Which T4?

[BobR]

Hi All,
Despite "others" trying to convince me otherwise (buy a jap van) I have decided to buy a T4. After going through the posts on this and other forums, I have decided on a 2.0 litre petrol, manual with as low ks that I can find. I will be using the van as a daily driver and weekend camper and not for any commercial use.
My preference is for early 90s model without airbags, and there seem to be quite a few of these models available at a reasonable price with around 200,000ks on the clock.
My question to the forum is whether these earlier models are any less reliable than the later ones with regard to electronics and maintainance issues? Obviously improvements were made to the T4 over its lifespan, and I would like opinions on what year model was the "sweetest".
I am not new to VW, I have owned Kombis and both aircooled T3 and watercooled T3 so I understand the "idioms" of owning one, but the T4 is unexplored territory for me.
Thanks. Bob.

[phaeton]

Welcome Bob

Perhaps call you local VW Specialist and see what they have to say about the early T4s.

Good Luck.

ps Maris (Wedel.1) had a 2.0L camper perhaps PM him. (as far as I know his was reliable from new.)

[DVR68U]

yeah the 2l petrol is a great motor in the van , its not your golf 2l its designed for the t4 with a torque delivered lower in the rev range. i can get 8.5l/100 on camping trips even when loaded up. still has enuff power to cruze at 110 on the flats very easily. hills will slow you down but not much. id say its the better of the two petrol motors. the 2.5l tdi is the best of the best but comes at a high premium. i was also make sure i got a van with powersteering. when i first got my van it was a non power steering rack and it was pretty hard to park at slow speeds , fine when you got going but a bit of hard work in carparks with no aircon lol. i think powersteer is more important than aircon. but you should be able to get one with both. careful with the early after market aircons tho some of the bracketry is pretty dodgy.
so the 2lt has done me well , and most bolt on parts can be exchanged with most 8v vw motors which makes parts cheaper than the 2.5l petrol.

What ever you do , dont buy a 2.5l petrol auto , or any auto lol. you will regret it.
any other q's im happy to give my oppion , i have 10 cars but the only one i drive is my van lol , thats a mk2 vr6 a mk3 vr6 and some mk1's but the van takes the cake. you'll love it
cheers

[DOUBLECAB]

T4's

Hi.......suggest you aim for a 2.5cyl 1997 onwards as most of the issues were ironed out by then.

2ltr is a gutless wonder and the resale values show that.

All the best.

[Golf Loon]

I reckon the 2L is the pick of the cheapies.

I see heaps of problems with the 2.5s.

I had a 2L for years and it was great I towed cars with it and loaded it up. Great fuel economy and suprisingly quick if you rag it through the gears. Tough as an old boot and indistructable. Parts are cheap too, like dvr68u said.

Get A/C and Power steer, having neither on a hot day is a recipe for road rage.


I had every imaginable Van and Ute before my T4 but the search is over, simply the best Van ever.

2.5 TDI is best ever, but they are expensive.

Later ones have airbags and cool blue dashboards, but cost more.

[BobR]

Hi All
Thanks for your replies. My main concern is with the electronics side of things, ECU etc. I was told that on the earlier models (pre 97?) that they were not as complex and didnt play up as much as the later models, and were much more reliable. Any truth to this?
Power steering will also be a requirement now that the engine is in the front, but I am not too fussed about A/C. Thought about a diesel....too expensive, and the 2.5 petrol from what I hear is a bit temperamental and thirsty. I am in no hurry these days so a 2.0 litre it is. As for wanting a van with no airbags, a mate hit a roo which set his off and wrapped him round a tree. He survived but swore never to get a car with airbags again.
Thanks. Bob

[DVR68U]

well ive got 450,000 ks on my 2l , the only real probs with the 2l are the temp sensor and sometimes the coilpack, both very easy to fix. take a 2l and a 2.5l for a drive and see the difference , im very happy with the 2l keeps me from getting speeding tickets and the less electrical things in a car the less to go wrong. id be looking at a 94-96 ive got a '93 but that came no air/steer. if you want i can take you for a drive in my van to see how the 2lt goes.
cheers brenton

[DOUBLECAB]

T4's

http://home.freeuk.com/jimwillfixit/van.html

[Golf Loon]

The early ones dont have coded keys, which is one less thing to go wrong too.

Sounds like you have decided, now just need to find a van

[jets]

[QUOTE=Golf Loon;301424]
I see heaps of problems with the 2.5s.

Want to share some of these with the rest of us Loon?

[Zanza]

My 2.5L petrol has almost 200'000 kms on it and no problem at all.... Manual tranny of course (avoid the auto as the plague).

Kinda thirsty I agree, but plenty of power and in a mountains country as I lived, definately a plus over the anemic 2.0L

[DVR68U]

Zanza what sort of litres per hundred are you getting with the 2.5l fully loaded up ?
cheers brenton

[Zanza]

13.2 average.
It's written in my signature....Over a year of consumption is logged (thanks to the website SpritMonitor.de)

I rarely drive really slowly, average speed is 120 km/h on highway (with some 130-150 also), I drive in town too and also in mountains for skiing in winter.

My California is always loaded with all for sleeping and resting 2-3 days, ready to leave for every possible week-end. I only don't have the 50L fresh water tank fully loaded during winter

[gregozedobe]

I rarely drive really slowly, average speed is 120 km/h on highway (with some 130-150 also), I drive in town too and also in mountains for skiing in winter.

If you drove at those speeds in Australia you would lose your licence pretty quickly, and if the cop was in a bad mood you might even get locked up for 150kmh

Our maximum nearly everywhere (except the Northern Territory) is 110 kmh, and we have lots of fixed speed cameras and mobile radar to collect $$$$ from you if you speed. The general attitude is that speed cameras and radar are more of a revenue raiser than a speed deterrent. You get a ticket in the mail weeks or months later, so not the same as being pulled over by an actual police person at the time. Plus they are mostly located on downhills on good roads rather than on a twisty, tricky road where it is dangerous to speed.

[Zanza]

Same here in Switzerland, all cameras are located on good portions of straight roads, just for cash not really prevention

But allowed speeds on highways is 120 km/h in Switzerland, and 130 in France, and some Germany parts of highways are simply no limits of speed (Yes!)