Date:         Fri, 18 Sep 1998 12:56:08 -0700
Reply-To:     Dan Schmitz <djs@GENE.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <Vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         Dan Schmitz <djs@GENE.COM>
Subject:      Comtemplating buying my first Waterboxer...
Comments: To: Vanagon List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi. I currently own an '82 Vanagon Adventurewagen. This vehicle, while
absolutely wonderful for camping and for all manner of utility uses, has
been very hard on engines. It is a 2L air-cooled, with California emissions
(cat and EGR) I have rebuilt the engine a couple of times, due to
overheating/overstressing, and my latest strategy has been to go with a
slightly modified 2.2L (stroke increase) engine for a bit more power.

However, I am to the point where I would like to consider moving up to a
water-cooled model. I have heard, both on this list and from mechanics,
that the 2.1L '86 and newer Vanagons are the ones to get. Reliability and
engine longevity are supposedly better than the 1.9L, as is power.

Question: I see the horsepower quoted as 95 for '86/87, and 90 for
'88/89/90/91. Was there an actual decrease, or is HP measured differently
for the later years?

Also, for markets outside the U.S., I have seen models with 112 HP 2.1L
engines. Again, are these truly more powerful, and if so, why?

I am interested in buying the Vanagon with the most power, for obvious
reasons. I would appreciate any tips, insights, advice, and moral support
available.

Thanks in advance!

Sincerely,

Dan

PS: Synchros are also a possibility, but I'm not much of an off-roader. But
please feel free to comment on Synchros, as well!


Dan Schmitz
Technical Writer
Process & Automation Engineering
Genentech, Inc.
djs@gene.com