It's a bit ironic actually, do you remember the BRAT, the four seater
"pickup"?  I wanted one as a teen-ager.  Subaru has always exploited the
loopholes...

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Demarest" <tim.demarest@POBOX.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 12:46 PM
Subject: Re: FW: Subaru Engines (NVC)

>          I noticed an interesting slant to the article... apparently
Subaru
> is the "bad guy" for *exploiting* the SUV loophole, not the US government
> for leaving it open...
>
> Still reading between the lines, and coloring outside them,
>
> Tim
>
> At 02:51 PM 5/27/2004 -0400, Myers, Thomas A wrote:
> >Apparently subaru sells "trucks"  [ not sedans or wagons ] now....
> >
> >http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4191589/
> >
> >
> >Tom
> >
> >         ----------
> >         From:   Vanagon Mailing List on behalf of Andrew Fox
> >         Reply To:       Andrew Fox
> >         Sent:   Thursday, May 27, 2004 12:07 PM
> >         To:     vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> >         Subject:        Re: Subaru Engines (NVC)
> >
> >         Dont you people care about gas mileage?  The new subaru's are
only
> >getting
> >         in the low to mid 20's, barley better than the small SUVs?  I
have a
> >92
> >         legacy wagon AWD, gets over 30 mpg, gutless yet, but cheap to
drive
> >and
> >         bulletproof.  I for one am very disappointed that subaru has
gone
> >from
> >         producing fuel efficent cars for the masses to satisfying the
needs
> >of the
> >         few with the deep pockets, its just like honda and vw, noone
wants
> >to make
> >         a cheap car these days, honda no longer sells a small fuel
efficent
> >         hatchback, their only hatchback is an overpriced suped up stupid
> >looking
> >         model for stupid kids.  VW is selling overpriced made in mexico
> >yuppy
> >         cars, and overpriced SUVs and sportcars for those with more
money
> >than
> >         brains.  The practical car market is going to the koreans (kia's
and
> >         hyndai's).
> >
> >         Andrew
> >
> >
> >
> >         On Thu, 27 May 2004, Mike Blotz wrote:
> >
> >         > the choices are actually 2.2, 2.5 phase 1 and 2 (DOHC or
> >SOHC--better),
> >         > 3.3 SVX, 2.0 WRX and the newer 2.5 turbo. I am doing the 2.2
swap
> >from a
> >         > 90 legacy on my syncro as we speak--almost done. they are
bullit
> >proof
> >         > engines--as well as the turbo 2.0 WRX.
> >         >
> >         > main reason subaru made the 2.0 turbo WRX is because it was
the
> >consumer
> >         > version of there rally WRX impreza. rally cars are limited to
> >2.0L. that
> >         > is the reason. now they have a consumer version of there STI
WRX
> >which
> >         > is a 2.5 turbo. and same motor detuned in the forester and
coming
> >out
> >         > next week--the new legacy line (ive been waiting a year for
that)
> >yes--i
> >         > drive subarus as a daily driver here in CO (legacy 2.5GT
wagen).
> >even
> >         > with my 2.2 90 legacy motor i am 35 hp ahead (130hp) and--I
forget
> >the
> >         > number exactly--but close to 25 more ft lbs of torque. there
is a
> >guy
> >         > local to me doing a WRX conversion as well--cant wait to see
it. I
> >know
> >         > he only has something like 28K ORIGINAL miles on his syncro
and
> >         > tranny--which would probably be the weak link with that much
HP
> >and
> >         > torque.
> >         >
> >         > ps--I drove the WRX when they unloaded it from the truck here
in
> >         > CO--demo car--they didnt care how it was driven. very far from
> >gutless
> >         > here at elevation 9hich doesnt effect turbos much
anyway)--holy
> >cow--mr
> >         > lawman/insuranceman wouldnt let me have one
> >         >
> >         > mike
> >         >