Date:         Fri, 29 Mar 2002 19:14:05 -0700
Reply-To:     Bob Stevens <mtbiker62@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Bob Stevens <mtbiker62@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Comment on 2.1 WBx vs. 2.2 Sub
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

I can second that. I've had both the Turbo RX Sedan and a Legacy. Both very
quick, smooth cruisers. I've owned an '88 Golf and Jetta. NO idea about the
Subie installation in a Westy but if it has already been done, feel sure it
performs much better than the WBX as the Subie is a much crisper performer
in the smaller sedans/wagons than the VW's were. At least that seems like a
reasonable comparison to me..JMO.
Bob Stevens
'91 Westy

Happy is he who bears a god within.
-- Louis Pasteur
http://communities.msn.com/BobsPhotoShare

Being an actual owner of a Subie converted syncro here is my 2 cents.

1. This conversion kicks the pants off of the wbx engine, low or high speed.
2 In 20k miles I have had no problems after I removed my imbalanced
drive line which was cracking
header pipes.  (I'm about to reinstall a balanced one with new
transmission mounts).
3. It drives and accelerates very similarly to many small cars I have
driven.
4. I can keep a consistent 65 mph up Snoqualmie pass at under 5000
rpm's, redline is 6500.
5. Whomever said that Subaru cars are 'dogs' must have driven highly
restricted rental cars.  I have owned 2 legacy wagons and they are very
quick cars with high top end speeds.
6. The 2.2 Subie boxer engine is a highly advanced piece of engineering.
  Many components utilized are unique to these particular engines!
7. Pipe down unless you have owned said engine and have the knowledge of
them to rant one way or the other.


     Mike Garske


_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com