Wow... totally hadn't noticed the flags. Look at the difference between the
index numbers for the UK and US! That looks like a bunch of lead footers
with engines with lot's of moving parts for the US. But no average mileage
numbers, no cost of repair! Lame! I wonder what gives?

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Jake de Villiers [mailto:crescentbeachguitar@GMAIL.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 9:01 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: In praise of VW inline fours

Well stated Jim, as usual.

On the Reliability Index Chart there are a Union Jack and an American flag.
When I click on 'Old Glory' I get US figures.

Pretty shabby, really.

Thanks, Jake

On 4/18/07, Jim Akiba <syncrolist@bostig.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting post, in what ways do you mean the Zetec and VW inline four
> have
> similarities?
>
>
> In response to "Why confuse the issue with a non-VW engine?"
>
> Because:
>
> A) it's actually WAY less confusing depending on what engine you choose
> B) there are no VW engines that offer solutions to your end goals
> C) there are non-purists that don't care who makes the engine as long as
> they get what they pay for
>
> You point out that the ABA has longer rods which minimize vibration. This
> is
> a good observation, the rod ratio of the ABA is around 1.7, vs. for
> example
> the zetec which is 1.58.  The ABA is theoretically less prone to
> vibration,
> but because it isn't balanced as precisely, it isn't. It certainly could
> be,
> but from the factory it's not. Additionally because of the rod ratio, the
> ABA should also be theoretically worse in terms of low to mid engine speed
> cylinder filling and therefore have lower torque production at low RPMs.
> Higher rod ratio engines are characteristically better suited for
> lightweight vehicles for this reason since they are better suited for high
> end power no matter what you do with cam(s) selection. This is reflected
> in
> the performance of the ABA's they are not as torquey down low as the zetec
> with a lower rod ratio for instance.
>
> As far as the maintenance goes, it's true that the inline are very easy to
> access and work on. If the inline itself is even simpler as far as inlines
> go, it gets even.... simpler. If one were to look at them side by side and
> in person, it becomes rapidly obvious how insanely simple the zetec is
> from
> the maintenance standpoint,you can for instance do a zetec timing belt
> blindfolded with no problem. Not a typical scenario, but it makes a point
> about how different the valve timing setup is on the zetec. It uses an
> elegantly simple idea to make valve timing virtually impossible to screw
> up,
> no other engine I'm aware of has this in it's design. We should shoot a
> video of this so you can see for yourself what the heck I'm talking about
> though. Like the ABA the water pump is nice and easy (in fact they use the
> same o-ring style pump), here's a video of Sean doing one start to finish
> in
> 9 minutes and change
> <http://www.bostig.com/products/zetec/videos/zetec_water_pump.wmv>.
> Another
> common one would be the serpentine belt, you can do it with two quarter
> turns of a single 15mm open or box wrench. It takes literally 30 seconds.
> It
> will take you longer to get the wrench, take the new belt out of it's
> paper
> keeper, and throw the old belt away than actually swapping the belt.
>
> You mention: " Simplicity, reliability, performance,
> affordability."
>
> Bingo. I totally agree, and the zetec outstrips the ABA conversion on
> every
> point. But you forgot your very first mentioned selection criteria for
> better or worse which is "VW, *then* Simplicity, reliability, performance,
> Affordability" In which case then I'd agree the ABA would be the one.
>
> BTW have a look at these indices:
>
>
> http://www.reliabilityindex.co.uk/man_index_2.html?searchtype=engine
>
> It is data from an aftermarket warranty provider in the UK. There is NO
> reason the warranty company would be biased, in fact since their entire
> business model revolves around being correct in their risk assessment. I
> would say they likely have the best data you're going to see since not
> only
> do they need to track and be accurate in their data collecting, but they
> also have complete information since they are actually paying out as well,
> it isn't like a consumer reports evaluation based on customer feedback or
> factory warranty claims... MANY people have problems that they end up
> paying
> for that they will not complain about, perhaps because on the whole they
> love(and I mean love, not like) the car.
>
> This link above is for engine reliability alone... and it is so vital to
> break that out of the context of the vehicle alone, since you aren't
> actually talking about the whole car with an engine conversion. Nobody
> cares
> if the door handles break too easy on the vehicle that their engine is
> coming from (at least they shouldn't).
>
> And look the Honda is right where you would suspect, at number one. And
> there are no surprises in terms of where everything else is either. But
> I've
> worked as a mechanic, and am impartial to make
>
> I wish there were a few US aftermarket warranty companies that would
> publish
> data like this, and I wish the data was broken down even further so we
> could
> see which engines are actually contributing what.. as that is the only
> shadow cast by the data... there is still not enough info to make a
> definitive claim engine by engine based on it... but it can lend to people
> realizing that if their high level grasp of what is a reliable "make" is
> flawed, maybe they need to re-evaluate how they think about particular
> engines too.
>
> As for wanting to make a buck while doing it, yeah it'd be nice but I keep
> repeating has never been the goal. I've been doing this conversion for
> almost two years now, and nobody involved has made a single dime to show
> for
> it. But it's still worth it. But we have lot's of new friends, and the
> amount I've learned in simply making these ideas work is
> un-frickin-believable. And besides, we're just getting started.
>
> Flamesuit on, although I tried to stay away from opinion your honors,
>
> Jim
>
>
> ________________________________________
> Bostig Engineering
> Engine Systems Voodoo
> http://www.bostig.com/
> 617.272.3800
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Keezer [mailto:warmerwagen@YAHOO.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 2:44 PM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: In praise of VW inline fours
>
> One of the  best engines VW designed was the four
> cylinder overhead cam inline-four .
>
> You could say it "absolutely rocks" with
> performance and reliability.
> With lots of room for performance upgrades.
>
> I strongly recommend considering a Jetta or Golf
> engine (2.0 '93-'99 ABA).
>
> Watercooled Volkswagen engines are plentiful and
> cheap. And of course there is the TDI Diesel,
> which is hard to find locally.
>
> Inline-four ABA engines have longer rods which
> minimize vibration that is prone to the 1.8
> engine.
>
> They also have oil spray jets that spray oil at
> the bottoms of the pistons.
>
> Mine has been running my 5,000 lb Westfalia since
> 1999. It now has 210,000 miles.
>
> If you are looking for a suitable replacement for
> the WBX , look no further.
>
> You can call me a purist, but I am just a VW
> owner. So if you are your own mechanic and a VW
> owner ,then the natural progression is which VW
> engine can I substitute?
>
> Why confuse the issue with a non-VW engine?
> Sure there's a bunch of people out there and here
> that want to make money selling Subaru and Ford
> technology. Fine.
>
> You might find it an interesting challenge to
> find what non-VW engine can be adapted to the
> Vanagon. Nothing odd about that.
>
> I'm speaking for those like myself who want to
> have a VW engine in your Vanagon ,but not the
> original engine.
>
> Sure, the Subaru or Ford might be fast and quiet
> and like a WBX and reliable etc, but it's not a
> Volkswagen engine.
>
> And reading these posts I see nothing about the
> inline four unless it's a Tiico, as if Tiico was
> the only inline four conversion out there.
>
> My dad put a VW engine in a airplane . The flat
> four design, the weight, the similarity to other
> aircraft engines, made it a popular choice.
>
> Part of the  Subaru's  popularity is due to it's
> similarity to the WBX. Oh yeah and you can goo
> super fast.
> The Zetech is similar to the VW inline.
> Similarities are OK.
>
> One Vanagon owner just asked if the Subie sounds
> like the WBX.
> Another observation-WBX owners  like the sound of
> the WBX. It just shows how we form an attachment
> to the sound of the car.
>
> Would Harley's be popular if they sounded like
> Kawasakis?
>
> The inline four doesn't sound like a WBX.
>
> I recognize the virtues of the WBX, but few from
> a maintenance perspective . I do like the sound,
> and the quietness. I found the WBX 2.1 muffler is
> great on an inline conversion.
>
> Try removing the AC compressor or alternator from
> an 89 Honda Civic like on a friends.
>
> They designed it to be worked on up on a hoist.
>
> The inline four has it all on one side , easy to
> replace a water pump, alternator, AC compressor,
> spark plugs, distributor, etc.
>
> Simplicity, reliability, performance,
> affordability.
>
> We are a small group of people who aprreciate
> drive a vehicle no longer in production and with
> diminishing support from VW.
>
> That was recogninzed shortly after the last
> Vanagon rolled off the assembly line.
> This list has help provide a way owners can ehlp
> each other where there is limited or non-existing
> help.
>
> A good book on water-cooled inline four VW
> engines is the Watercooled Volkswagen Performance
> Handbook by Greg Raven
> ISBN 0-7603-0491-2
>
> Robert
> 1982 Westfalia 2.0 ABA '95 Golf
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

--
Jake
1984 Vanagon GL
1986 Westy Weekender "Dixie"
www.crescentbeachguitar.com