Derek,

What I'm referring to is just a set of comparisons of torque available at the
road surface vs. road speed. I did this for the few standard transmission
final drive ratios available in the USA. Only for the top gear and for up to
three different wheel sizes (185sr-14, 27-8.50x14, and 215/75-15), in each
case using the manufacturers rev per mile specifications for the tires I have
purchased (Michelin, BFG and Yoko).

The curves show for example that the European 1.6L TurboDiesel clearly
outperforms the 1.9L WB in both of its available gearings. The Vanagon NA
1.6L diesel has just 10% less torque available at the rear wheels as compared
to the 1.9L WB, yet the performance difference is more severe. The difference
is the force required to overcome drag and the margin one has available to
put on the road for other needs (passing, hill climbing, general acceleration
to cite a few). I have toyed with plotting the difference in torque available
after pushing the vanagon at a steady level speed.

Adding to the interpretation of such plots (engine/trans combo) could be Mike
Sullivans post about derriere sensed performance differentials. I'm sure the
torque curves are out there for the TDi and the 1.9 TD. If I get them, I'll
add them to the list.

But to sum up my prejudices, I think the TDi and the SVX exceed the design
limits of the transmission. (I fully anticipate Mike providing us with a
dispersed metal powder analysis of a container that looks very much like a
Vanagon transmission.) The 1.9L TD with a 5.43 should be excellent as will be
the 2.0L engines (particularly that inspired Audi 3A) with the diesel trans
(5.43 or 5.86).

Frank Grunthaner