Vanagon EuroVan
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (December 2001, week 2)Back to main VANAGON pageJoin or leave VANAGON (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:43:47 -0500
Reply-To:     Derek Drew <derekdrew@RCN.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Derek Drew <derekdrew@RCN.COM>
Subject:      Re: [Syncro] 1.3 or 1.4 ratio rockers?
Comments: To: Steve Schwenk <steve@syncro.org>
Comments: cc: Syncro@onelist.com
In-Reply-To:  <3C17FE62.BBD3B1F@syncro.org>
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html> <font size=3>If you review some of the posts about the cam change (Bob Donalds??) I had the impression that the cam change isn't that dramatic improvement down low in the torque dept where you really want the power. Accordingly, I was uncertain about how excited I was about that part of the conversion, and decided to get the most I could out of the stock cam by going with the 1.4s. <br> <br> Some others made this same decision. <br> <br> Also, there are right now a number of us looking at the chip. Would everybody who is looking at getting the chip email me and I will see if we can combine the purchasing power for a lower price? <br> <br> Most recently the price was $260, and a group purchase would allow us to push this lower. <br> &nbsp;<br> At 05:03 PM 12/12/2001 -0800, you wrote:<br> <blockquote type=cite cite>I am looking at the chip/ratio rocker upgrade to help<br> bridge the power gap created by my larger tires.<br> <br> Robert Lilley advises 1.3 ratio rockers if you are<br> going to upgrade the cam upon rebuild and 1.4 rockers<br> if not, and further advises these only with use of the<br> upgrade chip.<br> <br> My question, if you go with the 1.3s and do not upgrade<br> the cam for a while, what is the down side?&nbsp; Is it just<br> that the 1.4s provide best performance if not doing a<br> cam, but the 1.3s with the cam are better yet, and the<br> 1.3 without the cam do not provide the same level of<br> enhancement as the 1.4?&nbsp; If so, would the difference<br> between the 1.3 and the 1.4 without the cam be much. <br> And between the 1.4 and the 1.3 with the cam?<br> <br> Sorry!<br> Steve<br> <br> If you would like to modify your subscription settings (including unsubscribing), visit:<br> <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Syncro" eudora="autourl">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Syncro</a><br> Please remember that rude or offensive language is not allowed on the Syncro list. Please try your best to resolve differences privately and keep them off the list.<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> &nbsp;<br> <br> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/" eudora="autourl">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</a> </font></blockquote><br> <div>_______________________________________________</div> <div>Derek Drew&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </div> <div>CEO &amp; Co-Founder </div> <div><a href="http://www.consumersearch.com/" EUDORA=AUTOURL>http://www.ConsumerSearch.com/</a> </div> <div>New York, NY &amp; Washington DC</div> <div>===========================</div> <div>&quot;Best Expert Review Site&quot; </div> <div>for product reviews on the Internet </div> <div>Jan. 2001, PC World Magazine</div> <div>==========================</div> <div>derekdrew@rcn.com</div> <div>212-580-6486 </div> <br> Alternate numbers for the industrious phone caller that wants to try every avenue: 212-580-6486 (best), 917-848-6425 (cell); 202-966-7907 (Work), 212-580-4459 (Home), 202-966-0938 (Home), 978-359-8533 (fax [efax]), 212-269-3188 (New York Seaport office). </html>


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main VANAGON page

Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!


Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com


The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.

Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.