Sorry for the multiple posts but I thought it might be interesting to get
some feedback from the subie group.

Very interesting curves. (see link below) Now can someone help dissect them
for me?

"Torque is what pushes the vanagon up a hill".  Assuming we are traveling at
70 mph (washington state speed limit on highway 90) and hit the eastside of
the cascades. I would like to continue going 70. Assuming standard gearing
and standard 14" wheels what rpm's would I be doing in with each engine?
(well I know I would not be going 70 in with the wbx).

If you compare the 2.2 and the 1.9L there is what,  20 lbs at 2000 rpms more
in the 1.9L?  A little more at 1500 and 2500 but I don't know how much
difference 10 lbs would make. The big increase in torque at higher rpm's in
all 2.2 from 4000 to 6000 rpms.

So how much driving will you do at 4000+ rpms?

So the TDI has the low end torque and the 2.2 has the high end while the
curves are almost identical from 2500 to 3500.

I guess my question is what do I get with more low end torque? Faster "off
the line"?  And what do I get for more high end torque?

And if torque is the goal then seems like the 2.5 is the answer.

Peter

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Delanty" <laurasdog@WEIRDSTUFFWEMAKE.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: 3.3 verses 4.3 verses 1.9???

> At 02:29 PM 7/25/2004, David Marshall wrote:
> >STOCK POWER:
> >For get horse power, this is what sell vehicles but this isn't really
what
> >you drive your heavy Vanagon with.  The TDI does have more useable
> >horsepower than any stock motor in the Vanagon.  See
> >http://www.fastforward.ca/VanagonSwap/AHU/ahu.jpg for a torque and power
> >chart of the TDI vs the wasserboxer engines.
> -------------
>
>
> Just to put it in perspective, I took the AHU torque from David's chart,
> converted Nm to Lb Ft  (boy those metric numbers look big, don't they),
> and plotted it every 500 RPM on top of the subaru 2.2L and 2.5L torque.
> http://www.weirdstuffwemake.com/automotive/vanagon/torque.jpg
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Delanty" <laurasdog@WEIRDSTUFFWEMAKE.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: 3.3 verses 4.3 verses 1.9???

> At 02:29 PM 7/25/2004, David Marshall wrote:
> >STOCK POWER:
> >For get horse power, this is what sell vehicles but this isn't really
what
> >you drive your heavy Vanagon with.  The TDI does have more useable
> >horsepower than any stock motor in the Vanagon.  See
> >http://www.fastforward.ca/VanagonSwap/AHU/ahu.jpg for a torque and power
> >chart of the TDI vs the wasserboxer engines.
> -------------
>
>
> Just to put it in perspective, I took the AHU torque from David's chart,
> converted Nm to Lb Ft  (boy those metric numbers look big, don't they),
> and plotted it every 500 RPM on top of the subaru 2.2L and 2.5L torque.
> http://www.weirdstuffwemake.com/automotive/vanagon/torque.jpg
>
>
>
> Steve
> '86 Westy "Escape Pod"  (EJ22)
> '73 Beetle "ain't got a name yet"
>