What's the weakest point of a Haflinger?

[heinkeljb]

Title maybe not quite what I intended but it will do to get people's attention!

What I mean is; Is there some specific area of a Haflinger which lets it down?

For example: The engine, or maybe the transmission or even body work?

If we are talking engines - what sorts of problems do they have? Do they need more power? Would fitting a more modern engine make the Haflinger a "better" vehicle? Obviously the purists will say it is fine, but I was thinking along the lines of the "big bore kits" or changing the valve gear or better oil pump sort of thing.

Actually, that's a whole new topic in itself! What engines would fit? You can MAKE engines fit but more along the lines of:
Subaru boxer, Citroen (2CV / Ami / Visa), Ural / BMW boxer, Jowet boxer? VW / Porsche,

The Transmission - What sort of problems do they have? If mine is anything to go by, the hubs leak oil! Does the Clutch / Gearbox cope with off road work?

The Brakes - What sort of problems do they have? I would have to say the rear handbrake is overly complicated and not very effective.

The Bodywork - What sort of problems do they have? Rust obviously, but I was thinking more along the lines of fatigue failures such as those you get under the front seats or bad access to some bit which always needs repairing / replacing.

The electrics - What sort of problems do they have? I suppose the major one is the Dynastart but only because it does not output a lot of power!. The other major problem is the wiring harness does not match any of the wiring diagrams properly!

John

[maxhafli]

Haflinger with Citroen Visa engine.

[Julian B]

My initial answer would put at the top of my Wish List a higher top speed. But in reality that would probably mean that many other things would then need changing (hubs, gearbox, brakes etc). Can't say that I have had any serious issues with the Dynastarter or any of the (meagre) electrics. I also wish that replacement canvases were readily available - but they probably didn't think that Hafs would still be in use after 54 years of hard labour.

Ultimately it excels at what is what designed for; in today's terms that is probably closer to a quad bike / "Mule" than a Land Rover.

[walderse]

Hello to all,
This thread brings two famous quotes to mind.

“Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life.”
― Confucius

and

“Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it.”
― Confucius

I thoroughly enjoy the opportunities get to spend repairing and maintaining the many Haflingers we currently have in our stable. Do I get frustrated or have skinned knuckles at times? Yes. But this is due to my impatience or lack of forethought and not because of some perceived inherent design flaw of an inanimate object. Still, I enjoy what I am afforded the opportunity to do and keep coming back for more.

I don't consider myself a purist in that I am not opposed to making modifications that suit my purposes but then my needs to not seem to take me outside the original design parameters envisioned by Erich Ledwinka and his team. I do see myself as a Steyr-Puch Haflinger enthusiast. Passionate without being anal retentive. I have no issue if someone decides to go outside the design engineering envelope but if something breaks as a result, the finger of blame should not be pointed to those in the past for not having a crystal ball. To each, his own. It is their truck. Do with it what suits the individual needs best. But if it does not bring enjoyment, why waste another moment. Trade for something that is less problematic and/or challenging.

Now to my wish list if we were all tasked with being members of a design focus group…

-A modular body/platform that would not rust. AluZn sheet metal, aluminum, carbon fiber, structural plastics...whatever. I do NOT like rust.

-Dual circuit disc brakes

-Air cooled aluminum block diesel V-twin under 1 liter displacement governed to 5,000rpm producing 30hp (with or without turbo as option)

-A top speed of 50mph/80kph in standard form. Perhaps edge up to 55mph/88kph if we talk about a long wheelbase unit. (I would drive my 1963 M422A1 Mighty Mite at nearly 60mph with its 71” wheelbase/16” NDT tires and things tended to get a bit twitchy.)

-Kit for rapid amphibian capability-tub would have to be water tight with provision for easily deployable side spars for inflatable pontoons. Propulsion using easily mounted/dismounted directional impeller units providing water speed of 2-3 knots.

-Easily convertible superstructure allowing for everything from front panel with folding windshield and flat load deck to a fully enclosed hard top five door van and multiple variants between those two extremes.

Alas, it is doubtful we will ever see a “New Haflinger” from any manufacturer anytime soon. That is not to say that Kubota, Polaris, Yamaha, Suzuki, Honda, Kawasaki, KTM, John Deere or Can-Am would not be capable right now. They all are…NOW! John Deere has released their newest Gator side-by-side capable of 52+mph. But...we have the advantage of street legality worldwide.

So, to answer the rhetorical question posed in the subject line, "What is the weakest point of a Haflinger?", my best answer would have to be "The eye of the beholder."

May our cups always be more than half full.
Take care...one and all.

Jim Molloy
Waldersee Farm
http://www.northwestmogfest.com

[maxhafli]

............enough this engine fitted as standard. to have a little power. and a little more speed .......... unfortunately this engine has never gone beyond the prototype was built in two versions and in a few examples .....

[heinkeljb]

Actually, I thought that there would be more comments on specific parts of the Haflinger. So far the most obvious problem with Haflinger is the engine not producing enough power and the top speed.

If you replaced the engine with some thing which produced upward of 40 bhp you would still have a top speed issue unless it could also rev higher than the current engine. Top speed is governed by the gearing so both gearing in the gearbox and the hubs would have to change.

John

[maxhafli]

Hi John,

is not a problem of speed, that is fine, it is a problem to have a few more horsepower...

Instead of getting into third gear at 5000 rpm, you could climb in fourth gear at 3000 rpm ........ that's all!

[woodman]

Hi John,

is not a problem of speed, that is fine, it is a problem to have a few more horsepower...

Instead of getting into third gear at 5000 rpm, you could climb in fourth gear at 3000 rpm ........ that's all!

Hi John, I'm not a purist, but I do think that putting a larger engine into the Haf is not really a good idea, for one thing the brakes are only just up to the job with the standard engine, so they would need upgrading, then is the transmission up to it, the list goes on and on besides its nice to trundle along for a change at 45 mph ( down hill with a following wind ) instead of rushing around, take life at a slower pace. Regards woodman

[Rick K]

My only wish would he that the vehicle better accommodate taller people. As it is, if I sit up nice and straight, my eye line is directly at the level of the top of the window frame. This promotes bad posture, as I have to hunch down to get clear vision- and I'm only 6ft tall!

Rick

[heinkeljb]

Rick,

How about putting an extension on the hinges and then putting a filler piece in the gap? That would lift the top of the windscreen out of your sight line. The roof would cope with it quite happily if you were moving and stationary there should still be something of a slope. You could always put the cab roof hoop up by same amount and add a filler round the bottom.
Just a thought....

John

[sibrysmi]

Not sure I can contibute much to this thread as only a few months into my first Haf restoration and have never driven one or even heard one running yet!
In taking it to bits I have to agree that rust is my biggest issue so far.

I have no reason to believe that my engine won't work when I get round to sorting it but it has not run for many years. Maybe it is "horses fo courses", if you want more power then go for a landie or Pinz, the Haf seems to have intentionally gone for the low power and lightweight path which to me is something of its charm and attraction.
When reading recently i noticed that the Daf 33 and 44 both had air cooled 2 cylinder flat engines. Is this an alternative as the puch engines become harder to find?

Looking forward to enjoying the strenghts and weeknesses of the little truck.

Simon

[heinkeljb]

I must admit I know nothing about the DAF 33 & 44 cars other than they used a variable belt transmission system!
Are the engines known for robustness or do they have weak areas? How much power do they produce, are they on par with the Haflinger engine? Are they physical a similar size? I don't even know what engine capacity the cars had, so maybe I should go hunting the Internet for some information bout them.

John

[wojo12]

Although I don't have the mechanical or financial capability to do it, I'd love to see a Haf with a 650cc or so BMW aircooled flat two cylinder in the back - increased rev range would mean slightly higher top speed and more torque when you need it. I've seen pictures of the Kohler transplant, and years ago, people where putting VW beetle motors in. With the latter motor, you loose the Haf's great departure angle.

[AustHaflinger]

My neighbour has a BMW 1100 twin and I have had a close look at it - the BMW flat twins will not go in as they have that huge chain gear arrangement that lives in the sump (which hangs down well below the engine) so if in a haflinger you will only get about 4" ground clearance and the sump will be extremely vulnerable to damage.

https://www.bikesmedia.in/reviews/boxer ... -know.html

Garry

[Doug]

With the discussion of different engines I wonder if anyone considered a Wankel rotary engine.

An interesting link to comments on the engine can be found here https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/c ... azda-rx-8/

The aviation industry has also shown an interest in the Wankel http://www.ultralightnews.com/sunfun99/wankel.html because of it's size and power to weight ratio.

There were also some in motorcycles.

Nowadays there is much talk of EV's, electric vehicles. Electric engines are small compared to internal combustion engines so maybe that is the way forward.

I'd love them to bring out a modern day Haflinger incorporating all the improvements and suggestions mentioned in this thread. Composite body work, improved brakes (regenerative brakes if electric).

[AustHaflinger]

With the discussion of different engines I wonder if anyone considered a Wankel rotary engine.

There have been Haflingers with Mazda rotary engines in them - like normal cars the main issue is lack of torque and requires changes to haflinger gearing.

Nowadays there is much talk of EV's, electric vehicles. Electric engines are small compared to internal combustion engines so maybe that is the way forward.

Search elektro haflinger on Youtube - this is just one of the many videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_UPfFwg-q4

I'd love them to bring out a modern day Haflinger incorporating all the improvements and suggestions mentioned in this thread. Composite body work, improved brakes (regenerative brakes if electric).

They are called UTVs

Garry

[Doug]

Thanks for the link Garry. As they say nothing new under the sun. Who said EV's were quiet, a bit reminiscent of the whine of the old milk floats.

Below the film was a link to their website www.elektro-haflinger.ch A nice tidy conversion.

[wojo12]

My neighbour has a BMW 1100 twin and I have had a close look at it - the BMW flat twins will not go in as they have that huge chain gear arrangement that lives in the sump (which hangs down well below the engine) so if in a haflinger you will only get about 4" ground clearance and the sump will be extremely vulnerable to damage.

https://www.bikesmedia.in/reviews/boxer ... -know.html

Garry

1100cc is too big and powerful for a Haf.

[AustHaflinger]

Not really - I have seen a subaru 1400 flat four in a haf and it actually ran quite well.

But like most engine modifications the haf gearing held it back as the subaru is a slow revving engine. Any engine change needs a high revving engine to get a better cruising speed and bigger engine to get the torque to pull up the hills.

Or of course you can just accept the Haf as it was designed and enjoy it

Garry