Date:         Thu, 28 Dec 95 13:05:01 MST
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         aburczyk@dres.dnd.ca
Subject:      Re: Why do we all love our "bricks" so much? 

I have to agree with you.  I have a '73 with a 1700 cc type IV engine.  Almost 
all of the problems that I've had with the vehicle have to do with the engine.  
Parts are hard and dear to come by, expertise from VW sucks big time, and the 
design of the engine is horibly labout intensive to work on.  On the plus side 
I've found the van itself to be remarkable well suited to a family of 5 and 
hard to break.  My rule of thumb is that '70 vans cost about twice to fix 
compared to that of 60's vans, Vanagons cost about twice as much as '70s vans 
(or 4 times what a 60s van would cost).  I'd love to re-engine my '73 with a 
modern power plant, unfortunately I don't know how to handle the radiator 
location problem.  I really don't want to get into things that really screw up 
the exterior of the van.  Up to now I've gotten around the engine availablity 
problems by getting parts vans and spare engines and components but I se the 
day when the lack of something minor and unavailable will ground me.  

In this vein I've obtained an 82 originally diesel powered vanagon that was 
converted badly to gas.  Unfortunaly the cost of fixing it up (non-engine 
components) is prohibitive since the PO abused it severely and I don't have a 
parts vehicle for it (I'm looking).

I'd rather convert the '73 to a good water cooled engine.  I dream of being 
able to pipe heat around to where it is needed instead of using a gas heater.  
I've also never understood that VW mags that brag about getting 150 HP out of a 
bug engine with the unsaid implication that they only last for a few hundred 
miles or until the race is over.  A vanilla V8 will pull 200 HP stock and run 
forever and the chevy 2.8 L V6 has a great reputation and parts are easy to 
come by.  You probably would never have to rebuild one of these since you 
could simply mine wrecked vehicles for decent engines.  

If anyone has a lead on a cooling system conversion for a 70s bus please let 
me know.

Andy

> 
> 
> To All:
> 
> The original Piper 'Cub' -- the Taylor E2 -- had a piece of crap for an
> engine.  Even so it was a good flyer, with a generous wing, exceptionally
> strong fuselage and landing gear. Indeed, it did jobs no other airplane could
> do, and continues to do so.  A few people may have scraped the bird because
> of the engine but since better engines were available that was like throwing
> out the baby with the bath water.  What they did was throw out the crappy
> engine.  With a better powerplant the Cub remained in production for nearly
> forty years, until it was shot out of the sky by lawyers and insane liability
> laws.
> 
> The Volkswagen Transporter is the Piper Cub of vans.  Re-engined with a
> properly built powerplant, it continues to do things no other van can do, and
> do them at less cost.  Unfortunately, that only applies to those Transporters
> fitted with upright engines.  The Type IV powerplant is becoming too costly
> due to its limited numbers, and from a mechanic's view-point the engines in
> the water-cooled vans were never more than a bad joke.  But better engines
> are available.
> 
> So long as air-cooled Volkswagens remain in production somewhere in the
> world, keeping an early van alive will be a snap.  But the cost of owning a
> water-cooled van or one having the Type IV engine has been rising steadily.
>  Many loyal owners will be forced to abandon their vehicles due to economic
> factors.  
> 
> Mechanically speaking, the powerplant is only one of the systems that go to
> make up a vehicle.  And if you have a bad powerplant it seems logical to
> replace it with a better one.  That is the basis for my strong interest in
> the Subaru and V6 conversions, with a strong bias toward the V6's because of
> their greater availability, lower cost and history of 100,000+ service life.
> 
> While the Vanagon List was not created to provide a repository of information
> about engine conversions, neither was it designed to poll sleeping positions
> or BTU requirements for camping in the snow.  It seems entirely reasonable
> that anything which serves to keep our vehicles on the road is a worthy
> subject for the list, and to my mind that includes alternative powerplants.
> 
> We love our 'bricks' because they fulfill a need.  Installation of a
> different engine is a relatively minor point in the overall scheme of things.
>  I'm hopeful someone with the necessary resources can create an archive of
> engine conversion data so that when the time comes -- as it surely will, even
> for the uprights -- we will have alternative powerplants and the necessary
> conversion information to keep our vans flying.  er... rolling.
> 
> -Bob
> 
> My strong interest in the V6 conversion is b 
>