

| Subject: | Re: [Syncro] 1.3 or 1.4 ratio rockers? |
| From: | Derek Drew |
| Date: | Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:43:47 -0500 |
<html> <font size=3>If you review some of the posts about the cam change (Bob Donalds??) I had the impression that the cam change isn't that dramatic improvement down low in the torque dept where you really want the power. Accordingly, I was uncertain about how excited I was about that part of the conversion, and decided to get the most I could out of the stock cam by going with the 1.4s. <br> <br> Some others made this same decision. <br> <br> Also, there are right now a number of us looking at the chip. Would everybody who is looking at getting the chip email me and I will see if we can combine the purchasing power for a lower price? <br> <br> Most recently the price was $260, and a group purchase would allow us to push this lower. <br> <br> At 05:03 PM 12/12/2001 -0800, you wrote:<br> <blockquote type=cite cite>I am looking at the chip/ratio rocker upgrade to help<br> bridge the power gap created by my larger tires.<br> <br> Robert Lilley advises 1.3 ratio rockers if you are<br> going to upgrade the cam upon rebuild and 1.4 rockers<br> if not, and further advises these only with use of the<br> upgrade chip.<br> <br> My question, if you go with the 1.3s and do not upgrade<br> the cam for a while, what is the down side? Is it just<br> that the 1.4s provide best performance if not doing a<br> cam, but the 1.3s with the cam are better yet, and the<br> 1.3 without the cam do not provide the same level of<br> enhancement as the 1.4? If so, would the difference<br> between the 1.3 and the 1.4 without the cam be much. <br> And between the 1.4 and the 1.3 with the cam?<br> <br> Sorry!<br> Steve<br> <br> If you would like to modify your subscription settings (including unsubscribing), visit:<br> <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Syncro" eudora="autourl">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Syncro</a><br> Please remember that rude or offensive language is not allowed on the Syncro list. Please try your best to resolve differences privately and keep them off the list.<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/" eudora="autourl">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/</a> </font></blockquote><br> <div>_______________________________________________</div> <div>Derek Drew </div> <div>CEO & Co-Founder </div> <div><a href="http://www.consumersearch.com/" EUDORA=AUTOURL>http://www.ConsumerSearch.com/</a> </div> <div>New York, NY & Washington DC</div> <div>===========================</div> <div>"Best Expert Review Site" </div> <div>for product reviews on the Internet </div> <div>Jan. 2001, PC World Magazine</div> <div>==========================</div> <div>derekdrew@rcn.com</div> <div>212-580-6486 </div> <br> Alternate numbers for the industrious phone caller that wants to try every avenue: 212-580-6486 (best), 917-848-6425 (cell); 202-966-7907 (Work), 212-580-4459 (Home), 202-966-0938 (Home), 978-359-8533 (fax [efax]), 212-269-3188 (New York Seaport office). </html>
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »