开云体育

Tim
What year is the 2.2 engine?


Richard

< Are you still looking for a Subaru engine? I have two at present one
is a 2.2 Legacy which is complete with harness and computers 53000 miles
. Price 600.00

this is really good price!

The other is a 2.7 tx6 complete with harness and computers 92000 miles
and runes like new. Price is 750.00>

not good, from the XT6, not a lot of power and I heard prone to head problems.

bye, Tim

At 11:59 PM 6/19/00 -0500, you wrote:

Tim - that Porsche of yours - well, interested in maybe selling it someday?

Nevah! It's California plates are hanging in the garage, car is top notch,
except for engine. My fault, redid heads/rings two years back and used up
what little was left in the mains.

Keep checking ebay, a 912 is the 'poormans' Porsche, 4cyl/95HP etc. Uses older
356 engine, or if mid-70's has the 914 engine. Cheap(er) to maintain,
28+mpg if driven modestly, in top shape 120mph. And lighter/better balanced
than the rear heavy 911. They go for $5-10K US in respectable shape,
but a tired engine can run $2-4K for rebuild! Add $1K for trans etc etc.

bye, Tim

Hi I'm new to the list and was wondering if anyone has done
aconversion using the subaru six.

I have just been told of two Subaru engines for sale:

< Are you still looking for a Subaru engine? I have two at present one
is a 2.2 Legacy which is complete with harness and computers 53000 miles
. Price 600.00
The other is a 2.7 tx6 complete with harness and computers 92000 miles
and runes like new. Price is 750.00>

If interested contact George Reed mailto:hotvw@... not me.
-Larry

Tim - that Porsche of yours - well, interested in maybe selling it someday?

Marshall

Er...normal? Would that be 640x480 (basic), 800x600 (common), 1024x768
(getting common)? My general advice would be shoot for the 800x600 user --

Hi, my two cents... scanning a regular 4"x5" photo at 150dpi
makes for a nice image, 600x750 pixels eventually, which is ample
big enough for full details. File size is 1.4Mb uncompressed,
but jpeg will drop it greatly, like to 125Kb. Scan line dwgs.
in B+W at same 150dpi, they print out well that way, can read
wiring schematics etc. Much smaller files, and winzipping those
drops them down by 80-90%! Can't speak for website usage, I
know nozzink. Nice package for 30 day trial is PhotoShop Suite 6
Go get it at www.shareware.com. Many other to choose from there also.

HTH, bye, Tim

'85 Crew to be Subaru
'85 Single (FS)
'87 Syncro Westy (who needs a diet or Subaru'ing)
'65 Porsche 912 (hmmmmmm, it'd be sacrilege but... ;)

There are three sides to this story; Your side, Hobert's side and the
truth. It's probably not fair to Hobert to air this this way. Just my
opinion.

Patrick

At 14:33 6/19/2000, Tom Myers wrote:

Question for those of you who are web techies: What
scanning resolution is a good compromise to get good (enlargable
images) that will fill a normal computer screen when enlarged and

Er...normal? Would that be 640x480 (basic), 800x600 (common), 1024x768 (getting common)? My general advice would be shoot for the 800x600 user --
the 640x480 folks are too far behind the curve now and will have to put up with scrolling around if necessary. But it's not clear to me that you'd ordinarily want to actually fill a screen, even enlarged. Or at any rate, bear in mind the costs.

still get a reasonable resolution and download screen??

The web will show it at 72 dpi. So if you have a shot that is
720pixels across, it will be 10 inches wide on a computer screen
(it's not really that simple). Most of the shots on my site are 270

A couple of data points: Running 1152x812 on a 17" monitor, I measure 98 dpi. Running 800x600 on the same monitor, I measure 67 dpi. The actual displayed size of a picture depends on the interaction between the display resolution and how physically large the monitor displays that image. Monitors of the same inch size will typically display images in similar (but not identical) sizes. I rather suspect that the 72 dpi convention came from 640x480 displays on 14" monitors, but I haven't done the math. The older monitors size-for-size had much smaller images that didn't fill the physical screen.

If you're talking about putting pix on a web page, when you put the image in the page you should specify the width and height you want -- that way there will be a placeholder of the right size, and the rest of the page can continue loading without waiting for the image to finish. *BUT* -- having done that, go fix your image so it's the same size that you've specified. You can have a 1200x1600 image display as 60x80, but it's still going to take your lunch hour to load.

Oh dear -- one could go on for a looong time, I'm afraid. As with most things, there's more to this than instantly meets the eye.

david


David Beierl - dbeierl@... <<-- Note new address

Question for those of you who are web techies: What
scanning resolution is a good compromise to get good (enlargable
images) that will fill a normal computer screen when enlarged and
still get a reasonable resolution and download screen??

The web will show it at 72 dpi. So if you have a shot that is 720pixels across, it will be 10 inches wide on a computer screen (it's not really that simple). Most of the shots on my site are 270 to 360 pixels across. Typically, 500 pixels across might be too big, unless the photo is very important.

Other options abound.....

If you don't have a program which compresses photos for quick 'uploads' (like Adobe Photoshop, or ImageReady, for example), then I'd recommend checking out . Look for a link called "gif-lube". Website garage will take your images and compress them to upload faster, then send back to you.

Tom
--
+------------------------------------+
| CycoActive Products tel (206) 323-2349
| 701 34th Ave fax (206) 325-6016
| Seattle, WA 98122 USA
| website:
| e-mail: TomMyers@...
+------------------------------------+

??????????????? I am a draftsman/designer by trade and I was fooling around on the computer trying to figure out a way to shorten/modify or design a new oil pan. I was flipping through some air cooled VW catalogs and ran across some oil sumps for engines. What does everyone think about an oil pan that was designed like the aftermarket oil sumps? The flange where the bolts would attach to the engine would have to be bent inward (inside the oil pan) instead of outward (outside the oil pan). The only way this would work is to cut the bottom of the oil pan out large enough to access the new bolts that would be inside the pan. The bottom pan would essentially be like the air cooled VW's. When doing this you could keep the four quarts of oil or possibly have five quarts. Does anyone knows why Subaru has two baffles in their oil pans and what are they for? I have been trying to track down an oil pan Nashville, but it seems that Nashville is short of Subaru oil pans and engines.? If anyone has a spare oil pan that is for scrap I would gladly purchase one from somebody and pay shipping.? Any feedback on this project would be appreciated.??

Larry
Stay in the Subaruvanagon web site and look to the left of the
page and click on the "Files" icon. Once inside of files you will see
a file called "modified subaru.gif". Double click on the file and you
should see a picture of the oil pan drawing.

Richard




--- In subaruvanagon@..., Lawrence Johnson
<LARRY_AVERY.JOHNSON@S...> wrote:

Richard, what site do I go to for his sketch? -Larry

Richard Hill wrote:

I added a sketch in the Subaru-Vanagon List. Look under "FILES" to
view the pic.

Kurt, sounds like you may have dirty injectors or plugs. Or maybe one of your
coil packs is weak. -Larry

kjanda wrote:

MY SUBIE MOTOR IS DIFFICULT TO START COLD BUT STARTS EASILY ALL DAY WHEN
WARM ,DOES ANYONE HAVE AN ANSWER TO THIS . YOURS DESPERATELY KURT .

Richard, what site do I go to for his sketch? -Larry

Richard Hill wrote:

johnsom3@... wrote:

I don't have specific info such as you requested, but I appear to
have
done one thing differently than those who have posted pictures, and
toss it out for your consideration.

I notice Ron, Tom and others who have posted pictures have used the
plastic VW connectors at the front right of the engine compartment
when connecting the plumbing. I took the liberty of removing those
connections, as well as a bit of the sheet metal in that area. (I
made a few relief cuts with a hack saw blade and folded it up and
forward. It looks fine.) As a result, I was able to connect my new
plumbing directly into the long 1 1/4" (I think) plastic pipes that
run from the radiator to back near the engine compartment. I just
used a short piece of rubber hose on each. This allowed me to keep
the lower inlet line down and out of the way of the heater hoses,
etc.
As a result, I didn't need to cut off the heater hose connections
on
the engine as KEP says will be required.

Sounds good! One note, Tom, Ron, and Eddie have '84-'85 vans which were
plumbed somewhat differently than '86 and up. The newer vans don't have
plastic pipes busting through to the engine compartment.

Dick

I added a sketch in the Subaru-Vanagon List. Look under "FILES" to
view the pic.

Richard





--- In subaruvanagon@..., "Richard Hill" <rhill0324@m...>
wrote:

Hi there fellow Subbies

I am a draftsman/designer by trade and I was fooling around
on the computer trying to figure out a way to shorten/modify or
design a new oil pan. I was flipping through some air cooled VW
catalogs and ran across some oil sumps for engines. What does
everyone think about an oil pan that was designed like the
aftermarket oil sumps? The flange where the bolts would attach to

the

engine would have to be bent inward (inside the oil pan) instead of
outward (outside the oil pan). The only way this would work is to

cut

the bottom of the oil pan out large enough to access the new bolts
that would be inside the pan. The bottom pan would essentially be
like the air cooled VW's. When doing this you could keep the four
quarts of oil. Does anyone knows why Subaru has two baffles in

their

oil pans and what are they for? I have been trying to track down an
oil pan Nashville, but it seems that Nashville is short of Subaru

oil

pans and engines. If anyone has a spare oil pan that is for scrap

I

would gladly purchase one from somebody and pay shipping. Any
feedback on this project would be appreciated.





Richard Hill
2911 Augusta Trace Drive
Spring Hill TN 37174
(615) 302-3320

Hi there fellow Subbies

I am a draftsman/designer by trade and I was fooling around
on the computer trying to figure out a way to shorten/modify or
design a new oil pan. I was flipping through some air cooled VW
catalogs and ran across some oil sumps for engines. What does
everyone think about an oil pan that was designed like the
aftermarket oil sumps? The flange where the bolts would attach to the
engine would have to be bent inward (inside the oil pan) instead of
outward (outside the oil pan). The only way this would work is to cut
the bottom of the oil pan out large enough to access the new bolts
that would be inside the pan. The bottom pan would essentially be
like the air cooled VW's. When doing this you could keep the four
quarts of oil. Does anyone knows why Subaru has two baffles in their
oil pans and what are they for? I have been trying to track down an
oil pan Nashville, but it seems that Nashville is short of Subaru oil
pans and engines. If anyone has a spare oil pan that is for scrap I
would gladly purchase one from somebody and pay shipping. Any
feedback on this project would be appreciated.





Richard Hill
2911 Augusta Trace Drive
Spring Hill TN 37174
(615) 302-3320

If you can't find a shorter belt I'd just run the fluid around like
Larry suggested. Getting rid of it sounds like burning bridges.

Hi,

although you're pumping fluid without any real pressure behind it, you're
still pushing it around and it will get hot, better keep the reservoir
etc hooked up too. Yup, if run dry it will seize, or at lest wear out.

bye, Tim

Brian,

Wish I had known where you were, I was just in Norfolf, Va. Could
have dropped in and checked out your progress.

Nice beginning on your website. Looking forward to more since I have
a Syncro also. One suggestion for you and others. I always like it
when I can click on the picture and get a larger view. I like to see
the details, especially of the engine work, plumbing, wiring, etc.
Small pictures just don't cut it. As great as Ron's site is, I have
wished many times I could get a "closer look".

I don't have a digital camera either but have lots of high end 35mm
gear which I think I can get better pictures with . I will scan
standard 4x5 prints on a (relatively inexpensive) flatbed scanner
($135). Low tech but a lot cheaper than a $900 digital camera. If
you don't have a scanner, most Kinko's copy centers do and will let
you rent by the hour for a reasonable amount.

Question for those of you who are web techies: What
scanning resolution is a good compromise to get good (enlargable
images) that will fill a normal computer screen when enlarged and
still get a reasonable resolution and download screen??

Warren Chapman



--- In subaruvanagon@..., b.l.yonker@w... wrote:

Well, I finally made a web page for my conversion. So far, it is
just a little story. I will add to the conversion part as soon as
possible. I have a couple rolls of film to develop first. Can any
SubieVan Fan recommend a decent Digital Camera for not a lot of

money?

The web address is

Comments and suggestions are appreciated.

Brian
86 Syncro
Suffolk, VA