Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 14:36:14 -0500
Reply-To: EMZ <vw4x4@FYI.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From: EMZ <vw4x4@FYI.NET>
Subject: Re: Repowering madness, is this workable?
In-Reply-To: <002b01be1a63$1fe15c60$f2e9ffd0@loi-bear>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Fri, 27 Nov 1998, Pat wrote:
> Eric, is the Buick 4.3 setup transverse or regular?
> Do you think it would fit without cutting the sheet metal under the rear
> seat on my 2wd?
Nope! But this is just a guess....
>
> I'm thinking crazy here, like will the 3.8 Grand national turbo motor bolt
> up to the 4.3 Buick transaxle?
>
Your defeating the purpose of picking this motor and trans.
setup if you do that.
> I'm talking 7-8 sec 0-60's or better in vanagon. Thats sick.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: EMZ <vw4x4@FYI.NET>
> To: vanagon@VANAGON.COM <vanagon@VANAGON.COM>
> Date: Friday, November 27, 1998 2:53 PM
> Subject: Re: Repowering madness, is this workable?
>
>
> > This idea had been going thru my mind for months. If I had
> >a 2 wheel drive, I would remove the motor and trans, and install
> >a front wheel drive buick 4.3, with transmission, computer,
> >and all. The weight of the vehicle is about the same. No
> >playing with gears, torch ranges. Mate at the half shafts,
> >mount, and go! Part avalible anywhere.
> >
> > Eric 86-VW4x4
> > vw4x4@fyi.net 72-240z
> > Pittsburgh, PA USA 1936-Chrysler
> >
> >
> >On Thu, 26 Nov 1998, Blue Eyes wrote:
> >
> >> I've got to ask, even though I know this may sound strange. Has anyone
> >> repowered a Vanagon with a complete front wheel drive auto's motor and
> >> transaxle by just making it a mid engine installation? That way, nothing
> gets
> >> turned from the factory power train's original design. It wouldn't know
> it's
> >> driving rear wheels instead of front wheels. Why not just reverse the
> body's
> >> orientation compared to the engine/transaxle package instead of
> redesigning
> >> the power delivery system?
> >>
> >> When I look at the space under the rear seat, it appears to be suitable
> for an
> >> engine mounted there. How far forward would it intrude into the floor
> space?
> >> Maybe this is workable.
> >>
> >> Thoughts of a 140 hp Audi A6 TDI with 6 speed transaxle, mounted where a
> >> Westy's recently blown gas motor and automatic sit, loom large in my
> head. I
> >> know it would no longer be able to go 129 mph as it can in the A6. I
> also
> >> know the 0 - 60 in 9.8 seconds that it does in the A6 would be a thing of
> the
> >> past because the A6 weights about 225 pounds less than a Caravelle, but
> it
> >> should still be a respectable 10 second figure. I also know it could no
> >> longer yield 44.4 mpg at 74.4 mph (5.3liters/100km @ 120 k/hr) as it does
> in
> >> the A6, but with slightly taller Westy tires, that former 33.0 mph/1000
> rpm
> >> that it gives in the A6 might drop from 2275 rpm at 75 mph to more like
> 1900
> >> where it still has plenty of power but has a slightly lower BSFC and even
> >> lower smoke level.
> >>
> >> Or, for a lower deck height, a front wheel drive 110 hp diesel TDI motor
> with
> >> 5 speed transaxle could go there for a lot less cash and without
> importing the
> >> drive train from a european salvage yard.
> >>
> >> Talk to me. What do you see as the costs and benefits to this kind of
> >> approach? Would it screw up the interior too much?
> >> John
> >>
> >> Audi A6, 3219 pound curb weight, 140 hp. TDI 6 speed test in
> >> Diesel Car April 1995 shows these 6th gear acceleration times:
> >> 30 - 50 mph = 18.1 seconds (starting from 900 rpm)
> >> 50 - 70 mph = 12.1 seconds (starting from 1500 rpm)
> >>
>
|