In a message dated 2/9/99 1:32:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, dave@V-DUB.MUSA.
 COM writes:

 > I don't see what the fuss is, my Vanagon has plenty of power for a VW
 >  bus.  I think the wasserboxer is a great engine for the Vanagon, it
 >  cruses fine all day near the redline and doesn't complain.

 Dave,

In my heart I agree, but now that I'm looking at new heads (at least) at
147K, I'm evaluating why I wanted a Vanagon in the first place.

It wasn't just for the WBX.

It was for the outstanding use of space within a wheelbase short enough to
turn around on my street without a broken U-turn.  It was space (real space)
for seven full sized humans or the three of us and our two or three big dogs (
depending on if my son brings his from his Mom's house) .  It's a portable
dining room and a cavernous hauler if I need it.  It's a great view from the
driver's seat.  It's a home away from home.

If replacing the wasserboxer with an inline will improve the longevity and
reliability, then so be it (but only if it's from VW or Audi... I have my
neuroses about "contamination").  I agree that there is nothing like a smooth
running boxer for buzz-free driving, (I'm a big fan of BMW bikes) but the VW
waterboxer head problem is just too troublesome for me (and recurrent for
some of us).

I had considered a Boston Bob replacement, but I'd just rather take the easy
way out and go the way that VW itself did (in SA).  I had a Jetta with the
big valve 1.8.  I sold it at 180K after doing nothing to the engine except
oil, coolant, and belt changes.  I had a Fox with 137K which I sold with the
same lack of trouble.  Both vehicles are still on the road, I'm told.

I may regret it while "buzzing" down the highway one day, but I'm hoping it'll
be many many miles from now.

Paul
89 Carat 147K (awaiting a quote on a Eurospec install)

[message/rfc822]