Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 22:25:05 -0400
Reply-To: Benny boy <huotb@VIDEOTRON.CA>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Benny boy <huotb@VIDEOTRON.CA>
Subject: Re: 1.9 to 2.1 conversion question
Please, don't take the following personal!!! It as nothing to do with you
choice or believed, but it's about my experience. Please don't put me back
in the hole.... the black hole!
I hate 2.1L, why would i say that??? There must be a reason! (look at my
rust post, that is one good reason!!)
Many talk about the 2.1L cooling improvement, what improvement??
Adding many hoses is certainly not one. Easier to bleed, sorry guys but that
is BS. Oil cooler, BS, it doesn't need one!!!!! Subaru did the same stuff,
wrong!
I crave for 2.1L ECU, i have 23 1.9L, WHY???
I crave for 2.1L harness, i have over 15 1.9L.
Those big main 1.9L coolant hoses in the engine bay, THEY NEVER GO BAD!!!
The frigging van as already enough coolant liquid and line, PLEASE don't add
some for god sake.
Here i go again :-)
That was fun....
Ok, i will shut up.
Ben
1.9L rod, everything was design for that 1.9L, they go up 200cc and they
mess everything they did before. DON'T USE THE SAME BOLT IF YOU INCREASE
displacement!!!!
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:03:58 -0400, Chris S <szpejankowski@GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>I'll agree with all you said, except for the cooling system. 1.9 Cooling
>system parts were made for 2.5 years while 2.1 cooling system parts were
>made for 5 years. Which has better availability? Plus, 1.9l cooling system
>has some 1-year only parts. The 2.1l system is easier to bleed and I no
>longer have to worry about the brittle "H" pipe and its bleeding nipple. In
>2.1 there's no metal crossover pipe just behind the pulley, so the water
>pump and alternator bracket bolts are easier to access. I replaced my '84
>hoses, which was still in good shape, with stuff that's 5 years newer and
>even cleaner. 2.1L system also has an oil-to-coolant heat exchanger. I
>don't believe that VW engineers took a step back in this case.
>
>I went from this:
>http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b7/misterpolak/WBX_transplant/before.jpg<http://www.benplace.com/85rouge/rouge128.jpg>
>
>To this, which is before I cinched up the wiring harness and mounted the air
>filter:
>http://s16.photobucket.com/albums/b7/misterpolak/WBX_transplant/?action=view¤t=DJ_is_in_2.jpg
>
>I think it was worth the upgrade for me, especially if you consider that I'm
>using the DJ-code ECU and harness along with all the sensors exactly as they
>came from factory. More power without cross-breeding.
>
>2009/4/14 Benny boy <huotb@videotron.ca>
>
>> My 2 cent.
>>
>> I have tried many configuration (on my van and other customers) and ended
>> up
>> with that (before i went Subaru):
>> http://www.benplace.com/85rouge/rouge128.jpg
>>
>> In my case, only the 2.1L exhaust seem to do a tiny difference powerwise.
>> Still, i did put back the 1.9L exhaust because i had new ones in the shop.
>>
>> Reason to stay with Digijet/1.9 setup:
>> -Less expensive exhaust system
>> -More reliable and simpler FI system
>> -More Digijet used part available and less expensive.
>> -Simpler cooling system and way more reliable (less hoses).
>>
>> 2.1L harness are as dry as the older one.
>>
>> On top, you already have everything install in there. For the difference in
>> power, it's not worthed.
>>
>> And i know what i'm talking about.
>>
>> Good luck, Ben
>> http://www.benplace.com/
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Chris S.
>Disclaimer: "Death and serious injury may occur"
| 
