Date: Sun, 20 May 2012 13:04:44 -0700
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: I'm getting the FAS Gen 5 and info
In-Reply-To: <0C777152-1AEB-4755-8E5B-A05653923239@comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hi..
I can't tell that that is a factor so much.
the right way to tell is .......see what each tire is supporting in lbs.
In some car magazines on road test repsorts you'll see that now ..
say like on a Porsche 911 ,
they will give the weight for each wheel.
was going to run numbers for an example..
they have about 55 % of their total weight on the front axle,
and about 45 on the rear ..
with more weight on the left side..
if you get these numbers for a waterboxer .
and then for an inline four gas or diesel .
and see that there is significantly more weight on the left rear wheel
compared to a waterboxer..
then I will agree with you .
I don't think the factor is significant though.
the centerline of the crankshaft and transmission is slightly to the
right of center in the van btw..
about 1/2 inch I think.
Perhaps ...VW had that in mind from the beginning of vanagons ..
knowing that they would put in a tilted-over-to-the-left inline four
diesel engine for their first watercooled vanagon of any type with the
82 diesel. .
with countless inline four diesel and gasoline vanagons running around
at 50 degrees. .
it sure does not seem to be an issue .
"vast majority of there
weight"...
I'm sure that should read 'their' weight ...I'd say 'vast majority' is
overstating it a bit.
scott
On 5/20/2012 11:34 AM, OlRivrRat wrote:
> I do have to say that it does appear that these guys are doing
> a very
> commendable job at making
>
> sure that this conversion will be as good as it can be but I have to
> add that, IMHO, I do not think that
>
> any of the "Inline4s" are a proper engine for a Vanagon ~ They are set
> up from the getgo for a flat well
>
> balanced engine & that should be a leading criteria when one ponders a
> conversion. The main issue that
>
> I have with the Inline4s is that they place the vast majority of there
> weight on the DriversSide where the
>
> Drivers weight is already going to be & especially in the case of a
> Westy where all the CamperCabinetry
>
> & H2OTank & PropaneTank & possibly AuxBattery is already on that side,
> that should become an even
>
> bigger consideration.
>
> ORR ~ DeanB
>
> '90Westy + EJ25 ~ VDubaru
>
>
> On 18 May , 2012, at 11:17 AM, David Bjorkman wrote:
>
>> Hi Anthony;
>>
>> Yes, I'm pretty excited.
>> I am driving out to California in a couple of weeks. I'll see if I
>> can get some MPH data before I leave. I will most definitely keep
>> the list informed. And I will do my best to be impartial.
>>
>> Dave B.
>>
>>
>> On 05/17/12, Anthony Egeln<regnsuzanne@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> That is all very exciting, David!
>>
>> When you have the time, please try to keep the list informed as to
>> how the conversion works out for you.
>>
>> I am particularly interested in how the fuel economy works out. The
>> FAS fellas say they
>> average 24-26 mpg on the highway. I'd be interested in how you do
>> in combined city/highway
>> fuel economy.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
