TheSamba.com :: View topic

Sat Jul 19, 2008 10:43 am

The situation is that I have an '80 Riviera automatic which immediately upon acquiring I bought parts to turn the motor, which was in boxes in the back, into a sort of Camper Special. At the time I had never looked into Vanagons before. Since then I have done nothing to the motor mostly because of other projects but also because I wonder if I wouldn't be much happier with a Subaru in the back. I've recently started researching them more indepth and have been leaning towards going for the conversion with a 2.5 SOHC, but I now have the opportunity to pick up an SVX with a blown tranny, (one of their known weaknesses,) and ok mileage, for very cheap. The car itself looks to be in great shape and at this point we'll assume the compression check pans out.

The question is if I departed from the 2.5 and ran with the SVX what would I be giving up? Obviously the bennies are more horsepower at the expense of MPG, but beyond that I don't know much. I've read the automatic will put it out of its rev range but can I combat this with larger tires? I've already gone to 16" wheels. How would the tranny and driveline hold up to that kind of power increase? Any noise difference? Any comments and advice at this point would be very welcome. Thanks.

Sat Jul 19, 2008 11:27 am

Hey Dude,

You should join the http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/subaruvanagon/ group.

Also, there's a specific group for SVX-powered Vanagons but that group is small and there's less traffic; of course, they have exactly what you're thinking about installing.

http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/SVXVanagon/

From what I've seen and read, all of the SVX conversions are into 4-speeds with a lot of those guys installing 5-speeds. The automatic is not a good match for the SVX motor but my experience is remote at best.

Good luck,

Chester

Sat Jul 19, 2008 11:33 am

I dunno either. But I drove an SVX recently and the only thing I liked about it was the motor, especially the sound.

Sat Jul 19, 2008 12:45 pm

The tough problem is that a subaru is water cooled and you are air cooled. Most conversion are so poorly done that death in th ecrusher is merciful.

I am not a big Subaru fan either since I own one. They leak as bad if not worse than a wasserboxer.

I would suggest a Raby Camper Special or a Powerstroke if it were my money.

Just my 2 cents.

Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:53 pm

Going from air-cooled to water-cooled is definitely a drag but space is there for a water-cooled system (radiator and hoses) to be installed. Periodically, people do this and there are a couple of threads floating around about it.

As for the Subaru conversions themselves, the 2.2 and 2.5 conversions are now fairly common and standardized. The 3.3 is less so but even there the "hard thinking" has been done and it's a matter of buying all the right parts and slapping it together. At this stage the only way you can have a "bad" Subaru installation is to ignore all the good information out there. The following shops can supply you and give you vital information.

Smallcar (Washington)
Mastercraft (Santa Barbara, CA)
Vanaru (Pennsylvania)
Tom Shiels (Khanadastan)

Good luck,

Chester

Sat Jul 19, 2008 4:16 pm

I'm not really concerned with the level of work to get where I'll end up, I simply want to end up happy with the work I've done. Currently I have everything but an exhaust and a throttle body for a Camper Special, but frankly the Subaru 2.5 looks like a much more attractive proposition. That one I'll have to hash out on my own. The glitch right now is that this SVX has entered the picture and I am trying to pin down whether or not it is going to be something I would be happy with. It is a cheap, powerful starting point that I need to learn more about in regards to my application. Thanks.

Sat Jul 19, 2008 10:41 pm

Oh man I have spent way too much time on the internet today. Long story short I may stay aircooled on this one but am going to try to pick up the SVX just to have it in case a decent future project ever comes up. Be prepared and all yes? There are just too many negative references towards automatics and real poor milage out there for me to want to put the effort in on this particular van, but if a Syncro were ever to show up on the scene I think this would be the motor for it. Still haven't ruled out going ahead with a 2.5 conversion with this one, but I so far have not found any screaming good deals on a motor and am slowly coming around to doing something on this. I'll keep looking and if something comes up worthwhile I will probably jump on it, otherwise I'll just stay the course. Thanks.

Sat Jul 19, 2008 11:20 pm

Converting an air cooled Vanagon should not be very much more work than doing an air cooled one. Face it- an 84-91 Vanagon is going to need the dash pulled apart and a new blower motor and heater core anyway. And it's going to need new coolant pipes. Both the metal ones and the plastic are junk by now. A new radiator might be worth spending the money for as well.
So, if you are going to do all this stuff, putting it into an air cooled car is only somewhat more work.
Downside, on the 4 speed cars, the early transmission is weaker than the later. and the later shifter is better.
But the specific question here was for an automatic.
So, the air-cooled part is an obstacle, but not a big one.
Like Randy, I have a Subaru Legacy. Unlike his, mine has a 2.2 engine. At 200k miles, I often do not realize it is running because it is so quiet. I've only owned it for a few years, so not sure whether it has had previous head gaskets. Don't think so, though. At 135 hp, that seems like an improvement to me.
Al

Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:54 am

Well, I know a few who have the SVX in their syncros and love them. The only potential issues I know of, provided the install was clean, is the gas mileage is not so great and those engines are not too common (parts and repairs). I'd say one should decide if they really want/need that kind of power - for what purpose? If not really necessary, stick with the 2.2 or 2.5. The SVX matches up great horsepower-wise with heavier westies, especially heavy westy syncros. I'd say the hp to weight ratios are about perfect and what VWoG should have originally done. I have two 2.5 subie-ized syncros and love them - wouldn't go back.

As you indicated, I'd say grab that SVX anyway in case you may want later down the road or sell.

Sun Jul 20, 2008 9:11 am

69doublecab wrote: Converting an air cooled Vanagon should not be very much more work than doing an air cooled one. Face it- an 84-91 Vanagon is going to need the dash pulled apart and a new blower motor and heater core anyway. And it's going to need new coolant pipes. Both the metal ones and the plastic are junk by now. A new radiator might be worth spending the money for as well.
So, if you are going to do all this stuff, putting it into an air cooled car is only somewhat more work.
Downside, on the 4 speed cars, the early transmission is weaker than the later. and the later shifter is better.
But the specific question here was for an automatic.
So, the air-cooled part is an obstacle, but not a big one.
Like Randy, I have a Subaru Legacy. Unlike his, mine has a 2.2 engine. At 200k miles, I often do not realize it is running because it is so quiet. I've only owned it for a few years, so not sure whether it has had previous head gaskets. Don't think so, though. At 135 hp, that seems like an improvement to me.
Al

I now have a running, former air cooled, conversion (Jetta 2.0). It is my first conversion.

It is a great feeling knowing that the cooling system is almost 100% new. Even though drivetrain is not thoroughly "real world" tested, I can say it was worth the extra effort to convert an air cooled. Now that I have a better idea of what's involved, I would do it again IF I found a "cherry" air cooled for a great price.

An automatic? Personally I wouldn't do it unless I was swapping in a standard tranny. Figure about 1/3 extra work to convert from air cooled, and ? more work to swap in the tranny etc. (I know there's a "how to" on this list somewhere..... )

If a person has done engine swaps before, then it's not such a mental hurdle. It's mostly about time/money. Possibly not a lot of money. For sure it would end up being a ride that the owner KNOWS well. i.e. which parts replaced etc.

In terms of swapping to a manual tranny, I *think* one could switch to a later model tranny/shift linkage. i.e. on the earlier model Vanagon, there are a few bushings in the shift linkage that *may* be hard to find new. Other than that, I can't see what wouldn't be available.

Neil.

PS. I got somewhat lucky, but I found some stock steel long coolant pipes. I stripped and POR-15/top coated with Tremclad. They should hold up for a while. ;)

Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:28 pm

Ok picked up the SVX for $300. '94 130k and grives great so long as you don't need to back up as reverse is gone. After the 2387 is in the Beetle and shaken out a bit the Vanagon is next in line. If no 2.5 presents itself before then it will remain aircooled. Sometime this winter the motor and harness and such will probably come out of the SVX, get worked over, and go into storage. At least that is the plan right now. Keep me out of trouble for a while.

Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:03 pm

iltis74 wrote: There are just too many negative references towards automatics and real poor milage out there
How did you search this out?

What percentage is "just to much?"

In other words, what is so bad and where is it stated?

Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:47 pm

Most of my searching was done on the two Yahoo groups listed above, both of which I have joined, searching for words like SVX and Automatic together. A few that run them seem to get around 15-18mpg, though these were not with an automatic. The one that really got my attention was one that, if memory serves, was on the SVX sight where someone that I believe had the conversion stated that they could not imagine an automatic with one pulling higher than 12-14. If I were to put that kind of work into this and run 12-14 I would be pretty upset. Most of the companies selling conversion parts list the SVX as not a good choice with the automatic or simply do not offer a kit for an SVX in anything other than manual form, though I did not call any up to see if they would. From the Vanaru website-

"Automatic - The SVX conversion can be done on a vanagon automatic. The automatic has drawbacks which make it less ideal for this engine. Foremost is the gearing - the automatic is geared lower than the manual transmission, and the transmission section cannot be re-geared like the manual. Running with the stock gearing, the engine will be revving unnecessarily high, resulting in poor fuel mileage and a high noise level at highway speeds. There exists a European ring and pinion which gears down the differential by 9 percent, but this is a very expensive option and is not currently available as a new gear set."

So it is not end of the world bad, but also I feel not worth the effort on this van. I've also just put new tires on and do not really wish to swap them out already. If I buy a second Vanagon I'll buy it with this motor in mind, of course.

Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:11 pm

"OH"

I missed the part of you were being exclusively SVX specific.

Understand...

Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:51 pm

Sorry to rain on your parade....but an SVX and a Vanagon automatic are just not a very happy marriage.....and I'm not sure if an '80 aircooled autobox is the same as the later model WBX versions.....as far as gearing goes.

Issue is the box causes the engien to turn way more revs at cruising speed than the SVX wants or needs to run at.....definitely not it;s peak efficiency. So yes, you will consume more fuel at higher rpms....and the stick shift Sycnros with this motor have reported 16-17mpg.

Warren C.
Moderator
SubaruVanagon Yahoo Group

Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:06 pm

No rain here. I've figured if a good deal on a 2.5 came up before I got my motor going I would probably jump on it. This thread was just because an SVX came up instead and I needed to figure out whether or not to jump. In the end I bought the car but will not be installing it into this van. Another car is just what I needed.

Sun Jul 20, 2008 9:39 pm

I have a similar opportunity to pick up a '92 SVX without a tranny, rear transaxle or fuel pump. Besides that it's complete including ecu/harness and the guy said it ran well. ~160k miles and I could get it cheap. I have a 1989 Auto Westy and a 1986 Syncro Westy. Thinking this is worth picking up for the Syncro down the road. :wink:
I figure a trans rebuild would also be in order but parts wise what's a realistic estimate if I do most of the work? $2-3k?
Just wondering what I'm in for since some of this is overwhelming: http://www.rmwesty.com/index.php?page=shop.browse&...p;Itemid=1
I also like the idea of Vanaru's in house conversion since I'm on the east coast. :)

Sun Jul 20, 2008 10:49 pm

I just did a conversion on my Westy from a 1.9L, which has more hp, torque than a 2.0 air cooled. OMG, it is SO much faster that I can't even relate to how it was!

If you don't have a syncro, the gearing in the vanagon will give you SO much more performance with even a 2.2L you won't be dissapointed. If you want to waste gas and have your rear end sag from the extra weight, spend even more money on a transmission gearing mod, and impress friends for a week or two, the 3.3L is the ticket. The 2.5 is somewhere in between, but certainly closer to the 2.2 side.

I should note, I have a 2002 Impreza Outback Sport, which has a 2.5L. I couldn't believe how peppy the Westy was with only a 2.2L compared to the 2.5 in the Impreza. It just "feels" faster. But the Westy doesn't have 4WD, wide performance tires, air conditioning, or power steering. An the gearing is lower, meaning quick shifting and acceleration. So you get quite a bit more out of the engine than you'd ever think! Those of us converting from wimpy 2.0L's or 1.9s are usually simply amazed!

Just saying... The thrill of a couple of seconds faster(3.3L) goes away pretty fast with $5/gallon gas. With the 3.3L, your mileage will go down. With a 2.2L or 2.5L, your mileage will increase as well as the performance. And your carbon footprint will be less.....

Edit -- sorry, I just read your later post and realized you already bought the 3.3L, but may not put it in.....