Date:         Wed, 10 Jul 1996 05:29:09 -0400 (EDT)
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         Terry Tan <terrytan@ritz.mordor.com>
Subject:      Re: VW Customer Relations on Westfalias in US

> 
> It seems Asghar Bhatti's note about VW's Customer Relations Department 
> communication has sounded a GO signal to list members who might like to 
> express their frustrations over VW's ELECTIVE limitations as to what US 
> customers may select from their manufactured product line.  While I'm not 
> typically a "joiner," allow me to contribute to this parade.
>   First, let me say that I love efficiency, and since diesels convert a 
> higher percentage of their heat into usable shaft horsepower, I'm 
> attracted to diesels.  The ratio for diesels is typically around 31% 
> compared to 26% for spark ignition motors, and that's before you even 
> start to consider the fact that at nearly 7.2 pounds per gallon for 
> diesel compared to 6.2 for gasoline, there's just more available 
> potential heat per gallon in there.
>   I look at corporate VW/Audi as one firm as surely as Buick and Chevy 
> are parts of one GM.  The VW/Audi motors have had the same engineering 
> background for years.  Look at an old Chiltons Imported Autos Manual and 
> see the identical Audi/VW bore and stroke etc.  Makes no difference to me 
> that ome may have five or four of these identical cylinders ganged to 
> form a motor, they're the same to me.  As a matter of fact, if you look 
> at the old SAE Journal articles submitted by the VW engineeering dept. 
> back when the water cooled gas/diesel versions of their then new motor 
> was just in production, you'll read that they are also two versions of 
> the same motor.  So the whole water cooled series originates back with 
> this single fine little design.  And modify they have.  Wow.  Many 
> displacements, and both gas and diesel took their own paths.  To get some 
> more power from the diesel types, several neat tricks have been applied 
> at the production level.  What fun it would be to know what engineering 
> actually tried along the way.  First they played displacement games, and 
> the original 1.5 liter gave way to the 1.6.  Then they added a turbo, 
> jumping the 1.6 48 horses to 68 that Shawn's Westie has and was popular 
> in europe but never inported into the US market.  This failure to 
> import decision may have been an early indication of partial brain death 
> in VW's US marketing staff.  US buyers were more power hungary and had 
> lower fuel prices than europeans, just as now.  But let's fast forward to 
> 1992, the first year that I know the Audi division offered for sale in 
> England the current 2.5 liter DIRECT INJECTION TDI motor, then rated as 
> 115 horsepower @ 4000 rpm, which has now been increased to 140 at the 
> same speed.  This FABULOUS diesel can accelerate a 3300 pound Audi A6 
> manual trans car from 0 to 60 in about 10 seconds flat, average around 45 
> mpg., and maintain a a top continuous duty speed over 125 mph!  Hell of a 
> machine.  It IS NOT a 2.5 INDIRECT INJECTION 78 horsepower motor that's 
> also less fuel efficient!  Diesel Car Magazine says this A6 towing a 
> trailer (so the combined gross weight and wind drag is much more than a 
> "transporter") still goes very well indeed.  Torque peaks down at a truck 
> like 1900 rpm @ 214 lbs-ft, so if they could dump the heat it makes, it 
> would be, to my mind, the IDEAL Westie type vehicle power plant.
>   Now I understand VW is test marketing a 78 horse diesel version 
> Transporter (as they call it) in California.  I say where's the 140 horse 
> Direct Injection computer controled and ultra clean smokeless 2.5 TDI?  
> It appears to be the same brain functioning that kept the 68 horse 1.6 
> turbo from being made available in the US 13 years ago in my opinion.  
> Hello VW, IS ANYBODY HOME?  You guys want to capture a greatly increased 
> chunk of the US Van market?  Just bolt a few together and let all the US 
> auto magazines test it and poll their readers as to whether or not they'd 
> be interested.  This frugal VanaRocket would sell very well indeed.  Look 
> how the big diesel US pickup competitive war is raging due to great 
> demand in turn caused by their great real world performance.  What is 
> wrong with this picture VW?  If you can't dump the heat with the stock 
> water pump and inadequately sized coolant lines, fix it.  If you need 
> to, go with an electric external secondary pump for periods when your 
> previous Vans experienced a plague of heating problems because they 
> couldn't even handle the much lower heat-making motors you fitted 
> earlier.
>   So that's my complaint against VW.  For a "dyed in the wool" diesel 
> fan, they appear to be refusing to push the obviously right buttons, and 
> if I held a big block of their stock, that complaint would be voiced at 
> stock holders' meetings.  They are not serving themselves nor their 
> customers well by this refusal.
>   Finally, let me predict that in the year 2000, VW will offer a Fabulous 
> New Millennium motor to US bus buyers, and that's their then 8 year old 
> 1992 2.5 liter direct injection TDI motor.  Just my opinions.
> 
> 	John Wakefield
> 
> 

You forgot that those nut heads in VWoA that make those marketing decisions 
like Joel Walker mentioned are mostly GM or Ford Transplants that VW thought
would help bring back their old glory. I think VW's first job is to purge
its organization of this cancer which has made so many VW owners unhappy
and get the right people to rebuild if it wants to stay in the US. I believe
there are many people (from the comments that I have read here) on this list
that has more commonsense than those they currently employ in Michigan.
VW should have learnt their lesson when the Pensylvania mfr facility
became a flop.
				Terry Tan