To WBX or Not?

for questions and answers about alternative power transplants on the T25, GTi, Porsche,Subaru etc, this is the place. You must register to post but anyone can read.

Moderators: User administrators, Moderators

Mojoh
Registered user
Posts: 43
Joined: 25 Aug 2015, 07:45
80-90 Mem No: 0
Location: Underground

To WBX or Not?

Post by Mojoh »

Greetings Engine Swappers. I am sorry, but I just can't resist...

Before you throw away that gorgeous WBX, have you considered the 'plug and play' Go-Westy WBX 2.5 conversion?
Have any of you actually build this?, or am I alone around here.

Anyway, 2 years back, we started building them. We haven't uprated, upgraded or changed anything, just chucked the kit into the 2.1 block,
bolted back the rest (even the standard cylinder heads) and hey presto!, you have a wonderful engine, original, much more powerful and bullet proof.
It's absolutely brilliant and as said, 'plug and play'.

But you will have to ask Aidan to upgrade your gearbox. You'll probably want a 4.14 lol.

Have fun....., keep it simple.

Mojoh.

User avatar
itchyfeet
Registered user
Posts: 12427
Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
80-90 Mem No: 12733
Location: South Hampshire

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by itchyfeet »

Can you give us all a ball park figure for this upgrade please Mark?

Ian Holman ( 025 Motorsport) is doing high compression WBX 2.5s as you know and Andrew Simmons ( Campershack) is fixing / rebuilding lots of stock DG and DJs.


Personally I'd stay wih the WBX anyday.
1988 DG WBX LPG Tin Top
1989 DJ digijet WBX Holdsworth Villa 3 Pop Top
itchylinks

User avatar
ajsimmo
Trader
Posts: 2698
Joined: 23 Mar 2009, 14:06
80-90 Mem No: 6542
Location: Isle of Arran
Contact:

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by ajsimmo »

Mojoh wrote: Before you throw away that gorgeous WBX, have you considered the 'plug and play' Go-Westy WBX 2.5 conversion?
...
We haven't uprated, upgraded or changed anything, just chucked the kit into the 2.1 block,
bolted back the rest (even the standard cylinder heads) and hey presto!, you have a wonderful engine, original, much more powerful and bullet proof.
It's absolutely brilliant and as said, 'plug and play'.

But from GoWesty's page for the 2450cc kit:
"IMPORTANT NOTE: The engine block assembly (case) will need to be hand-machined for added clearance in several places, including (but not limited to) the roof and beneath piston at BDC and back side of the bosses into which the head studs install from the opposite side. The case is made from cast aluminum, and no two are exactly the same. There is no "blue print" or "program" to achieve this—it has to be done by hand by a very experienced and talented individual. The crankshaft/rod assembly, cylinder, and piston must be test-fitted repeatedly to ensure that the clearance is correct and adequate, while at the same time not going too far and maintaining the cleanliness required for any successful engine rebuild."

Not exactly "plug and play" then!
So you just chuck the kit into the 2.1 block, bolt back the rest, and hey presto.
That's reassuring (in a Gerald Ratner kind of way). :shock:
The Campershack - (website paused)
WBX Rebuilds & Upgrades from the beautiful Isle of Arran

Mojoh
Registered user
Posts: 43
Joined: 25 Aug 2015, 07:45
80-90 Mem No: 0
Location: Underground

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by Mojoh »

Welll, to answer your questions, true, the kit is actually 2.45 indeed.
There are also NO instructions given at all, we made our own blue prints, so it's rather easy once you've mastered the first one. We do not advise the DIY guys to do this job, but in all honesty, once sorted, it's extremely easy and the modifictation to the block take us about 3 hours of work maximum. Because we build so many WBX engines, this kit is simple to do and beautifully engineered. Chucking it back together is a loosely used uthanism, but what is interesting is you can still use stock cylinder heads (if you wish) and stock Injection Systems too. We do use a couple of modifications, but they are really insiginificant. For example we save all the old WBX push rods from 83-85 Engines (they are slightly heavier and deliver a slightly higher volume of oil to the valve gear. For our customers, we supply them Stage 1 tuned AMC Cylinder Heads also, but in all honestly, the engine produces just as good results on the standard head also, providing they are well restored. We use Copper Cylinder Head Seals just to be on the safe side, but have also used 'stock' ones too, without problems also. We do use a higher delivery Shardek oil pump, but that's about it. There are two types of oil seals for the front crankshaft pulley, so that needs checking before final assembly. Put the wrong one in and you will have oil flying around everywhere. Smaller seal (red) for the single pulley, Black, double seal for the cast pulleys. Nothing else to report. Once build, the engine has the charactor of a Type 4 (loads of low downn torque), upper rev range is limited by the OHV gear, but 4.500RPM is a comfortable mazimum. Power is greatly increased and the new WBX engines as silky smooth, due to the balanced Crank, conrods and Chevi Pistons. Cost of the engine complete is €7000. I am totally convinced that where a WBX engine is concerned, this is the best and most 'balanced' upgrade I've come accross. Yes, you can do a Oettinger 2.2 or 2.3 which is also terrific, but my experine is that the wbx runs much better on longer stroke principles, small pistons and lower compression ratios. Anyway, I'll bring one of my 2.5 Sycro to Wales (with it's upgraded gearbox) and everyone is welcome to try it, no problem. I finish with the idea that this really is a simple 'plug and play' option for the wbx, completed within a few weeks with fabulous results. This is what I will be doing for the next years for sure and with my hand on my heart, very happy too. Mojoh.

PS, I am aware of the high compression 2.5 wbx being build, have looked at it and would enjoy to try it, the engineering work I have seen last year was etremely good indeed too. My question always remains, what will it be like after 100,000 miles. I know that the GW 2.45 will be deliveryingn smile after smile, pulling from 1200rpm in top, right up to 4000 rpm without a murumour. Coupled with a 1.19 third gear and a 0.74 top (on the Sycro AVV for example) makes a huge difference too. On my 2.5 Pop Top Westy, 2 x 2, we went even further with a 1.023 4th and a 0.70 firth gear. Being a much lighter van than Tank, and a few tricks to the air flow meter (via Aidan), this is the fastest WBX I have ever driving with a cruising speed of 130kph at a tad over 3200 RPM. 160 is easily attained with the rev counter heading towards the 3,800rpm mark, but for my van this is simply far too far. 130 all day is a nice speed to zap across europe. Oh and economy, she uses less fuel than the 2.1DJ Digifant set up she had before the conversion. Food for thought before you go Subaru, Audi or Otherwise. There is only two other conversions that I have enjoyed since I started 6 years ago and that is unusually a Volvo B23E conversion (done in Sweden) and an Audi 2,7 straight 5 conversion doen in the UK. Both were also great. See you.

User avatar
itchyfeet
Registered user
Posts: 12427
Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
80-90 Mem No: 12733
Location: South Hampshire

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by itchyfeet »

Do go westy publish bhp and torque for this kit?
I seem to remember you haven't tested it yourself Mark
1988 DG WBX LPG Tin Top
1989 DJ digijet WBX Holdsworth Villa 3 Pop Top
itchylinks

User avatar
ajsimmo
Trader
Posts: 2698
Joined: 23 Mar 2009, 14:06
80-90 Mem No: 6542
Location: Isle of Arran
Contact:

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by ajsimmo »

The Campershack - (website paused)
WBX Rebuilds & Upgrades from the beautiful Isle of Arran

User avatar
marlinowner
Registered user
Posts: 1530
Joined: 28 Jan 2014, 12:02
80-90 Mem No: 13646
Location: Scottish Borders

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by marlinowner »

From Gowesty site

GoWesty 2450cc high output engine
*9.4:1 compression, with 110 hp & 150 ft.lbs of torque

"Snap"
1993 SA VW T25/T3 2.5i Microbus/homebrew camper
1981/1968 Marlin Kitcar TR6 Engine

User avatar
itchyfeet
Registered user
Posts: 12427
Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
80-90 Mem No: 12733
Location: South Hampshire

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by itchyfeet »

How does that compare to a stock DJ? ( don't have figures to hand)

The big probelm I see is the price
I'm not saying its expensive but that these vans are on average not worth 7k euros so unless you have a high value van then you are probably going to opt for a cheaper transplant.

Personally I rebuildy own WBX but not everybody can do that.
1988 DG WBX LPG Tin Top
1989 DJ digijet WBX Holdsworth Villa 3 Pop Top
itchylinks

User avatar
R0B
Moderator
Posts: 18852
Joined: 07 Oct 2005, 17:33
80-90 Mem No: 864
Location: Cheshire

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by R0B »

For the cost of doing this i would rather stick with my 2.1 which has enough power for me. :)
2.1 LPG/Petrol Auto Caravelle

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits"

Mojoh
Registered user
Posts: 43
Joined: 25 Aug 2015, 07:45
80-90 Mem No: 0
Location: Underground

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by Mojoh »

Greetings Guys. Indeed I have 'not' ever tested any of our builds, so I don't know the figures, but I can speak from driving experience and there is a big difference to the 2.1wbx's indeed. For me, that says it all. As I've said extensively, the feel and behavior of the 2.45 wbx is completely different from it's smaller sisters. It has a lot of torque, flexiblity and solid delivery of power.

The Kit seems expensive and will all the bits and pieces, our costs come out (in parts) around €5300 and then we take about 34-38 hours building the complete engine (to fitting stage).

But of course, in principal, we have a brand new engine, with a balanced crankshaft etc. Having build quiet a few now and the delight of the customers who are driving them, that's good enough for me.

For those interested in more power, I am sure there is a bigger potential to get much more out of this unit, but as some of you know, I have a keep it simple viewpoint and the conversion is very simple, straighforward and completed within a few weeks.

Mojoh. :ok

User avatar
itchyfeet
Registered user
Posts: 12427
Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
80-90 Mem No: 12733
Location: South Hampshire

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by itchyfeet »

I agree 100% keep the WBX but there are lower cost options to the go westy kit, rebuild of a 1.9DG or 2.1 DJ/MV can be done with silimar costs to a transplant.
Cranks and pistons last well so can usually be reused.
1988 DG WBX LPG Tin Top
1989 DJ digijet WBX Holdsworth Villa 3 Pop Top
itchylinks

silverbullet
Trader
Posts: 16311
Joined: 08 Jun 2009, 09:51
80-90 Mem No: 6908
Location: Surrey Syncronaut #156
Contact:

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by silverbullet »

Not that this is a "who can wee the highest" competition, but I have been told by my customer with a wbx 2.5 Dehler ambulance syncro that it will easily do 160km/h

Sent from my S60 using Tapatalk

philyoung
Registered user
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Oct 2015, 12:29
80-90 Mem No: 15404
Location: Portsmouth

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by philyoung »

It does Ian, on standard 14" wheels and allowing for a bit of speedo optimism it's a good 95mph. There was more left. There's useful torque from 1500rpm in 4th and from lower revs in the lower gears. Not bad for something with the aerodynamics of a brick. The fuel consumption at that speed however.....
1990 LHD 2.5WBX Syncro Krankenwagen

philyoung
Registered user
Posts: 161
Joined: 26 Oct 2015, 12:29
80-90 Mem No: 15404
Location: Portsmouth

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by philyoung »

I had the gearbox checked by Aidan, but only minor mods as it was in good condition. I believe I ticked the box for 'experienced engine builder'. In essence I have a hand built, brand new engine with components, that, for the most part exceed the specs of the VW originals. I see no reason why there should be any question mark over long term reliability. Of note the GW 2450 seems to produce no more power than a 2.1DJ, accepting more torque will make it more tractable low down it still seems like a lot of money.
1990 LHD 2.5WBX Syncro Krankenwagen

User avatar
slowcoach
Registered user
Posts: 1575
Joined: 06 May 2010, 10:23
80-90 Mem No: 8892
Location: West Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: To WBX or Not?

Post by slowcoach »

philyoung wrote:It does Ian, on standard 14" wheels and allowing for a bit of speedo optimism it's a good 95mph. There was more left. There's useful torque from 1500rpm in 4th and from lower revs in the lower gears. Not bad for something with the aerodynamics of a brick. The fuel consumption at that speed however.....
Sounds awesome :-) what was the rpm at that speed? Must have been pretty intense!?
===================
1984 TRAKKA Conversion Subaru EJ20 5 Speed

Post Reply