Hi Cris - lol.
I  hope you are half sincere about the Soobie comment !
scott

Chris S wrote:
> 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 <mailto: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 <http://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> <mailto: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
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.4.1/1516 - Release Date: 6/24/2008 7:53 AM
>