Well then... couldn't you just cut the belt for the powersteering, and maybe
also the ac belt (if the ac is not running is the belt still reducing
power???), and see an immediate increase in power???? And would fuel mileage
also be increased??? Anyone want to dyno that?

>From: "MOST,DAVID" <most@ucla.edu>
>
>Though it's an unscientific appraisal, I think that PS makes a huge
>difference.  I have two '87s.  The first is a non-GL camper w/AC without
>PS and 150k.  The second is a GL camper without AC w/PS and 160k.
>Granted, the GL has extra weight with the camping equipment, but the
>difference in power is significant enough that I asked a mechanic about it
>when I first obtained the GL.  He said that it was in fine shape, and I
>actually think that the GL engine sounds a little better.  But, the power
>difference is considerable.  It's particularly noticeable when trying to
>accelerate or when going uphill.
>
>David
>
>
>On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, Mark Drillock wrote:
>
> > The 2.1 has much more power at the bottom end and noticeably more at all
> > rpms. I have owned several of both, all with manual trannys. Power
> > steering and A/C rob some power. Many 1.9s have neither so they would
> > feel stronger in comparison. I have had a couple 2.1s without PS and
> > they really moved.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > Benjamin Tan wrote:
> > >
> > > In a message dated 8/17/00 7:51:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>JordanVw@aol.com
> > > writes:
> > >
> > > << I'd just like to hear a few other peoples opinions about which they
> > > prefer..
> > >  i have a 1.9L automatic van, and a 2.1L automatic van >>
> > >
> >

________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com