"the word" I've read on the subie list says the XT6 motor, even though 145
hp, does not have the torque at low end needed for the vanagon. just
repeating what I've read there, no personal knowledge. Oh, I googled and
found this:
88-91 2700 2672 145@5200 156@4000 ER-27 XT6 (coolest of all 2 valve)
is posted here:
http://www.ultimatesubaru.net/80s/specs/mechanical/engine-specs.html
notice the rpm that 156 lb/ft comes on.

man do they work great in the subie though!

Bob

----Original Message Follows----
From: Al and Sue Brase <albeeee@MCHSI.COM>
Reply-To: Al and Sue Brase <albeeee@MCHSI.COM>
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: WBX in Porsche
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:05:36 -0600

  Well, I was comparing the WBX to the 1.6 Porsche. Or even an authentic
912E engine, which I have. (But since they only made 2099 total cars,
original spare engines and junkyard parts are hard to find.)
C'mon John, do subies never need head gaskets? I doubt they are as bad
as WBX's, but NEVER?
One guy I talked to several years ago- a type 4 guy- called the WBX a
Frankenstein motor.  I  know what he means, but it's not THAT bad!
    And-maybe this should be a new thread- what about the 2.7 engine
from the XT-6? Both for a Vanagons or a 912 Porsche?  It's still about
160 hp or so, right?
Al Brase

John Connolly, Aircooled.Net wrote:

>the problem is the WBX is only quiet out of your 4 needs "Quiet, Reliable,
>powerful, thrifty. "
>
>that's my entire point. The ONLY advantage the WBX offers is that it will
>bolt up to the trans without an adapter. But that advantage is seriously
>outweighed by the disadvantages of the WBX IMO
>
>the 2.2L Subi sounds like the engine you need to me; dirt cheap (engine and
>parts too), and a breeze to work on.
>
>John
>Aircooled.Net Inc.
>
>
>
>