Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 18:57:09 -0700
Reply-To: Don Hanson <dhanson928@GMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Don Hanson <dhanson928@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: More Digifant Troubleshooting ...
In-Reply-To: <C63A3148.7EF8%dave.arthur@nscc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I have a 92 Jetta/Golf/Rabbit motor in my 84 vanagon. When I wanted a spare
ECM.."brain" I went to my favorite, German Auto Salvage, nearby and asked
for another one. He asked for some numbers off the one in my van and it
turned out to be a Vanagon part number running the Jetta Digifant
injection. He sold me another from a Jetta,
cross-referenced..$40..guaranteed. It works just fine, too.
I tell yah, lots of the parts in the WBX motors are the same as the other
inline VW motors..Same Temp II sender, same alternator, ete etc. "One size
fits all?"...probably not, but a lot of the stuff is interchangable.
Don Hanson
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Dave Arthur <dave.arthur@nscc.ca> wrote:
> Now this may cause some friction and resulting flames...
>
> I have been tracking engine idle and running roughness with my '86 2.1 MV
> Westy. I've uncovered a bunch of problems, but hadn't hit any that gave me
> major success until now.
>
> I was in my local junk yard looking for a rear wheel bearing casting
> (another story) and came upon the remains of an '88 US made Jetta. I picked
> up the AFM off the car as it looked the same as the Vanagon unit and if
> nothing else I could disassemble it / play with it.
>
> Upon a consult with ETKA the VW base part number 906 301 is the same. The
> Bosch part numbers are; Vanagon 0 280 202 079, Jetta 0 280 202 106. Close
> but certainly not the same.
>
> Since outwardly and electrically (using a high Z DVM) they appeared the
> same, I cleaned it up and plugged it in. My Westy is of undetermined
> mileage, the Jetta was ~30,000 Mi.
>
> The van started and idled smoothly, the real difference was on the road,
> very smooth acceleration and much better performance. Another thing of note
> was that the engine seemed much quieter, can't explain it.
>
> Now my next test will be to see the effect if any on mileage. I'm guessing
> that I am not the first person who has plugged one of these units in an MV
> engine. Also there may be something very bad that will result from doing
> this :-(
>
> I believe that my better performance and behavior is because the Jetta AFM
> was newer and less warn than the original unit.
>
> Does anyone know of any danger with using the Jetta AFM? Also does anyone
> have a clue why the engine is quieter?
>
> Also I had made comment in a previous post that I felt the mixture was rich
> in closed loop, since this change I feel it is closer to correct, in fact I
> get a few splashy exhaust notes, so I'm happy on that point too.
>
> D
>
| 
