

| Subject: | Re: Why no bolt-on HP upgrades to the 2.1 WBX? |
| From: | neil n |
| Date: | Fri, 25 May 2012 23:54:16 -0700 |
I saw that article. Anyone know if this is Mega Squirt engine management with some variations? As a newcomer to the 2.1 WBX, disregarding coolant jacket to head seal issues and connecting rod stretch bolts issues exacerbated by heat, etc., I think the WBX is a great balance between torque where needed and, when engine in top shape, decent fuel efficiency. Like even though my 2.1 is not be dialed in 100%, I'm driving home in it tonight pulling the same hills in 3rd w/o feeling the same rate of drop off in power I would feel in my Jetta swap. (two different animals. e.g. I miss the "get up and go" in upper RPM's that I have in the Jetta swap and it generally has better fuel efficiency, not to mention cheaper easier to get parts!) But these are the ramblings of a WBX newb with relatively minimal engine design knowledge. Still. I think guys like Tencentlife (Chris) have a good thing going on and hope development and improvement of the WBX keeps on keepin on. Neil. On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 2:32 PM, pickle vanagon <greenvanagon@gmail.com>wrote: I found this: > http://www.gowesty.com/library_article.php?id=1532 > > For some reason when they say it it sounds less exciting than when Jim was > discussing a similar possibility. > > -- Neil n 65 kb image Myford Ready For Assembly http://tinyurl.com/64sx4rp '88 Slate Blue Westy to be named. '81 VanaJetta 2.0 "Jaco" http://tubaneil.googlepages.com/ Vanagon VAG Gas I4/VR Swap Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/vanagons-with-vw-inline-4-cylinder-gas-engines
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »