Ian wrote: An exception to the non-interference rules are the 1.8L and 2.0L 16v engines, 1986-1992(?) Scirocco and GTI. 10:1 compression on those, too. However, I don't think the 16v was ever a serious consideration for Vanagon engine conversions. Not torquey enough (at least my Scirocco doesn't seem to be) in the lower RPM ranges. -------- reply ----------- I also always assumed the 16v would be a bad choice for the vanagon, no bottom end torque I thought. I've since owned a couple 2.0l 16v engines (passat), 10.8 to 1 here in Canada. 134 hp @ 5800 rpm, 133 lb/ft @ 4400 rpm. I am surprised at how good the bottom end is. You can lug the engine, no need to wind it out to get moving fast. It's nothing like a Honda. To me, it feels like the torque is lower down than what the numbers suggest. I think there are some clearance issues for use in the vangon however. Just anecdotal ramblings, Gary Lee http://www.telusplanet.net/public/gary2a/rack/vanagonrack.htm |
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Vanagon mail messages have been archived.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.