Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 16:10:39 -0400
Reply-To: Warren Chapman <vwsyncroguy@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Warren Chapman <vwsyncroguy@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Roadhaus - 2.2L Engine Install , Prelimanary Report
This thread cracks me up......what a bunch of hot and bothered armchair BS.
Charts and figures may be nice to speculate about, but the "proof of the
pudding" is in the driving, ....before and after.
One comment here made some sense to me.....
>As for seat of the pants feel. Most lay folk I have dealt with think
>that the car has more HorsePower, when in fact where they are
>experieninge the change is in increased Torque...at a given RPM. That
>doesn't mean that there is higher max torque, just that there is more
>at a point where the folks notice it.
If you notice it .....isn't that the whole goal..???? Whether it's torque
or hp or donkey turds...seems to me if you notice it.....it counts.
Charts and numbers are great to speculate about on this list (what fun!)
but don't mean s__ (except for bragging rights on Vanagon.com) unless you
can feel something with that good ole' instrument.....the subjective
glutimus maximus.
Someone pointed out recently ( with some validity perhaps) that my fine
instrument (the glute) just might be influenced towards the optimistic side
by the recent departure of significant amounts of cash from its owner.
Hmmmmmm....something to think about......
However,....I recently drove a so-called 2.2 waterboxer,..... not by the
builder being discussed here...it was prepared by Marco at Buslab in
Berkeley, CA. My good ole' glute told me it easily felt stronger (is this
torque ??) going through the gears ....than the usual
waterleaker, ......and I've driven a few waterboxers.....and owned five
different versions in the last two years. Since my glute hadn't parted
with any cash in order to have this particular fine experience, could it be
considered "objective" in this case ????
But then I'm a known, unobjective, non-fan of the waterboxer anyhow. IMHO
1.9, 2.1 or 2.2......its still a waterleaker and its still limited in rpm's
to about 4000 (useful) 5000 (terminal).
My vote (which ain't worth much, I know but 20 other people voted here)
says spend the money on a better engine.
Warren Chapman
90 Syncro Westy,
(also with a 2.2L engine, only by Subaru)