

| Subject: | Re: Diesel Subaru Conversions |
| From: | Mike Collum |
| Date: | Fri, 10 Mar 2006 22:05:13 -0500 |
With this being an international list ... the octane discussion gets confused. 1 RON octane is equivalent to 87 CLC octane. (RON + MON)/2 = CLC octane number. This is the number that you will find printed on a yellow label on gas pumps in the United States. The RON (Research Octane Number) is used outside the United States. Mike Dennis Haynes wrote: > Your Vanagon does not need 91 pump octane fuels. That sticker is for > another, older rating system. 87 ROZ/RON is fine unless something is > wrong or the ignition timing is over advanced. > > Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf > Of Christopher Gronski > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 2:42 PM > To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM > Subject: Re: Diesel Subaru Conversions > > I disagree with your calculation for two reasons: > > 1) A lot of people do conversions because they need a new engine > anyway, so for many the calculation needs to be done on the "premium" > charged for a diesel conversion over a rebuild of their 1.9 or 2.1 > > 2) My 2.1 syncro lists the gasoline requirement as 91 octane right > next to the filler neck, so I have to burn premium gas. In Canada this > generally means paying $0.07 to $0.10 MORE per litre for diesel. > > The math still probably works out against the diesel but when I do it, > it will likely be for eco reasons and added (mostly flat) torque. > > Chris > > On 3/10/06, Pensioner <al_knoll@pacbell.net> wrote: > >>Musing over conversions, one of my many talents, brings me to consider > > the > >>cost-benefit scenarios. Let's postulate that we drive 10000 miles per > > year > >>just to use easy numbers. Discounting the normal maintenance for both > > a > >>converted vanagon and a non-converted vanagon, the costs of conversion > > seem > >>to range from ~$14000 (not a misprint) in my case to perhaps $3000 for > > an > >>average of $5000 (high but we have to start somewhere). >> >>If fuel costs over time are the principal reason for going to diesel > > (not > >>fuel availability, or the desire to side with Willie on the BioDiesel >>concert) then it makes sense to look at the fuel savings one would > > enjoy > >>over that 10000 miles per year. Diesel currently costs about %10 more > > than > >>87 Octane and is likely to stay that way. For $2.50/gallon 87 octane > > let's > >>say and vanagon average fuel efficiency of 17 miles per gallon. The > > gallons > >>per year is easily found to be ~588 gallons times $2.50 gives $1470 > > per year > >>fuel cost before conversion. If you go with diesel the fuel > > consumption > >>will probably be on the order of 25 miles per gallon. For the same > > 10000 > >>miles per year you'll pay $1100 in fuel costs including the %10 higher > > price > >>for diesel. You will get additional range between fuel stops but > > you'll > >>need it as not all fuel services feature diesel. >> >>In summary you'll save $370 per year in fuel costs for 10000 miles per > > year. > >>How many years to break even on the installation is left as an > > excercise for > >>the reader. >> >>Seems to be over ten years if your previously owned motor lasts that > > long. > >>FTSOE let's say it does. You will have saved $3700 towards the motor >>replacement. >> >>The above example is to be considered a conservative estimate process, > > your > >>mileage, tolerance, costs, will no doubt be different. >> >>"If a man professes knowledge but cannot express that knowledge in > > numbers, > >>then that knowledge is of a meagre and insufficient kind" -- Lord > > Kelvin > >>Numbers rule! >> > >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »