Date:         04 Dec 1995 11:58:11 EST
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         "Tom Forhan" <TFORHAN@hr.house.gov>
Subject:      Re[3]: Engine transplant ideas??

     On the length issue, Tim Smith has measured the space in his
     Syncro and, with Audi engine data from a junkyard, it appears
     feasible. The tilting thing, yeah, 50 degrees is a bunch.

     The biggest concern though, is the oil pan on syncros.  Dry sumping is the
     obvious thing, and it is not difficult, however, you need a three stage oil
     pump, run externally with a belt scheme, and the price of the pump
     is about $2000! Plus fabrication of the brackets, the new minimum
     volume oil pan, the pickups, the oil tank, the ss hose. Price
     advantage of the Audi or some of the v-6 alternatives is out the window!
     Mind you, these additional complication only holds for syncros, but that
     is what most interests me, and you, and several others on the list.

     So it seems Syncro owners need to think flat. Now, the Subaru sounds OK,
     155 HP seems about right. Any ideas on the junkyard price (its
     a relatively new production engine)? Plus we add several hundred to
     Kennedy Engineering for an adapter. The bottom line?

     Since I have recently become the owner of a second wasserboxer engine
     in need of serious rebuilding, the Ottinger option starts to run
     through my head, once again. Increase the displacement, and follow
     Bob Hoover's Sermons on free horsepower as the rebuild progresses.
     This is where I was, philosophically, weeks ago. But now I have the
     second engine ;-).

     Tom F.
     90 Syncro Westie
     87 Syncro GL (expected to arrive late this week, DOA)
     90 Audi 200 TQW



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Engine transplant ideas??
Author:  SYNCROHEAD (INTERNET.SYNCROHE) at HR
Date:    12/1/95 8:02 PM


Yeah, I think "fit" is probably a bigger problem than you might think.
 Regarding the length and your statement that "We know the engines are not
too long", they're not too long in the Vanagon diesel application because the
transmissions were mounted further forward with the axles canted backwards to
reach the normal wheel locations.  This arangement was said to create
additional stress on the CV joints beacuse of the need to continouusly cycle
through a high angle range.  When the wasserboxer was announced VW made a
point of mentioning this.  The axles were probably even longer to reach the
proper location.
Also you say, "we can tilt it a bit, if necessary".  I think that the diesels
were tipped over at about 50 degrees to clear the decklid.  This is far more
than "a little bit".

I think that the fitment problems of any in-line engine are significant.  The
wasserboxer is about 2.5 cylinders long.  The Rabbit/Jetta engines are 4
cylinders long and the Audi engines are about twice as long as the
wasserboxer at 5 cylinders.  I see the only more difficult engine to fit than
the 5 would be an in-line 6.  I think it might be wise to keep in mind flat
or V engine configuration engines.

The flat ones of course are ideal for an easy fit, but other than Porsche &
VW, there's only Subaru.  Subaru has both flat 4s and flat 6es.  Their newest
4cyl is 2.5 liters and makes about 155HP.  I know, I know, it's not VW/Audi.
 It's not German. It's not even European or American!  But, all thing
considered it might be the best alternative.  I think Syncros should be able
to live with 155HP.

Then there are V6 engines from every (almost) automaker on the planet.  The V
configuration has 2 significant advantages over the in-line engines.
1. Their cylinder banks are already tilted over thus being lower than an
in-line engine without cocking them at some extreme angle.  I think most ar 60
degree Vs (each cylinder bank tilted 30 degrees from vertical), but a 90
degree V6 would be easier to fit.  I don't know specifically if there are any
90 degree V6es.  I do know that V8s are made in both 60 and 90 degree
configurations.
2. The length of a V6 is 3.5 cylinders - only 1 cylinder longer than the
wasserboxer.  Some small V6 may exist that would fit lengthwise without
having to move the transmission forward at all - a big advantage.

Well, there's my two cents worth.  I know both the flat & V solutions are far
from the Vanagons roots, but realistically speaking seem the most plausable.

Jim Davis
87 Syncro
88 Wolfsburg