Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 22:07:22 -0700
Reply-To: David Marshall <vanagon@VOLKSWAGEN.ORG>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: David Marshall <vanagon@VOLKSWAGEN.ORG>
Subject: Re: Subaru was: 2.1l engine for sale too $900.
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.96.990901000559.25122E-100000@yoda>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I agree! I am happy with the 102hp 1.8L in our Westie - better power than
the original 1.9L, I would have to say it is equal to the 2.1 only with a
lot more zip as you can rev it to 5500 with no problems! The 1.8L in my
mums 78 rabbit has over 400,000km on it (orig from an 83 GTI) and the
compression is 150 right across!
At 12:13 AM 01/09/1999 -0400, EMZ wrote:
> My choice is a 1986 1.8 VW inline 4. Why? Because if you look at the
>HP output, it is about the same torque as the 2.1, but if you want more
>power you can wind it up. This means going the same speeds as I always
>go, the motor going the same RPM of course, a 1.8 will suck less gas
>then a 2.1. Gas milage should improve. Lastly this motor is
>indestructable (sp). I have seen many still running fine with over
>250,000 mile.
>
> Eric 86-VW4x4
> vw4x4@fyi.net 72-240z
> Pittsburgh, PA USA 1936-Chrysler
>
>
>On Tue, 31 Aug 1999, Rico Sapolich wrote:
>
>> Regarding the Subaru conversion, KENWILFY writes:
>>
>> << He says that he would like to re-gear the tranny a little though as the
>> engine makes it's power in the higher rpm range and the van tranny is not
>> geared quite right.
>> >>
>>
>> This is one thing about which I questioned Kennedy Engr. They replied,"The
>> 95 and earlier Subaru engines are happy at the high RPM required by the
>> Vanagon gearing. Peak torque is up where you need it at 4400RPM." The
>> engine may be happy, but I wouldn't be happy. I want the engine to pull
the
>> hardest right in the middle of that green area on the tach, about 3000RPM.
>> If you look at the 2.1L, it torques out @ 3200RPM and the 1.9L @
2800RPM. I
>> certainly do not want an engine that I have to wind up tighter than a
ferret
>> on crack for use everyday. While VW may have gotten the torque profile
>> right, they just didn't provide enough of it. I guess what I want is what
>> Smokey Yunick has been saying everybody cruising the highways and byways
>> really needs: a high torque, low-speed power plant.
>>
>> So, what can I stuff into the ass end of my Syncro that retains the skid
pan,
>> doesn't weigh too much, isn't too long (height doesn't scare me). and puts
>> out about 135 ft-lbs @2800-3200RPM? Oh, I almost forgot; does not have wet
>> liners nor external coolant bypass lines.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>
>
-- David Marshall - - Quesnel, BC, Canada --
-- 78 VW Rabbit, 80 VW Caddy, 84 VW Westie, 85 VW Cabriolet --
-- 87 Audi 5000 Quattro, 88 2.0L VW Syncro Double Cab --
-- David's Volkswagen Home Page http://www.volkswagen.org --
-- Fast Forward Autobahn Sport Tuning http://www.fastforward.ca --
-- david@volkswagen.org (pmail) or vanagon@volkswagen.org (list) --
| 
