Sheesh, Scott that was not picky at all!

I just love how you voluntarily sprinkle us with your Subaru enthusiasm.

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Scott Daniel - Shazam <
scottdaniel@turbovans.com> wrote:

>  for the sake of technical pickiness,
> let's say it would be more kosher to say there's a big difference btween a
> CR of 10 and 9.7 to 1 .................
> IF.........there is proper and even semi-radical valve timing and cam
> profile, quite advance ignitioin timing, and very inhanced intake and
> exhaust systems, and all that .........then, yes, 9.7 vs 10 is a significant
> difference.
>
> giving only two changes that I know of ........the CR and the fuel and
> timing mapping in the ECU..........*nothing* else is much differnt......same
> lame looking intake runners ( look at some subaru engines, particularily the
> DOHC 2.5 for some nice obviously flow-enhanced intake runners )
> ..........*not to mentioin* hokey two valves per cylinders and PUSH RODS !!
> ( what are 'push rods' ???? ..........and 'rocker arms' ???...........are
> those ancinet things associated with 'points'........whatever those are ??
>
> Think you get my point - given how ancient and crude the waterboxer engine
> is........the dif between 9.7 and 10 to one CR is nothing basically.
>
> More :   ( I do get carried away - following is just 'more' about 'how to
> get there' engine performance and fuel economy-wise )
>
> and besides...........
> without KNOCK SENSOR ignition ........how can the engine even be really
> 'smart' about how much power it can produce ?  It can't.
> I don't think many people recognize that knock sensor ignition is a
> feedback system - the ECU constantly pushes the timing as much as it
> can.......and gets feedback from the knock sensor when timing is 'too much'
> - conseuqnetly it's opptimized constantly according the whatever ignition
> curve mapping the engineers put in the ECU>
> with old and fashioned  distributor that either ( 1.9 wbxr ) depends on
> centrifugal and vaccum mechanical devices to make the timing 'about right,
> roughly' most of the time........or as in the 2.1 ignitioin timing is
> determined within the ECU -but STILL ..........it's guessing at what is
> about the right timing for all rpm's, loads etc.  - without a feedback knock
> sensor ..........Ignition Timing Curve is just like A CARBURETOR - it's a
> crude  approximation that gets something within the broad ball park of what
> would really be optimum.
>
> If I was going to 'invest' time in trying to get more out of a waterleaker
> vanagon engine  ( and you WILL NEVER GET PAST Push Rods and Two Valves per
> cylinder - though there's been at least one air-cooled drag racing VW Bug
> engine with subaur 4 vavle OHC heads put on it ).........
> If I just 'had to' try to get the most out of a waterboxer engine, in the
> electronics dept. I'd try an aftermakret tunable engine managment system.
> Links is one. Expensive.
> But then you hook up your lap top to your ECU and you prgroam in the timing
> and fuel mapping that you want, even boost if you have a turbo.....all of
> that.
>
> and BESDIES Again - you will never get past the JOKE 'head gaskets' that a
> waterboxer enigine has, and will ALWAYS have.
> it is PURELY AN ADAPTED AIR-COOLED VW ENGINE.
>
> I love what Pual G. said when he was here- we were ponidering our amazment
> of how difficulut a water pump is to do on a waterboxer with the engien in
> the van...........like they sure coulda made that easiier if they really
> wanted to ! - and it's the main part that wears the fastest too- 70K miles
> is all you can really expect for sure out of a w. pump on a 2.1 wbxr engine
> - he said.................
> "VW gave the engineers 30 days to come up with a watercooled vanagon
> engine. "   !!
>
> THAT FITS - oh does it ever.
> Subaru Engineers..........and all manufacturers check out what the other
> manufactureres do ..............in 1990 when they were coming out with the
> Subaru EJ22 engines - which is just a BEATUTIUFAL piece of automtoive and
> motor engineering ............I'm sure after work at the Saki Bars they just
> laughed themselves SILLY over how much the waterboxer engine is a patch job
> and 'emergency upgrade' to VW's traditionial pushrod Bug engine layout.
>
> I 'do' waterboxer engiens all the time - cause I get them
> easily..........cause they're around - I don't hate them........
> but if you really wanting something enhanced and very worthwhile that goes
> better, and gets better fuel economy and is more durable......
> and has better throttle repsonse, and HOLDS A SETUP WAY, WAY BETTER Than a
> waterboxer Vangon engine ............
> there are much better more modern engines that will advance you light years
> , and it can be inexpensive too if you do the work yourself...........
> I'm, partial to subaru's.........but there are other modern good engines
> too............
>
> you can only get so far upgrading something in incremental steps. At some
> point to really advance you need a whole new 'clean sheet of paper.'
> No matter what you do to a horse-drawn wagon - put an engine in it,, put a
> windshiled on it, put disc brakes on it .........
> it can never be a car.  you just can't 'get there' without stepping into a
> whole other paradigm in design anc concept.
>
> I have core and rebuild-able subaru engines for sale btw.......not trying
> to push that.  One of these days i'll have an extensive inventory reduction
> sale.
>
> What I would do - assuming one has the room for a spare vanagon ......and
> assuming one doesn't have 10 grand to just drop on a Soobie
> conversioni................get some totally beater watercooled vanagon cheap
> , .......and get a Legacy Subaru car cheap - they go for 300 dollars
> sometimes - and build up a soobie conversioin overtime while keeping your
> good vanagon for trips and so forth.   That way you are never without a good
> running Vanagon. And when it's all dialed in, swap it over to your good
> vanagon.
> Only meant to say - didn't mean to make this about subaru-vanagons - ( use
> some other modern engine , that's fine too )  if you really want enhacned
> performance and fuel economy and real delight in an engine ........you can't
> get there really well with the old hardware.    it costs
> more........yes.........that is a problem all right - but the reward in the
> end.......wow !
> Scott
> www.turbovans.com
>
>
> Chris S wrote:
>
> So how does it run compared to the stock MV WBX?
>
> I'm asking because I have a complete DJ WBX on the way, with ECU, to replace
> the 1.9L in my '84 Westy.
>
> Chris.
>
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Kim Springer <kimspringer@rcn.com> <kimspringer@rcn.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>  Everyone keeps stating that the DJ Engine CR is 10:1, 10.5:1, etc.
>
> I carefully measured my DJ engine and it was 9.65:1. MV is 8.65:1.
>
> If you want to round up to 10:1, so be it, but, when it comes to
> compression
> ratios, 9.7 is a long way from 10.
>
> Kim
>
>
>
>
>