

| Subject: | Re: Emissions, Was: AC While Camping |
| From: | Jake de Villiers |
| Date: | Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:17:40 -0700 |
You assume incorrectly Karl. The WBX started first time every time, always passed AirCare with flying colours and used no oil between changes in regular use. However, I swapped it for an engine without rubber water gaskets, without external (!) pushrods, without rubber fuel lines hanging above the exhaust primaries, without NLA parts ie I installed a motor from this century with all that implies - 4 valves per cylinder, 10:1 compression, efficient pent-roof combustion chambers, steel fuel injection lines, an ECU capable of learning, and yes, twice the power. ;) I'd recommend one to anybody who loves their Vanagon. Seeya, Jake On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Karl Wolz <wolzphoto@q.com> wrote: > Jake, > > One assumes that your engine swap was brought about by some weakness of the > old wasserboxer, making one wonder how close to spec it was running at the > last emissions check. Not exactly a fair comparison, but interesting, > nonetheless. > > Karl Wolz > > | > |Dixie needs to go through AirCare before July 9th and I'll share the > |results. I'm very interested myself to see the difference between the 2.1 > |WBX and the 2.5 Subaru motor. > | > |It won't be an entirely direct comparison because I've swapped transaxles > |as > |well but it should be fairly representative. > | > |Jake > |ke.googlepages.com/mydixiedarlin%27 > > -- Jake 1984 Vanagon GL 1.9 WBX 'The Grey Van' 1986 Westy Weekender/2.5 SOHC Suby 'Dixie' Crescent Beach, BC www.thebassspa.com www.crescentbeachguitar.com http://subyjake.googlepages.com/mydixiedarlin%27
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »