I'm waiting for this technology to be available for conversions!!!!

To "Air" is human. what a "divine" idea!!

<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/automobiles/autospecial/24air.html?_r=1&a
mp;em&amp;ex=1193371200&amp;en=b6d24f853e5ac33d&amp;ei=5087&amp;oref=slogin>

http://www.engineair.com.au/airmotor.htm

Plenty of space for an air storage tank in a Vanagon too!

Jack

-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
Neil2
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 5:32 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Replace WBX with more efficient engine? Well....

Here, here, Diesels are just fine . . . in Florida.

On 6/5/08, Stuart MacMillan <macgroup@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> Do the math.  Calculate your savings (10%? 15%?) over a year, and decide
if
> it's worth it.  Probably not, since you can save as much by slowing down,
> or
> even with a product like this:  www.ca40g.com  (I have no interest in this
> company, but I've tried it and it did work for about a 10% improvement in
> my
> Scion xB  (30 to 33 MPG hiway over 10 tank fulls).  I'd be curious to see
> what you folks find if you try it. I'm going to try it in my EVC this
> summer.  It's a bit of a PITA to deal with though, its an oil based
liquid.
>
>
> People swap out the WBX for more power and reliability, not economy.  It
> takes the same amount of power to move the heavy, un-aerodynamic Vanagon
> Regardless of what engine is in it, so a slightly more efficient engine
> will
> give you slightly more mileage.
>
> Put in a diesel if you really want economy, and you'll have the best of
> both
> worlds--you'll be forced to drive slower ;-), and you'll get terrific
> (relatively speaking) mileage!
>
> Stuart
>

--
Neil
'82 Diesel Westy
Peace of