BenT,
 
HAR!!!!!!!!!!! Now that does put the problem in terms I can readily
understand, not that I have experienced the problem mind you as my 1.9
is air-cooled, highly reliable (knock on wood) and has not petered out
(yet). (puns required)
 
Built for comfort not for speed,
David Higginbotham
82 Westfalia
Silk Hope, NC
 
  _____  

From: BenTbtstr8@aol.com [mailto:BenTbtstr8@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 2:03 PM
To: Higginbotham, David A.; vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: [VANAGON] State of the Art in Engine Swaps is....?
 
In a message dated 4/7/2004 9:50:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
dhigginbotham@HAZENANDSAWYER.COM writes:
        << Color me seriously ignorant as I came up in the "there is no
replacement
        for displacement" years. How does one gain an advantage by
replacing my
        1.9L or 2.0L with a 1.8L?
 
David,
 
Eric said he had TWO 1.8's. So 1.8 plus 1.8 is 3.6. That's a whopping
displacement increase.
 
All kidding aside, the advantage is in reliability. IMHO the WBX engines
are better suited to Vanagon duty because of their torque curve as
compared to an inline-4 VW. Grunt is downunder in the lower RPM's where
you need it. But the inline-4 VW engines do not have the same
reliability issues that WBX engines have with regard to headgaskets and
such. There is the added benefit that many of these slightly smaller
displacement engines produce more power than your 1.9 WBX simply by
virtue of improved efficiency. What was it that the little guy said?
"Honey it's not the size that matters but how you use it." I-4's also
have a higher redline so you can get better top end. The little guy can
keep reving while you 1.9 peters out at about 4200 rpm. (puns intended)
 
BenT