Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 09:48:14 -0700
Reply-To: Stuart MacMillan <stuartmacm@GMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Stuart MacMillan <stuartmacm@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Engine question just curious (long winded reply)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
We can only speculate on what those engineers were thinking, but as Ray said it's all part of an evolutionary process starting with the original post WW II van, which ultimately ended with the radical redesign of the EV in 1992. Having lived through this era with a '68 Westy and a '78 T2 while waiting for the Vanagon, I did read a lot about it in the auto mags of the day.
The engine is basically the type 2 aircooled case (upgraded with somewhat better metallurgy) with water jackets cast onto it, and water cooled heads. The redesign was done in the '70s in preparation for the 1980 introduction of the Vanagon, but it didn't go into production until mid '83 while they (partially) ironed out the head sealing problems. Before that it came with the 2 liter air cooled from the T2, and the diesel in the US, but the diesel wasn't powerful enough for the American market and the aircooled couldn't meet the constantly tightening air pollution regulations in the US.
The WBX design remained the same as the air cooled in terms of bolting on the heads with studs into the case and a crush ring between the heads and cylinders, and this required a flexible gasket between the head and water jacket to seal the coolant, which has been problematic. I had an '84 I purchased in '86 with 30k miles on it, and at 40k the heads leaked. VW did replace them under a partial warranty, and those heads were still fine when I replaced that engine at 250k miles with a used 2.1 I blew up fairly quickly.
I remember that era as being especially challenging for all auto manufactures in the US market, but the foreign manufacturers really struggled. Every year the safety, fuel economy, and pollution requirements got more stringent, and they produced separate models for the US market.
The Vanagon had its own design and engineering team, and their choice was to keep the boxer engine alive by making it water cooled, which made it possible to meet the current air pollution standards (NOx). We might question that decision today, but they didn't have any other '70s engine that was a better solution.
One thing VW had going for them was early introduction of fuel injection thanks to Robert Bosch & Co. The Japanese stuck with carburetors way too long. I had a '80s carbureted Honda that had at least 40 vacuum hoses attached to it, and it never ran well cold (too lean). Today you don't see many cars from the '80s on the road, but the ones you do are usually German, thanks to Bosch.
The '70's and '80's were a time of rapid change for the auto industry. The best engine for the Vanagon would have been the Subaru 2.2, but it wasn't developed until 1990, and by then VW had to abandon the Vanagon because of the US front crumple zone safety standards, not to mention fuel economy standards. It was just last year that Brazil outlawed the T2 there for the same reason.
After over 300,000 miles on two Vanagons and four WBX engines I've now installed a '93 Subaru 2.2 in my '85 Westy, and it looks like it's been there since the van came out of the factory. It's a simpler and cleaner install than the WBX with much simpler cooling plumbing and a better designed engine control system. The power is amazing, especially compared to the tired 1.9 it replaced. I can climb hills and merge onto the freeway safely now, even if the on-ramp is up hill. I'm installing the GoWesty cruise control to keep from accidentally speeding on the highway. ;-)
Now I need to upgrade the brakes and suspension . . .
Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of Eric Caron
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 5:13 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Engine question just curious
Hi folks,
This is a different kind of Vanagon Engine question.
I’ve often wondered why the Vanagon has a different engine then other VW offerings of the same vintage. If people are putting in engines from rabbits, and other cars and they seem to work what was the advantage in having a whole different engine for the Vanagon? Was the engine a money savor or was it considered stronger in some way for the van? It seems like they could save money by just using one engine for many cars. It seems like that is done for many car companies today.
So, anyone know why the water boxer in the Vanagon and not the same engine as other VW cars?
Or do other VW cars have the same motor in them?
I don’t think I’ve ever heard of someone saying I’m going to upgrade my VW by putting a Vanagon motor in it.
Eric Caron
85 GL Westfalia
