Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:43:09 -0700
Reply-To: Daniel Rotblatt <d.rotblatt@VERIZON.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Daniel Rotblatt <d.rotblatt@VERIZON.NET>
Subject: Re: Buying a Van
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikjPQjyEWO+=RamkgRxq-RXBBCG-w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Lots of good advice all! Thanks. Looks like there is one vote from
Scott for the '85 and one from Don H. for the '82 gas jetta. Sounds
like they both have things going for them. Scott had me leaning
towards the '85, now Don H. has me leaning back towards the '82. I am
a little concerned by the smog police... I guess that it may come
down to the condition of the cars.
Also thanks Ron for the link - that's helpful. I thought that the '85
was the same as the '83 1/2 - '84. I think Go Westy's guide lumps the
'85 with the ones before it - I think because the transmission was
changed in the '86 model and they have had bad issues with the earlier
transmission.
Just to throw a wrench in the works, there's also an '83 watercooled
available with a country camper pop-top and weekender interior with a
fridge/stove added. It's got the wide weekender back bench. It's
selling for $3800 - $1200 less then the others.
Dan
L.A., CA
On Apr 14, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Don Hanson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Scott Daniel - Turbovans <
> scottdaniel@turbovans.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Don H. may chime in..he loves his . 2.0 block, 1.8 head.
>> When I find time I will get my DOHC 16 valve 87 jetta 1.8 inline
>> four going
>> in one of my vans.
>>
>> 'bothersome' ..that's cool.
>>
>> Sure, I'll chime in.
>
> The 1.8liter gas motor in a 'diesel' vanagon is pretty common and
> people
> seem to like em just fine. I drove my 1.8liter, which has the westie
> kitchen, etc but not the pop top, for over 50k miles before I 'pre-
> emptivly'
> combined most of that motor with a 'new' '93 Jetta' block. I got
> the whole
> '93 Jetta motor with 97k 'claimed miles' for $300. $300 seems a
> normal
> price for an inline 4 gas motor, though mine came with all the extra
> stuff...AC condenser, PS pump, alternator, wiring harness, intake and
> exhaust, etc etc...so that was a pretty good deal.
>
> The Digifant fuel injection I have in my inline (mine is a '92
> Golf/Rabbit/Jetta-everything but the block, which is now the 2.0-
> liter '93
> Jetta block) seems simple to me.(same as a Waterboxer motor, I think)
>
> It's been very dependable. Parts are plentiful and inexpensive.
> Any VW
> shop will work on them. VW inlines haven't changed much till
> recently, so
> mechanics know them. Power on the 1.8 l seems a bit more than a
> stock
> Vanagon...I usually passed other vanagons going up hill, anyway. Gas
> mileage on mine, with a diesel 5sp man. trans was 23.5..over all.
> My 'new'
> motor is only about 22.5-23mpg. My 'new' motor, however, can quickly
> accelerate to 70mph, going up a long grade, and hold that speed
> without any
> fuss. Probably not common with a standard Vanagon.
>
> I don't live in Ca. so I don't have experience with their Smog
> Police on
> the inline-powered vans. I have seen plenty inline gassers running and
> licensed in that state. The gas motor is identical in appearance
> to a
> diesel and uses the same block, so maybe they would be ok with
> that. I
> think they are pretty clean at the end of the exhaust pipe.
>
> If California registration was not a consideration for you, I'd say
> take
> the inline powered van..all else being similar. The other one, with a
> "spare engine"? So what?
>
> ...if you want a spare engine you could just putt down to the
> junkyard and
> get another Rabbit/Golf/Jetta inline for a few hundred bucks. From my
> reading, you may spend $2-$4k rebuilding a stock water boxer
> motor...which
> could easily begin dripping again quite soon..
>
> I did all the research I could when I started looking at Vanagons.
> I was
> soon put off by what was/is being said about vanagons with stock
> motors. I
> was 'clued-in' by the fact that a significant number of running
> Vanagons
> already have different type motors. Lots of questions on the
> various forums
> from busted vanagon owner's asking about transplanting "not
> waterboxer"
> motors, lots of rap from people running their 2nd or 3rd standard WBX
> rebuild or replacement, and having puddles and leaking heads
> again. I also
> see gas mileage figures that are not so good, though for the size of a
> Vanagon, they compare OK with modern vehicles.
> There's less discussion of inline gas motors in Vanagons than
> about some
> other more popular conversions like the many Subarus, the Turbo
> diesel VW
> conversions, the Bostig/Ford Zetec motors. Maybe because the inline
> conversions are so simple, so dependable, and not at all 'flashy' when
> compared to say a 'six cylinder turbocharged Subaru'.
>
> I went ahead and bought mine already completed for cheap. I'm glad
> I did.
> The Previous Owner, who did the conversion, did some corner-cutting,
> but
> it's such a simple swap that he didn't cause me any real problems.
>
> The 2.0 liter ABA motor ('93 Jetta) with the 1.8 head that I am now
> running. It performs favorably when compared with Subaru
> transplants...stomps them in cost, ease of maintenance and fuel
> economy.
> Should it ever blow up or start leaking, I can probably get another
> in the
> van again for under $1000 and do the work at home in a few days.
> This 2.0
> liter cost me ~$800 to install.
>
> Hope this gives you some more info for your vanagon search.
>
> Don Hanson
| 
