no debating that digijet and digifant are significantly different.

and I'm very familiar with running a 2.1 on digijet etc.

however...looking at the bently diagram for the two AFM's...
1.9 versus 2.1 ..
they look awfully similar inside.
the only different I see is how they drew the little arrow on the right hand
variable resistor .

in the 19 diagram it shows the arrow going to the top, on the 2.1 the arrow
sticks through a little.

I don't know if that's just a conicidence and it doesn't matter, or that
difference in now it's drawn really means something.

sometimes if you look really carefully, and understand what they are
representing in the drawings of the parts in the wire diagram .....they do
try to represent what part is what inside a relay etc...
so I am wonderiing if it means anything or not.

inputs to the ecu appear to be the same.
I'm gonna pop a 2.1 AFM onto a digiget system and see what it does.

if anyone would like to comment on the internal nuances of the two AFM's ...
that would be great.
Scott
www.turbovans.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Old Volks Home" <oldvolkshome@GMAIL.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:59 PM
Subject: Re: 2.1 VS 1.9 AFM

> 1.9 & 2.1 AFMS are substantially different and two entirely different
> systems (even though they look alike on the outside).  1.9 Digijet and 2.1
> Digifant sysrtems are the typical apple and orange, oil and water, etc.
>
> If your 1.9 system in your 83.5-85 is intact, use the 1.9 AFM, Boot, etc.
> For more info, see my 1.9 to 2.1 upgrade page:
>
> http://www.oldvolkshome.com/19to21.htm
>
> It's worked fine for me for the past 13 years.  The only major update is I
> installed a European spec better performance  Digijet ECU 025906021F from
> the late Boston Bob a few years back for smoother running and a little
> better power, especially on the hills in a loaded Westy w/trailer.
> --
> Jim Thompson
> 84 GL 1.9 "Gloria"
> 84 Westfalia 2.1 "Ole Putt"
> 72 411 Station Wagon "Pug"
> 75 914 1.8 "Nancy"
> Full Timing Since March 1999
> oldvolkshome@gmail.com
> http://www.oldvolkshome.com
> ***********************************
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Evan Mac Donald <evanm@att.net> wrote:
>
>> Aside from the physical difference of the inlet size at the rubber boot
>> end, are
>> there any real differences between these two items? If both complete sets
>> (airbox, boot, etc.) were available, would a 2.1 AFM work with a 1.9 ECU?
>> Just
>> wondering, cuz I will be putting my 2.2 (up from 2.1) rebuild into a 1.9
>> chassis...
>>