Vanagon EuroVan
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (September 2009, week 5)Back to main VANAGON pageJoin or leave VANAGON (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:12:18 -0700
Reply-To:     Don Hanson <dhanson928@GMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Don Hanson <dhanson928@GMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Cleaning up your Vanagon
Comments: To: mcneely4@cox.net
In-Reply-To:  <21088979.4285.1254335560859.JavaMail.mcneely4@127.0.0.1>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

The inline gas VW motor that Neil is using (and I have one similar('92 Jetta 1.8liter) in my 84) they are probably as 'common as rocks'. Every VW mechanic I have ever talked to says they'd be totally at ease working on these things. I have heard it said that they are very durable motors (used in many many different VW models over the years) and relatively trouble free. You'd likely get "nixed" in some California smog stations, though the same basic block WAS OE on diesel Vanagons, so you might argue them on that..California seems uninterested in the actual emissions from a vehicle and more interested in "electronic paperwork" and state revenue Mine seems to run very clean (no testing where I live, so no numbers for this post) and delivers more highway effectivness than a WBX motor. Much better gas mileage (averaging 23.5mpg over almost 40k miles) and decent power for the cost. I just saw, listed on the Samba, an adaptation package for $500. Motors are plentiful for under $500..I'd guess you would be hard pressed to repair a WBX headgasket for that.. Your own mileage and cost will certainly differ, but it seems a pretty good 'upgrade'...Just the amount of fuel burned would be 'Greener' both at the pump($) and what's blown out the tailpipe over the years. Don Hanson On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Dave Mcneely <mcneely4@cox.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 1:03 PM, neil N wrote: > > > Part of the reason I installed a "newer" engine was to reduce >> emissions. >> >> > Best part, in a way, was the the old engine saw new life in another >> Vanagon. >> >> Don't know if that owner installed a cat though.... :) >> > > So, you didn't really accomplish your purpose, in that the old engine is > still around, still emitting those noxious fumes. That's one thing the > cfc program did accomplish. The engines that were turned in got > trashed. > > However, if I do keep my camper (my wife really likes it), I'll think > about the frankenvan notion -- though not being a skilled mechanic > myself, that may make it even harder to get someone to work on it. But, > another bright side, maybe it will need less work ........... ? > > Dave Mc >


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main VANAGON page

Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!


Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com


The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.

Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.