for someone to represent the other view, but I am
sincere when I say the attraction is more the mystic of diesel, rather than
the pure practicality of it.........though I do acknowledge the positive
features I mentioned.
lol..........stay cozy !
scott
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Mullendore" <groups@WESTYVENTURES.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: The real story about the invention of the WBX?
> Many reasons, Scott. :-) We shouldn't REALLY need to rehash this over and
> over, eh? Simplicity, run-on-almost-anything-for-fuel, better for world
> travel, torque, fuel mileage, low maintenance, longevity, and more
> recently
> quiet and clean emissions? I have yet to experience the 'costlier' to keep
> and repair part that you mention. What you mentioned re: the AAZ example,
> sounds like the rental customer overlooked something and caused the
> failure-maybe a hose, coolant pump? Gas engines aren't immune to the same
> death. 'Bad injector' causing combustion chamber damage? Nah, pure
> speculation if you are referring to the case I am thinking of. Many gas
> engine are interference as well, like the splendid 1.8T's in the Audis
> I've
> owned several of. Except they trash all the valves AND the head, sometimes
> pistons too.
>
> 2004 Jetta? Nope, wrong facts? No injection pump there, it's a PD. Any
> shop
> that charged that for a rebuild raped the customer, sure you're aware--and
> that goes for "$900 to dial in the timing belt" -- really? I mean, what
> kind
> of story is that, someone got raped repeatedly!
>
> Diesel in my area is now same as gas, again. :-) TDI Syncro = 28-30 mpg,
> wbx
> 16-17? That's a bit more than 30-40%, agreed? Passat TDI (mine), same
> power
> as VR6, 45 mpg vs 18-20. All it has required are filters, oil changes,
> tires, and one scheduled timing belt change in five years. Coincidentally
> all the van has required too. Hmm. Not sure why an old diesel guy would
> turn
> so hard against them, but maybe you just lost the touch for diesels.
> Others
> seem to have better experiences.
>
> Karl
> 3+ VW diesel owner ;-)
>
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 13:40:35 -0800, Scott Daniel - Turbovans
> <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM> wrote:
>
>>why would anyone want a diesel ( btdt ) .....
>>except for the better fuel mileage, they are costlier over the long run to
>>purchase, own, operate, and repair, or at least 'quite often' they are.
>
>>diesel engines can do harm to themselves in ways that gasoline engines
>>can't ........like a bad injector causing damage in a combustion chamber.
>>They depend on the condition of the engine itself to create
>>combustion........if that gets a little weak.........and you don't get
>>complete combustion.
>>they are an interference design and have a critical timing belt.....
>>and a few other things .......
>>
>>I'll build 'em , or sell 'em .........but I'm tellin' ya ..........'a good
>>portion of the time' they are not cheaper to purchase, operate, repair,
>>and
>>own, even if they do get 30 to 40 % better fuel economy on more expensive
>>fuel.
>>They do have great low end torque though,
>>and you can run plant-based fuels, yes.....no argument there.
>>and sometimes they have a nasty habit of smoking, smelling, and rattling
>>and vibrating.
>>put it this way ...........
>>they do not make good 'old' engines. They make good expensive new engines.
>>
>>( and I won't even mention a guy I know with a 2004 TDI Jetta.......
>>had an injection pump rebuild that cost about $ 2,000 ........a part that
>>a
>>fuel injected gasoline doesn't even have...........then it cost about
>>another $ 900 to get another shop to really dial in the timing belt and
>>timing exactly right. Ain't no economy there Martha ! )
| 
