Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 21:18:44 -0700
Reply-To: Stuart MacMillan <stuartmacm@GMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Stuart MacMillan <stuartmacm@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Why no bolt-on HP upgrades to the 2.1 WBX?
In-Reply-To: <CAEuQn0YBn87KEKUHWiSuzT-ehBRDP+nCmXysj=0_nW6-UN-50Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
It's the 1800cc 70's air cooled engine with somewhat better metallurgy and
water jackets cast to the case with water cooled heads. Adding more power
just shortens the longevity of a maxed out design. Look at the way 2.1 with
a longer stroke breaks rods around 150k. The 1.9 lasts well over 200k, and
doesn't usually self-destruct this way. The only upgrade to a 2.1 consists
of increasing displacement with a larger cylinder bore, and that's likely to
shorten longevity too.
Why not invest your time and money in a modern engine?
Stuart
'85 Westy (fourth WBX I've had, and it will soon have a conversion)
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
Roland
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 8:32 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Why no bolt-on HP upgrades to the 2.1 WBX?
Ok, so it is now Thursday in Osnabruck, Graz, and SA, and it is the day
before a long weekend, and many be going splittin' for the weekend, and
worried this message may be deemed something that should wait until Friday
but....maybe it is ok to ask.
I was wondering why there are no HP upgrades to the 2.1 WBX. There are so
many other engines that all have upgrades -- intake flow enhancement,
exhaust headers, sparkin' plugs, reworked heads, super charger kits,
lightweight rods/pistons, larger valves, and (oh my!) nitrous?
Anyway, I can't recall any performance upgrades to the 2.1 mentioned here,
or bolt-on kits sold by the knowledgeable vendors (I've bought from all and
so thankful they serve us). I have had a few other cars, and essentially
all have many options to increase engine performance.
it is kinda a poll:
- the 2.1 WBX was a purposeful, optimized design and maxed out the way it
is.
- ya can't do much more with just 2.1 liters?
- requires reprogramming the ECU which nobody knows how to do?
- heads are maxed, no flow increase possible, the material is too thin,
can't tune the head.
- we Vanagon-ers prefer it slow, nobody would invest in a market that
prefers to cruise.
- the owner of 95 HP in a 4,500 lb vehicle would not get excited about 110
HP in a fully loaded 4,999 lb vehicle.
- the 2.1 was a compromise, just a 1,500 CC bug engine patched to sell T3s.
- need to add 2 more cylinders --Porsche got more than 200 hp from it's 2.2
liter 6 cylinder. (and for the interested over 1,000 hp from it's 16
cylinder 917).
- And disclaimer... I know that tencent and gowesty and others offer high HP
WBX, but they aren't really 2.1s anymore, and they require a full rebuild
instead of bolt on performance upgrades.
So what is it about the 2.1?
Why is conversion to some other engine, or total rebuild (same cost as
conversion) the only path to higher HP?
Why can't the 2.1 be improved with some bolt on upgrades?
Thanks
Roland
| 
