Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2012 11:47:48 -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: Conversion Choices
In-Reply-To: <1346609851.38087.YahooMailClassic@web121705.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
re
VW continued the WBX and dropped the inline -4 Diesel after a couple years.
Does anyone know why ?
Figuring glabally, or just in North America ?
As far as I know ......in Germany diesel powered vanagons continued all
along.
I'm working on a 1991 factory 1.6 turbo diesel Syncro vanagon ..
( tdi currently, oridinally 1.6 TD )
as to 'why' in the US..
lol.....
because they are weak and underpowered, and VW figured out Americans
could never understand a 48 hp 4,000 plus pound vheicle like a vanagon.
Or sales were nowhere.
Appears to me they sold a ton of 82's in the US ...
They heard a ton of complaints, so made the 5 speed version for 83,
with just that one main change is about 40 % better of a vehilce...but
it was too late ..
I don't think they sold all that many 83's here. I see about a 80 to
one ratio of 82's versus 83's.
So they just cancelled that program ..
and what they 'should' have done is build their 1.9 liter diesel that
didn't happen until after vanagons were not being made anymore,
or put a 2.0 4 inline gas engine in them !
They really were a 'people's car' car company up to and including
vanagons ..mainly with the waterboxer engine ..
a purely adapted air-cooled design. That's going about it on the Cheap !
depsite what engineers say ..sure ...the joke head gasket system on
waterboxers works ..for a while.
VW even acknowledged that by helping to pay people for their head gasket
issues sometimes, after official warrantee time was past. If you just
complained enough .....some people got compensation.
these days though ..with things like 5 valve per cylinder turbocharged
engines and other exotica, doesn't look to me like they are trying so
hard to be a modest person's car .........just great value and
performance for what a person pays, and I think they do that pretty
well. Just don't be owning one of those exotic engines when the timing
belt goes due to lack of proper care, 'cause it ain't cheap.
So now we get to build our vanagons like they should/could have been in
the first place.
I still have not found 'the ideal' engine for vanagons. Lots of good
'uns- just not a perfect one yet.
On 9/2/2012 11:17 AM, Robert Keezer wrote:
> "The 2 biggest down issues I have with it is that
> it is not a Boxer ( I'm kinda in to those when it is
> for my Vanagon )
> & again most of the weight ends up on the DriversSide
> where you already always have the drivers Lbs"
>
>
>
>
>
> By reading some of these posts like the one above , it appears some think a inline-four is not an original engine package for the Vanagon?
>
> 15-30 years ago , before the Subaru or other conversion concepts were out, the inline -four was the common choice . Usually though, it was simply a Diesel to gas conversion like my 82 Westy is.
>
> The inline-four was common in Europe in Diesel and gas configurations, and in South Africa.
>
> The notion that the inline 4 engine adds extra weight to the drivers side I think is unfounded. If true, it can't be much .
>
> VW continued the WBX and dropped the inline -4 Diesel after a couple years.
> Does anyone know why ?
>
> Robert
> 1982 Westfalia
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> As far as using it just because it's a VW engine ~ I can't see any
>> good reason for that to be an influence.
>> ORR ~ DeanB
>>
>
> Using the inline VW in a Vanagon because it IS a VW....there are
> actually very good reasons to do that..
>
