GoWesty 2700cc Wasserboxer is on the horizon.

[tschroeder0]

So, what am I missing as far as some ground breaking new development?

you don't have to go back very far in the samba search history to find the not so great (to put it mildly) reports of the 2.5. At the time they came out there was much about the newly developed pistons well??, and its easy to find the thoughts tencent had on why he stays on the lower end of a 2 liter wbxer.

I am all for new developments to the wbxer, I think its cool, what I don't like are stories about members here spending the equivalent of a small fortune on something that may not be as reliable as the 1.9/2.1

[markz2004]

[D Clymer]

The difference lies in the wall thickness of the cylinders and the diameter of the cylinder mounting bores in the case. The old GW 2.5 used stock cylinders bored out to 97mm mounted in the stock diameter case bores. The thin cylinder walls caused poor ring seating and oil consumption. This new engine uses special cylinders designed around the 100.75mm pistons with proper wall thickness. The case bores have been opened up, too, to allow for sufficient stiffness in the bases if the cylinders.

Only time will tell how well this combination works out. But in concept, they've approached this new development the right way with the larger diameter cylinders and bored case, so I wouldn't assume it will have the same issues as the 2.5.

I agree with you, though. Paying huge money for a WBX that doesn't hold together is for the birds.

Dave

[tschroeder0]

i am not at all trying to knock GW.

Maybe the 2.5 has been more reliable than I know, I just know what I have read here and it seems much more on the negative than positive. The issues seem to have been around reliability and maybe the bigger issue of what it takes( and is it reasonable) for an engine like the wbxer that is expected not just to have more power but to run all day long fully loaded, to be punched out to these sizes...really, Im just wonder out loud.

[tschroeder0]

thanks Dave, that was what I was wondering.

[vanonimous]

Too thin cylinder walls is sort of a first mistake people make when going overbore. Trouble is it gets thin and warps as it doesn't dissipate heat well. Then it burns oil...Add iron liners into equation and yeah, bad idea. Much better bore case but then you run into meat holding studs in place. No free lunch in math.
So IMHO they are going into right direction even though a WBX with pushrods, 2 valves, ancient combustion chamber is mildly put inferior in design. They better have some light pistons. But GW is excellent in marketing. They have a true following that doesn't care, they buy. I have a friend who drops $5K for seats, no problem. Another 4k to make his A/C work, sure.
I just sit and watch in amazement.
_________________
If happiness is being a mechanic, owning a Vanagon is nirvana.

Lighting upgrades: https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=578291

[tjet]

[nacradriver]

I wonder if at the time the Vanagon was being sold in the US, if the speed limit was 65, would VW have gone for a different engine....

At 55 to 63 (100 kph) my van behaves very nice.
_________________
Güdrun -1989 Westfalia - 2013 - 2018
Petra - 1985 Vanagon - 1985 to 1991
Zisa - 1974 VW Van "Bus" - 1974 to 1985

[OddN]

I am very curious about this engine. and how it compares to the 2,5 Subaru.

However Im a little worried that the 2,1 block is on the weak side for this much Power. The 2,1 is a tad more vulnerable to Rod bearing wear and failure than the 1,9 is. Remember that all the major Dimensions of this engine is taken from the Type 1 Air cooled engine, that had a displacement of 1,2-1,6.

I see the need for something more powerful than the standard wbx, especially in its detoxed cat Version, and even without cat, it never produced more than 112 hp in its high compression Version. Which by the way require 98 octane.

I also fully understand the want for something original looking, and I respect those who do not want a Japanese engine in their Vanagon.

On the other hand, the Subaru 2,5 is so readily available, relatively inexpensive and easily adaptable, that I do not really see the need for this 2,7 wbx.
_________________
1991 VW Multivan syncro 1,9 TD

[SL12572]

OddN,

The 2.1 block is in fact very robust. The rod bearing issue is addressed by either using 1.9 rods, I-beam rods, or arb studs. These engines can handle plenty of horse power.

While I think the Subaru conversion and pretty much every other engine conversion offered is great, I still believe the WBX is a great engine. Mine had over 220k original miles before being pulled out and was still going strong! It's a simple engine, running a gear driven cam. Using modern technology, such as waterless coolant, and upgraded sealants, these engines can last a very long time with upgraded power.

I'm excited to see what Go Westy comes up with on this new engine and new engine management system....Although pricing may be a big factor!

[vanagonjr]

[D Clymer]

[imtb]

Mine like to curise about 59 mph is the sweet spot.

A 5 speed would be nice on the highway and downshifting to 4th for hills would ok.

[hdenter]

While I would agree with the possible problems raised by the thin cylinder walls of the 2.5s, I suspect that faulty FI systems contributed to a lot of the failures. Keep in mind, when GW was testing out their 2.5s they did it on their own rigs and rigs that they maintained for others that they new had good FI systems in them. Put a 2.5 in a van with a bad injector or fuel pressure or some other modest FI problem that is not obvious and causes a bit of a lean mix and you are bound to have problems. I bet if they ran the 2.5s with the new FI system from the beginning, they would have had a lot fewer problems. Frankly, I think the stock looking new FI system with the knock sensor is the better development. 2.7lt... meh..., I'm not going to line up for one. I hope it works out, but I'm with the smaller size with a turbo crowd.

Hans
_________________
'79 triple white convertible bug
'84 sunroof vanagon
'85 weekender

[morymob]

Their engine sounds good. And one with good pwr to be able to cruise up 'that' long hill , great. We still have that 'mechanical 'fuse' to contend with, the trans. Originally on my 1st I planned togo with a 3.8 v6, even rebuilt eng & got adptor kit from kennedy until I got educated on the trans. Kept all,5, orig, at this point in time probably will just end up with the stock westy, my 2cts

[Robw_z]

For tin top guys like me I kinda wish they'd just make a "humble" high compression 2.2 with knock sensing ignition. A good economy engine(no need for premium fuel and better fuel mileage than a 2.1 in theory).

-Rob

[greggearhead]

[keithwwalker]

I agree to an extent. I have a worn 1.9 and am looking for the next 10+ years. The basic engine architecture has served me well over the last 10 years, but the ancillaries are the Achilles tendon of the whole design.

My concerns with a rebuilt/improved engine are:

Breakerless ignition - I am sick of the cap and rotor
Eliminate the air flow meter with something modern like hot wire sensor
Eliminate the air flow meter's problem prone sensor
Eliminate the crankcase ventilator's influence on the idle speed control
Eliminate the throttle position switches with a non-contact type of sensing (they look like they could break if you look at them wrong)

These are the issues that are a concern come emissions test time, regardless of whether an engine is new or old.

GW seems to have their ECU/ignition/throttle body kit slated for summer 2015. I am still trying to come to terms with the cost...

[tjet]

I'm looking at this kit, mainly because most of the EFI on my '87 2.1 wbx needs replacing....

http://www.sdsefi.com/

[ftp2leta]

Big car maker never passed 2.5L for 4 cyl in mass produce car.

there is a simple reason, it's called physic. Stoke VS bore VS weight VS inertia.

I know there are in Cali but they should look for some kind of engine conversion instead of enlarging the stock case. No matter what the wall thickness is. It's still a 1980 design FI

In my shop I have replace 2 of their engine that where less then 2 yo. One being a 2.5L

Plain stupid.
Trust me I respect them and deal with them but going 2700 cc is.. no, just no.

Ben
_________________
Working with rust, grease, dirt and dust is a sad truth.
------------------------------------------------------
FI part for sale: http://www.benplace.com/parts_sale1.htm
My site: http://www.benplace.com/vw2.htm
Subi conversion: http://www.benplace.com/vanaru_eng.htm
Youtube http://www.youtube.com/user/ftp2leta