

| Subject: | Re: Aircooled ?s here for my 81 Westy |
| From: | G.M.Bulley |
| Date: | Fri, 4 Oct 2002 13:18:52 -0400 |
Just re-ran the 0-60, sans 400+ lbs of stuff/water. 21 seconds to 50 mph 31 seconds to 60 mph Only other difference, I stayed in 3rd until about 58 mph. Still took 4 seconds to "get rolling". Just isn't like a Porsche where you can rev it up, dump the clutch, and take off like a bullet. Rev it up and dump the clutch and you are liable to rip all the motor mounts off the cross-bar. Bringing your ideas to life, G. Matthew Bulley Bulley-Hewlett Business: www.bulley-hewlett.com AIM = IExplain4u Phone: +1.919.658.1278 -----Original Message----- From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM] On Behalf Of dr Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:34 PM To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM Subject: Re: Aircooled ?s here for my 81 Westy Mine does 0-60 in a bit over 30 seconds (30-35), from a dead stop. Not having a tach, I shift at the the shift point indicators on the speedometer (those dots). Its an 82 aircolled westy. Nothing special about it other than fresh tuneup and new injectors. Has 82,000 miles, compression ranges from about 98 to 120 psi. I dont recall mine taking long to get up to 5-7 mph. Mine is at its worse right after the shift into 4th. I did not have a passenger, had no equipment loaded, gas tank was practically full, water empty. The new injectors is what prompted this thread. Before replacing them, my 0-60 was a hideous time well above a minute. david G.M.Bulley wrote: > I find the same thing. Performance in the 70-85 mph range is on par with > my Jetta TD, pretty tolerable. 55mph - 70mph is a lesson in > determination. > > Someone last night said their I4 Westy would do 0-60 in 30-ish, but he > didn't do it from a dead stop. I'd ask that person to re-do the test > from a complete stop. My wife even commented during our test run that it > took nearly 8 seconds just to get the van rolling at 5-7 mph. Also, I'll > retest tomorrow without the wife, with the water tank drained, most of > the camping gear removed, a half-tank of fuel, and the middle seat out > so it should be about 400 lbs lighter. More curious than anything else. >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »