Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 19:05:08 -0400
Reply-To: Jim Akiba <syncrolist@BOSTIG.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Jim Akiba <syncrolist@BOSTIG.COM>
Subject: Re: Inline 4 - new transmission
In-Reply-To: <BAY125-F124402FE9B800210571AC2A02D0@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I think I missed the joke and read it as simply another "no replacement for
displacement"... which kind of surprised me coming from you Dennis, but now
it makes more sense. Still, I would also say that while true about adding
complexity and cost, if you start lower with both, you can still end up
lower in both measures even if you add forced induction(which is such a
broad range of possibilities and levels within itself but you know what I
mean) than with many larger displacement possibilities. The boxer design(esp
OHC) inherent is about as high in complexity and maintenance costs(because
of the complexity) as one can go... afterall locating crucial moving parts
as far apart as possible from each other, and still having them act as one
system is no simple trick. Neither is maintaining the system that allows it,
there is nothing simple or cheap in doing so. Then again, we could talk VW
style and add multiple forms of forced induction to impress other people
that love designing overly complex things for the sake of doing so, and make
a real wallet buster.
Oh and I agree whole heartedly on an earlier point... play with the tire
sizes... you have a great deal of control on drivability via simple,
external, inexpensive rubber... how many different rim/tire combos could one
get for the price of a gear change?
Jim Akiba
-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Haynes [mailto:d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM]
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 6:19 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Inline 4 - new transmission
Ok, so instead of cubic inches we can use rectangular dollars to get power.
I am very familiar with the concept of forced induction for increasing power
or efficiency of an engine. I was sort of being funny and when comparing
normally aspirated engines, a multi valve larger displacement engine will
have an advantage over a 2 valve smaller one most of the time. Also, all
forced induction set ups add complexity and maintenance costs. Even OEM
designs have their maintenance issues. Now maybe the 2.0 Zetec can make as
much power as the Subie 2.5, but not the Tiico.
Dennis
>From: Jim Akiba <syncrolist@BOSTIG.COM>
>Reply-To: Jim Akiba <syncrolist@BOSTIG.COM>
>To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>Subject: Re: Inline 4 - new transmission
>Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 14:51:24 -0400
>
>I heard that too often in the old school v8 crowd on the "no replacement
>for
>displacement", c'mon Dennis! True for nascar, or other's that can't force
>induction to raise intake air density, but the statement isn't really true.
>There are plenty or replacements, some of them suck(or rather blow) and
>have
>pluses/minuses but so does everything.. but I definitely wouldn't say the
>only/best path to power is displacement only. Viva la small displacement,
>low-weight, combined cycle powerplants! Here's one that used to start
>trouble for me, "big v8s are great, for low power-to-weight"
>
>Jim Akiba
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dennis Haynes [mailto:d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM]
>Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 2:28 PM
>To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>Subject: Re: Inline 4 - new transmission
>
>There is a big difference between a Tiico 2.0 and the earlier 1.8.
>Still, since there is no replacement for displacement, the 2.5 Subie may be
>better choice than a 2.0.
>
>Dennis
>
>
> >From: Miguel Pacheco <escorpion1955@YAHOO.COM>
> >Reply-To: Miguel Pacheco <escorpion1955@YAHOO.COM>
> >To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> >Subject: Re: Inline 4 - new transmission
> >Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 13:27:47 -0400
> >
> >I drive a Syncro AW with a Tiico and I would leave that tranny alone. I
> >know we're not talking about the Tiico here, but it could not be too
> >different. 4th gear is great on the highway!!
> >Hey Benny Boy.............ouch! You're a little hard on us Tiico guys.
> >Mine came inside of a beautiful white Syncro AW and, though I was
> >skeptical, I bought it anyway. It was a slug at first. The conversion had
> >5000K on it and it had been a cross-town commuter. Man was it slow! Well,
> >now with 20000K on it (my leadfoot helping it along), it is much quicker
> >and quicker than a 2.1. First gear is really high strung, but that's what
> >I need anyway, when I get off the blacktop. The rest of the gears are
> >fine, with an honorable mention for third. As far as the vibration, mine
> >is fairly smooth. I suspect some conversions are better than others,
>based
> >on who did the work.
> >With 215-75-15s, Syncro.org springs, OME shocks and the TIICO conversion,
> >this is so burly and solid going down the road........far and above what
>a
> >stock Syncro feels like. Plus, it has been trouble free. Not one problem.
> >Last year we drove it from Durango, Colorado to Sayulita, Nayarit, Mx
> >(just north of Puerto Vallarta)and we were trouble free. It performed
>well
> >and even had plenty of oomph to get us well into the sandunes,
>overlooking
> >the beach.
> >I guess I would have preferred a different motor, but this one works very
> >well and, if broken down in Mx and sans the necessary parts to make the
> >repairs myself, I think I have a better shot of being saved by the locals
> >than someone in a subie!(though I am convinced those guys can fix
> >anything.)
> >Tell you what Benny, I'll race you to Zamora!
> >Cheers. Miguel in Durango, Co.
| 
