TheSamba.com :: View topic - Resale Value Of Zetec, Subaru, Other Converted Vanagon?

Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:54 pm

nothing worse than paying a professional 100$ a hour to learn about a vanagon engine
which engine
diesel
1.9
2.1
and air cooled?
then if I remember 3 diff wiring harnesses for a 86 ?
2 different ignition systems

Ga what a nightmare or cash cow !

Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:14 pm

photogdave wrote:
I guess it's highly dependent on one's location. .
Yeah, I bet it would be hard to find a mechanic here who has even seen a WBX. I'd also bet that some who have would run out the back door if they saw a Vanagon pull into the lot. I would think there are far more mechanics that would be comfortable with the Subaru, in-line 4 or Zetec.

Personally, a well converted van would be worth more to me if I were buying. But if I were selling, I would not expect the conversion to raise the value of the van by the price of the conversion - maybe if it was a well done self-install with a professional harness, but certainly not the price of a professional install at a shop.

Does it matter? It's not like when I bought my new Civic that I thought I'd get the price I paid and all my maintenance costs paid back when I sold it 10 years later with 200,000 miles on it. :lol:

Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:02 am

SyncroChrick wrote:
I cannot think of any brand or model in the whole history of cars that has been more valuable with a different engine than what came with it from the factory. That's why it's all about "matching numbers" for muscle cars.

In the Muscle Car world, you don't find cars that became icons with crappy motors (sorry!) Vanagons are not muscle cars. Their value is not derived from a fast engine, tire-smoking burnouts, or race heritage. Repowering the vanagon removes the big problem that was born into the Vanagon.

AS for keeping a problem in a car because it was original, remember the first-generation Ford Explorer? They had Firestone tires that suffered failures and sometimes caused the Explorer to roll over. Do you think these little trucks are more valuable with the original Firestones, or a good set of Michelins?

Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:18 am

Silence262 wrote: SyncroChrick wrote:
I cannot think of any brand or model in the whole history of cars that has been more valuable with a different engine than what came with it from the factory. That's why it's all about "matching numbers" for muscle cars.

In the Muscle Car world, you don't find cars that became icons with crappy motors (sorry!) Vanagons are not muscle cars. Their value is not derived from a fast engine, tire-smoking burnouts, or race heritage. Repowering the vanagon removes the big problem that was born into the Vanagon.

AS for keeping a problem in a car because it was original, remember the first-generation Ford Explorer? They had Firestone tires that suffered failures and sometimes caused the Explorer to roll over. Do you think these little trucks are more valuable with the original Firestones, or a good set of Michelins?
"Crappy" is a sliding scale.
Relatively few of those 60s and 70s vintage cars ever saw 100k miles without an engine rebuild, new transmission.. or some other MAJOR work. Cars just did not last that long in those days. The engines required a great deal of regular tuning to keep running well. And where the tuning was not done, they'd run like crap and slowly ruin themselves.

Most WBXers make it to 150k or higher before they grenade.

Regardless.. the proof is in the pudding.
Selling prices of Vanagons are about even.. whether they have a solid rebuilt WBXer or if they have a well done engine swap.

I think engine swaps are great... but I'd not likely pay much more for one.. regardless who did the work.
But I should add this qualifier.. I'd not pay GoWesty prices for a rebuilt Vanagon either.
In fairness.. lots of people will pay those prices.

The Vanagon is trending in Splitty direction.. and Bay Windows, likewise.. What Spiltty folks know is that most ANY "custom" work can be undone and a van brought back to near original.
Same will go for a Vanagon.

Still the bottom line is that if you are looking to make money, then invest in solid real estate or buy into the stock market.. Sure, there's still risk.. but at least you stand a chance at making money.. where as with cars your best day is just spending a little less money.

Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:31 am

The current $50,000+ Syncros in the classifieds have stalled around $25,000 on eBay.

Knowing what I do about Syncros and conversions...one of those seller should take the $25k and run...my opinion.

Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:15 am

In non-winter months, my '87 WBX-powered GL is my daily driver. If my engine gives up, I will likely replace it with another WBX, but only because I cannot afford the conversion. If a used WBX (less than a grand) was the same price as a decent conversion to Zetec or Subaru, I would have converted to one of those already.

If it sounds like I am playing both sides, really, I'm not. I am firmly in the "converted is better" camp, but, damn that Dylan (Insyncro), he has my 2.1 running so well, I can't consider converting until it dies. It might outlast me.

Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:35 am

Silence262 wrote: In the Muscle Car world, you don't find cars that became icons with crappy motors (sorry!) Vanagons are not muscle cars. Their value is not derived from a fast engine, tire-smoking burnouts, or race heritage.

Muscle cars are valuable simply because they are the cars that were lusted after when new by baby boomers, some of whom currently have the money to pay silly prices for them. The "matching numbers" thing is simply a way to justify even more inflated prices.

Quote: AS for keeping a problem in a car because it was original, remember the first-generation Ford Explorer? They had Firestone tires that suffered failures and sometimes caused the Explorer to roll over. Do you think these little trucks are more valuable with the original Firestones, or a good set of Michelins?

To set the record straight, the Firestones worked fine as long as you ran sufficient pressure in them. Ford, in an attempt to soften the harsh ride of the Explorer specified a low pressure for its tires and Firestone foolishly rubber-stamped the pressure spec because if they didn't they would have lost a big customer. It is likely that any manufacturer's tires would have shown an increased rate of failure at that pressure and with the Explorer's excessively high roll center would have killed additional people just as the Ford/Firestone combination did. In a finger-pointing competition, Ford happens to have a better PR department than Firestone.

Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:53 am

GeorgeL wrote: In a finger-pointing competition, Ford happens to have a better PR department than Firestone.
And better than Isuzu.. Consumer Reports killed the Isuzu Trooper.. citing roll over.. Yet they were pretty good SIMPLE vehicles over all.

These were a true utility vehicles and were no more prone to roll over than any other short wheel base vehicle of its type. Jeeps, 4runners, Pathfinders, Explorers, FJs, you name it..
Short wheel base, high ground clearance moved CoG up..
And hey guess what genuises.. You can't drive it like a frikkin 280Z.

SO the marketers decided to protect us from ourselves... and build glorified station wagons, instead.

IMHO, It was these types of "reviews" that killed real utility vehicles and ushered in the plushUVs..

Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:57 am

Silence262 wrote: In non-winter months, my '87 WBX-powered GL is my daily driver. If my engine gives up, I will likely replace it with another WBX, but only because I cannot afford the conversion. If a used WBX (less than a grand) was the same price as a decent conversion to Zetec or Subaru, I would have converted to one of those already.

If it sounds like I am playing both sides, really, I'm not. I am firmly in the "converted is better" camp, but, damn that Dylan (Insyncro), he has my 2.1 running so well, I can't consider converting until it dies. It might outlast me.

Your WBX enjoyed it's run on the DigiTool.
I am so happy it is still running strong.
I have picked up a few top notch wbx engines from conversions and will be installing them in vans this summer.
One will get the GW injection and another a combo of RJE and Vanistan aftermarket parts.
Both will be in "test" vans.

Long live the WBX :wink:

Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:12 pm

The matching number thing was just an example and not that relevant to this discussion - it does not really matter if you are looking at muscle cars, or VWs, or Toyota, or Benz, or any other vehicle.

Again, my point is that from a resale value perspective only - keeping an original engine in your classic car is a much safer bet, no matter how good or crappy the engine was when built. This applies to Vanagon too, even though it may not be always obvious right now.

Many of you have pointed out that the enjoy their vans more with a conversion, and the vehicle is worth more to them with it, which I totally agree. But personal preferences and market laws are 2 different things.

Tiico, Jetta 2.0, Subaru 2.2, Subaru SVX, even first gen 2.5 Subaru - these were all trendy conversion that have come and gone. There is not enough consistency between all the various conversions out there to generate a sustainable push in value forward. If I buy a 2.5 right now, I have to spend hours with the seller figuring out what parts have been used where (Smallcar, RMW, etc, etc), who did the wiring, what kind of speed sensor has been used, has the RPM been adjusted, etc, etc. If you are new to the Vanagon world, that's a big step on the top of the already steep learning curve.

For those who are still not convinced, spend some time there:

http://bringatrailer.com/

You will see very few cars with a non-matching engine being featured.

So to answer the original question to the OP, yes keep everything you remove when you did the conversion, that will help selling it (if you ever do).

Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:33 pm

The 1.8T is not trendy and keeps it all VW and Cali friendly. It's what VW would have done had it had this technology then. I see a bigger benefit doing the 1.8T than the others... they are like putting a Ford motor in a Chevy, ya just don't do it.

I honestly feel the 1.8T makes my Vanagon far more valuable than having the 1.9

Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:35 pm

Tequila, it does, especially since the cost of a pro-installed 1.8T exceeds the value of most Vanagons.

Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:36 pm

i think having a "well done" engine conversion would increase the value

i've seen some that would make me think twice about buying the vehicle

Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:46 pm

SyncroChrick wrote: The matching number thing was just an example and not that relevant to this discussion - it does not really matter if you are looking at muscle cars, or VWs, or Toyota, or Benz, or any other vehicle.

Again, my point is that from a resale value perspective only - keeping an original engine in your classic car is a much safer bet, no matter how good or crappy the engine was when built. This applies to Vanagon too, even though it may not be always obvious right now.

Many of you have pointed out that the enjoy their vans more with a conversion, and the vehicle is worth more to them with it, which I totally agree. But personal preferences and market laws are 2 different things.

Tiico, Jetta 2.0, Subaru 2.2, Subaru SVX, even first gen 2.5 Subaru - these were all trendy conversion that have come and gone. There is not enough consistency between all the various conversions out there to generate a sustainable push in value forward. If I buy a 2.5 right now, I have to spend hours with the seller figuring out what parts have been used where (Smallcar, RMW, etc, etc), who did the wiring, what kind of speed sensor has been used, has the RPM been adjusted, etc, etc. If you are new to the Vanagon world, that's a big step on the top of the already steep learning curve.

For those who are still not convinced, spend some time there:

http://bringatrailer.com/

You will see very few cars with a non-matching engine being featured.

So to answer the original question to the OP, yes keep everything you remove when you did the conversion, that will help selling it (if you ever do).

This will become an issue as converted vans age.

Seems to me that Zetecs and 1.8t's will have the most spare parts availability well into the future because of all the aftermarket guys who soup the hell out of em for racing. Sorta like Beetle engines of the new era.

That said, if you wanna sell your van 15, 20 years from now, you might be better keeping it WBX, because GoWesty will probably have most of the parts either available, or will have invented replacements, a la their pending new FI system. Or they'll have invented a Fuel Cell or fully electric option by then.

Wed Feb 19, 2014 1:54 pm

It is harder to abuse a tranny with a stock WBX. One thing I would consider if looking at an SVX conversion Syncro or other high HP engine.
Even though I want an EJ25 in my Syncro, I'd prefer to buy a used Bostig, Ten Cent, or EJ22 not knowing how the PO might have abused it. To each their own though.
Disclaimer: I think I am running a fever so I might not me making any sense right now.
-d

Wed Feb 19, 2014 2:25 pm

raoul mitgong wrote: It is harder to abuse a tranny with a stock WBX.

Well duh, with 84 HP hard to abuse much of anything :lol: :wink:
My auto doesn't get abused, I'm not into racing it, just like merging onto the freeway minus the white knuckles :D

dixoncj wrote: if you wanna sell your van 15, 20 years from now, you might be better keeping it WBX

LOLZ... If I live that long resale will be the last of MY worries :lol:

Wed Feb 19, 2014 2:34 pm

dixoncj wrote: This will become an issue as converted vans age.

Seems to me that Zetecs and 1.8t's will have the most spare parts availability well into the future because of all the aftermarket guys who soup the hell out of em for racing. Sorta like Beetle engines of the new era.

That said, if you wanna sell your van 15, 20 years from now, you might be better keeping it WBX, because GoWesty will probably have most of the parts either available, or will have invented replacements, a la their pending new FI system. Or they'll have invented a Fuel Cell or fully electric option by then.

I agree. The DIY Subaru conversions have never appealed to me in the past as there seemed to be no consistency from one Vanagon to the next. Things are starting to change as certain vendors/mechanics have become more mainstream. Outside of California the Bostig/Zetec makes sense to me. In California 1.8T.

We're looking to make our Vanagon last another 25 years. Both of these conversions seem like they'll be readily supported for the next couple of decades. I guess we'll see.

Wed Feb 19, 2014 4:42 pm

TequilaSunSet wrote: The 1.8T is not trendy and keeps it all VW and Cali friendly. It's what VW would have done had it had this technology then. I see a bigger benefit doing the 1.8T than the others... they are like putting a Ford motor in a Chevy, ya just don't do it.

I honestly feel the 1.8T makes my Vanagon far more valuable than having the 1.9

Given this line of reasoning, and even a desire to keep it all VW, and even close to stock .... then repowering with one of the descendants of the original 1.6na diesel engine should be considered. In Europe diesel vanagons outsold gassers 2:1, the descendants of the 1.6TD that went into '91 vanagons i.e. the 1.9 TDs and TDI's bolt right up to a stock vanagon diesel bellhousing and AFAIK are California smog exempt.
Lots of other benefits as well - extended range being one as well as the ability to use a variety fuels if one so desired.