Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 03:57:01 EDT
Reply-To: BenTbtstr8@AOL.COM
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Ben T <BenTbtstr8@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: 2.2 vanagon
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
In a message dated 4/5/03 5:36:44 PM Pacific Standard Time,
andrew.grebneff@STONEBOW.OTAGO.AC.NZ writes:
<< You mean Subaru Legacy's EJ22 engine, not Toyota or Honda, I assume.
There's a list dedicated to Subaru conversions, go to <www.yahoo.com>
and join the Subaruvanagon list. All owners seem to be most happy
with their conversions. >>
Andrew and other engine swap advocates,
Although I admire your loyalties to certain swaps, it is not fair to redirect
folks who are asking about a particular swap to one that you prefer. Case in
point, Cliff Bellows is asking about the Wasserboxer 2.2 that Eurocars is
promoting. You just redirected him to a Subaru swap w/o disclosing that there
is such as thing as a WBX 2.2. It's Just as bad as Eric redirecting a Subaru
swap inquiry to a VW inline-4 swap.
We all have our favorite power plants. But let's be honest when dealing with
folks who ask specific questions. Tell them about your swap. But tell them in
a manner that does not mislead.
BTW, Cliff, Eurocars in not the only company which performs the 2.2
conversions. There are several companies, including a number of them on this
list able to perform that for you. Several knowledgeable people in my area
have conflicting opinions about the 2.2 WBX conversion. Around here, it
typically adds about $200 to an ordinary rebuild. Some say the added HP is
due to the larger displacement. Whereas there are equally qualified people
who say that the extra HP comes from the raised compression. The one thing
they all agree on is the engine done this way is just as susceptible as the
1.9 & 2.1 Wasserboxers to headgasket failures.
I've test driven a Vanagon converted to the 2.2 pistons and cylinders.
Frankly, I could not really tell any difference between a freshly rebuilt 2.1
WBX vs. the 2.2 WBX. Perhaps the reason people who get the conversion done
feel a HUGE difference is their engines needed to be rebuilt to begin with.
Take a test drive in one before you spend the extra bucks. But if you intent
on staying with WBX engine, it seems an economical if your engine needs to be
rebuilt anyway.
The Subaru seems to be a natural swap. There is a significant gain in HP and
many of the sins of the WBX are absent. However, for most people, the cost
may be prohibitive. They have inherent problems as well. Talk to those who
champion this swap. I personally do not like cross-species swaps due my
experience with future resale. Some will argue to the contrary. Do your
research on and off the list and come to your own conclusions.
The inline-4 VW's are a natural as well. VW even offered it in the later
models made in South Africa. The diesel inline-4s were offered in the US
briefly. Again, there are inherent problems with these. The most common one
is annoying vibrations. Ask, ask, ask.
Just my humble opinion,
BenT
<A HREF="http://hometown.aol.com/bentbtstr8/myhomepage/index.html">Vanagon
Cafe</A>
1990 Syncro 16" 1.6TD
1987 Vanagon GL 2.1 WBX
1982 Double Cab 1.9TD
1982 Vanagon GL 1.8 CIS-E
1982 RHD Single Carburated 1.8 inline-4
