Too many times my 83 Westy (and my 84 GL) was passed by Vanagons
with 2.1 WBX on slopes and flat speedy ways. They passed me fast.
I don't need too much more power. Just more to stay out of being
a road block on slopes. My 1.9 Westy is fine on flat freeways as
long as I don't face with head wind.

I do need to keep as authentic (especially the look of the engine
compartment) to conform to California Smog rules. Adapt a Subaru
or else conversion would be too much work to consider right now.
So naturally a 2.1 core with everything else 1.9 is the goal if
that's possible. There are things that have to be changed I think.

David

--- On Thu, 2/19/09, Allan Streib <streib@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:

> From: Allan Streib <streib@cs.indiana.edu>
> Subject: Re: Replace 1.9 with a 2.1 WBX
> To: "David Kao" <dtkao0205@YAHOO.COM>
> Cc: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Date: Thursday, February 19, 2009, 5:24 PM
> Oops -- that's 200cc more in the 2.1.  Yeah, I can see
> that being
> "noticable" though still not really significant,
> depending on what else
> was done with the 2.1 model to get more power out of it.
>
> Allan
>
> David Kao <dtkao0205@YAHOO.COM> writes:
>
> > What I intend to do is to rebuilt it using as many 1.9
> parts on top of
> > the engine and swap out my 1.9 from my 83 Westy. The
> 1.9 engine was
> > rebuilt by me last year. But I have always wanted a
> 2.1. I need more
> > power because I went to Yosemite very frequently.
>
> I wonder how much extra power the 2.1 has?  I mean,
> it's only an extra
> 20cc.  That's like a chain-saw motor.
>
> > Oh, BTW, I paid $100 for the 2.1. I think this is very
> cheap. The shop
> > said they have had it for 4 months so they just want
> to get rid of it.
>
> $100 for a core is not bad, depending on what all it needs.
>  Try to find
> out as much as you can before you start spending money, so
> you don't end
> up hundreds of dollars into the project before discovering
> some kind of
> back-breaking problem.
>
> Allan
> --
> 1991 Vanagon GL