Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 14:41:02 -0700
Reply-To: zmaninco@YAHOO.COM
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Zoran Mladen <zmaninco@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Steering column shear bolt removal
In-Reply-To: <DBC849AC-2DBA-4D7C-AD88-B80B520F0B13@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Grab them with vise grips and loosen...no need to drill out,
Replace with regular bolts.
Z
Sent from my iPad
> On Feb 16, 2014, at 14:36, Cunegonde <cunegonde.van.westfalia@GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> In process of removing the dash ("instrument panel" Bentley 70.6). Conical upper steering column bracket shear bolts have to be drilled out, or can they be backed out and replaced with fresh for reassembly?
>
>
>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:00 PM, Automatic digest processor <LISTSERV@GERRY.VANAGON.COM> wrote:
>>
>> There are 7 messages totalling 383 lines in this issue.
>>
>> Topics of the day:
>>
>> 1. 1991 Westy - altitude sickness?
>> 2. Soliciting VW Engine Recommendations (5)
>> 3. Air Conditioning help
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 19:07:53 -0800
>> From: "SDF ( Scott Daniel Foss )" <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
>> Subject: Re: 1991 Westy - altitude sickness?
>>
>> is it getting full 95 to 100 % throttle , at the throttle plate ???
>>
>>
>>> On 1/21/2014 6:34 PM, Dennis Haynes wrote:
>>> If considering 70 an accomplishment on flat ground at sea level I suspect
>>> you do have an overall performance problem. I always start with the basics
>>> beginning with engine compression and a leak down test and eventually ending
>>> up at fuel delivery and exhaust restrictions. A partially clogged fuel tank
>>> outlet or restricted filter before the pump will raise havoc at altitude as
>>> the fuel vaporizes at the pump inlet. All things need to be tested and
>>> proper operation confirmed. A failed catalyst can clog the muffler with the
>>> pieces and cause all sorts of performance problems. You need to do some
>>> digging.
>>>
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
>>> KevinPGilleran
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:25 AM
>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Subject: Re: 1991 westy - altitude sickness?
>>>
>>> Dennis,
>>> When we were at altitude I had the gas pedal to the floor of the vehicle, on
>>> a straightaway not incline, so I think that there was and is a mechanical
>>> issue. Once we dropped back down to essentially 0 altitude then the van was
>>> working fine so there is some hose loose or sensor that appears to not be
>>> functioning properly.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>>
>>> Kevin P. Gilleran
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Dennis Haynes [mailto:d23haynes57@hotmail.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 3:36 AM
>>> To: 'KevinPGilleran'; vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Subject: RE: 1991 westy - altitude sickness?
>>>
>>>> From an engineering point of view a naturally aspirated engine loses 3% for
>>> each 1,000 ft. elevation. The O2 sensor should have no problem compensating
>>> for 5,000 ft. to keep the mixture close. Where you able to get over 50 if
>>> you down-shifted? Manual or automatic? If automatic is the kick down working
>>> properly. Inability to take hills in an automatic can also be a sign of a
>>> bad torque converter.
>>>
>>> Dennis
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
>>> KevinPGilleran
>>> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 4:07 PM
>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>>> Subject: 1991 westy - altitude sickness?
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> On my last trip out to the Grand Canyon and then circling clockwise around
>>> to Zion I found that my 1991 westy had problems with what I can only imagine
>>> is the altitude (4970 ft at Kanab Utah). I could barely get the van up to 50
>>> miles per hour the entire time we were at elevation. But once we dropped
>>> back down into California and were back on highway 5 (400 feet or so) we
>>> were back up 70 mph no problem.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any ideas of where I should start on this issue would be much appreciated.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kevin P. Gilleran
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 19:13:12 -0800
>> From: "SDF ( Scott Daniel Foss )" <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
>> Subject: Re: Soliciting VW Engine Recommendations
>>
>> I don't know of anyone who swears by CIS.
>> No one at all familiar with vanagon engine installations would suggest
>> a transverse installation.
>>
>> I still can't see Bretts with an inline 4.
>> the fastest/least expensive routes to a viable engine again are...
>>
>> good used,
>> or rebuilt 1.9 or 2.1 waterboxer long block.
>>
>> that's the goal .right ? ..running again ..
>> and the most cost effective good solution.
>>
>> an engine conversion is not really a smart proposition for her, unless
>> there's a spare $ 6,000 to 10K laying around.
>>
>> Digijet and Digifant waterboxer EFI systems are both fine.
>> Each has advantages the other system doesn't have.
>> They're both good.
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 1/21/2014 4:40 PM, Neil N wrote:
>>> It seems the most common VW gas inline engine is a 2.0 block with 1.8
>>> 8V head. Doing this on a 2.1 WBX Vanagon allows one to keep some of
>>> the 2.1 parts. (air cleaner etc.) With Digijet, how many, if any,
>>> components could one keep? Air cleaner? AFM? FP, ECU relays?
>>>
>>> Engine mounted inline with vehicle is all I've ever seen. A transverse
>>> mount would require some serious fabrication. Not sure why someone
>>> would attempt this! ;)
>>>
>>> You will get varying opinions on which engine management is best. eg.
>>> some (few?) swear by CIS. Digifant is pretty common. I'm running
>>> Motronic (as c/w the engine I installed)
>>>
>>> Installing a "stock" 2.0 means lowering the drivetrain a fair amount
>>> to avoid having a bump in the engine lid from the "crossflow" intake
>>> manifold. This is why most use the 1.8 8V head. It has a "counterflow"
>>> intake which puts it on the low side of the engine, engine mounted @
>>> 50ยบ
>>>
>>> Here's a page I put together with links to various related projects:
>>>
>>> https://sites.google.com/site/t2t3vaggasengineswaps/home/t2-t3-engine-swap-links
>>>
>>>> On 1/21/14, C B <cunegonde.van.westfalia@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Which inline-4 *VW* engines are most suited for my '83.5 Westfalia?
>>>> Displacement?
>>>> Fore'n'aft or transverse?
>>>> Best years?
>>>> Preferred EFI systems?
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 20:22:36 -0700
>> From: Richard A Jones <Jones@COLORADO.EDU>
>> Subject: Re: Air Conditioning help
>>
>>> Well, it's leaking from somewhere!
>>
>> That's for sure! With 134a and some dye in the system,
>> I don't see why a good shop can't find the leak. But they
>> have to check everywhere, including up the pillar and
>> to the evaporator, not just the engine compartment and
>> under the van.
>>
>> As far as hoses are concerned, I converted my '87 five
>> years after I bought it with no cool air from the AC
>> to 134a. The shop tested with Freon, found no leaks,
>> evacuated and charged with 134a. It worked perfectly
>> for several years with the VW compressor and then with
>> the Subaru compressor until the Subaru compressor self-
>> destructed. Their observation was that old hoses
>> didn't leak 134a, smaller molecules not withstanding,
>> because the old hoses were saturated with the oil which
>> sealed them.
>>
>> YMMV, but I wouldn't throw money at it. I'd try to
>> find the leak and fix that.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 22:47:44 -0500
>> From: TonyCollin <tonycollin@GMAIL.COM>
>> Subject: Re: Soliciting VW Engine Recommendations
>>
>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 10:13 PM, "SDF ( Scott Daniel Foss )" <scottdaniel@TURBO=
>> VANS.COM> wrote:
>>
>> I don't know of anyone who swears by CIS.
>>
>> I do but that is because of the scirocco and not the vanagon.=20
>>
>> No one at all familiar with vanagon engine installations would suggest
>> a transverse installation.
>>
>> That is a totally agreeable statement.=20
>>
>> T.=20
>>
>>
>>
>>> =20
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 20:15:12 -0800
>> From: "SDF ( Scott Daniel Foss )" <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
>> Subject: Re: Soliciting VW Engine Recommendations
>>
>> I like that ..
>> 'totally agreeable statement.' nice way to phrase it.
>>
>> I have a whole CISe vanagon engine conversion ....
>> the conversion layout is started , then I got distracted.
>>
>> I will try running my 2.0 16V valve on 1.8 16V CIS-E fuel injection
>> ...see how that works.
>> if I can't get it working right ..
>> I might run it on Digifant.
>>
>> I also have a 79 450SLC Benz with purely mechanical CIS.
>> I've had it running ...but it has/had a severely worn timing chain and I
>> haven't finished that task either.
>>
>>
>>> On 1/21/2014 7:47 PM, TonyCollin wrote:
>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 10:13 PM, "SDF ( Scott Daniel Foss )" <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM> wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't know of anyone who swears by CIS.
>>>
>>> I do but that is because of the scirocco and not the vanagon.
>>>
>>> No one at all familiar with vanagon engine installations would suggest
>>> a transverse installation.
>>>
>>> That is a totally agreeable statement.
>>>
>>> T.
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 20:37:10 -0800
>> From: C B <cunegonde.van.westfalia@GMAIL.COM>
>> Subject: Re: Soliciting VW Engine Recommendations
>>
>> Hi Scott (and other generous folks)!
>>
>> The total re-do budget is about $3k over two engines; we are assuming I do
>> the majority of the mechanical labor, as I all ready do. Welding and some
>> parts fabrication will have to be done by a pro. We just don't have the
>> cash for re-doing the entire fuel system and a matching transmission for a
>> diesel/SVO conversion.
>> Part of the outlay will be 15" front brakes, which will definitely be
>> necessary with more HP and higher speeds. With the 15x7.5 Audi rims and
>> modern tires, the front brakes frequently squeal and don't controllably
>> bind due to tire grip. After new pads, machined discs, all new fluid and
>> bleeding, we had them looked at/road tested by Wolfsburg Automotive in
>> Seattle and they confirm the wimpy brakes issue. But hey, we have awesome
>> tires no matter the road conditions.
>>
>> Scott, of course, knows Cunegonde and how she is typically used, very well.
>> The transmission is still working flawlessly, if continuing slightly whiney.
>>
>> We'll see how her "new" 2.1l transports and is maintained compared to the
>> 45k miles 1.9l she came with. I was regularly getting 19-21 MPG at 60mph,
>> but only 35-45 MPH uphill/3rd gear with any load whatsoever. Lack of range,
>> even with rooftop gas cans, produces annoying worries during many of our
>> back country trips.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Bretts
>>
>> 1983 1.9l WBX Ivory Westfalia "Cunegonde"
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 23:54:15 -0500
>> From: Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM>
>> Subject: Re: Soliciting VW Engine Recommendations
>>
>> I am very familiar and a big fan of CIS or CIS/E, (O2 sensor). Any of =
>> these systems have a lot of opportunity for engine enhancements. Very =
>> simply as the engine sucks more air you get more fuel. The downsides of =
>> this system is that it is easily damaged by dirt or moisture in the =
>> fuel, some parts are expensive, and few know how to fix it. A fuel =
>> pressure gauge and valve set are more important than a multi-meter. The =
>> death kneel for these systems was emissions requirements and the issues =
>> with intake valve deposits and valve guide wear. The major disadvantages =
>> was the inability to turn the injectors off when the engine was being =
>> overrun and for the CIS-E to respond fast enough to O2 sensor input. My =
>> 88 fox has the CIS-E, I had a 560SEL with it and countless other VW's =
>> including a 79 Sirocco, and 81 Rabbit convertible.=20
>>
>> Dennis
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf =
>> Of SDF ( Scott Daniel Foss )
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:13 PM
>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>> Subject: Re: Soliciting VW Engine Recommendations
>>
>> I don't know of anyone who swears by CIS.
>> No one at all familiar with vanagon engine installations would suggest =
>> a transverse installation.
>>
>> I still can't see Bretts with an inline 4.
>> the fastest/least expensive routes to a viable engine again are...
>>
>> good used,
>> or rebuilt 1.9 or 2.1 waterboxer long block.
>>
>> that's the goal .right ? ..running again ..
>> and the most cost effective good solution.
>>
>> an engine conversion is not really a smart proposition for her, unless =
>> there's a spare $ 6,000 to 10K laying around.
>>
>> Digijet and Digifant waterboxer EFI systems are both fine.
>> Each has advantages the other system doesn't have.
>> They're both good.
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 1/21/2014 4:40 PM, Neil N wrote:
>>> It seems the most common VW gas inline engine is a 2.0 block with 1.8=20
>>> 8V head. Doing this on a 2.1 WBX Vanagon allows one to keep some of=20
>>> the 2.1 parts. (air cleaner etc.) With Digijet, how many, if any,=20
>>> components could one keep? Air cleaner? AFM? FP, ECU relays?
>>>
>>> Engine mounted inline with vehicle is all I've ever seen. A transverse =
>>
>>> mount would require some serious fabrication. Not sure why someone
>>> would attempt this! ;)
>>>
>>> You will get varying opinions on which engine management is best. eg.
>>> some (few?) swear by CIS. Digifant is pretty common. I'm running=20
>>> Motronic (as c/w the engine I installed)
>>>
>>> Installing a "stock" 2.0 means lowering the drivetrain a fair amount=20
>>> to avoid having a bump in the engine lid from the "crossflow" intake=20
>>> manifold. This is why most use the 1.8 8V head. It has a "counterflow"
>>> intake which puts it on the low side of the engine, engine mounted @=20
>>> 50=C2=BA
>>>
>>> Here's a page I put together with links to various related projects:
>>>
>>> https://sites.google.com/site/t2t3vaggasengineswaps/home/t2-t3-engine-
>>> swap-links
>>>
>>>> On 1/21/14, C B <cunegonde.van.westfalia@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Which inline-4 *VW* engines are most suited for my '83.5 Westfalia?
>>>> Displacement?
>>>> Fore'n'aft or transverse?
>>>> Best years?
>>>> Preferred EFI systems?
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of vanagon Digest - 21 Jan 2014 (#2014-44)
>> **********************************************
| 
