twin - possibility of a2 subframes?

[Rabbit16v@attbi.com (Rabbit16v)]

Defineately A2 subs.  As far as where to get them???  Have you ever been to
a junkyard?  There are mor A2s in a junkyard than all German cars put
together.  Atleast out here there is!!  Anyone need an ACN tranny?  $75 ea
in our pick-a-part and there are GOBS!

Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allyn" <amalventano@sc.rr.com>
To: "scirocco list" <scirocco-l@scirocco.org>
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 2:47 PM
Subject: twin - possibility of a2 subframes?


> ok, i've been uneducated in the past when o-so many listers have told me
to
> use an a2 subframe in the twin. the events from this past weekend (clutch
> release arm finger snapped on the jetta, much thanks to Ron for the tech
> assist), have given me some more insight as to just how the a2 subframe is
> laid out. enough insight to possibly justify using a2 subframes (yes, 2)
on
> the twin.
>
> pros:
> - simpler tubular subframe design in area of engines (fewer tie points,
> slightly less weight as well)
> - future engine upgrades possible (twin vr6 anyone?)
> - can possibly use newer hubs that hold larger bearings
> - simpler removal/install of engines for rebuild
>
> cons:
> - many parts are not on hand (would need 2 sets of all mounts, mount
> brackets, subframes, power steering racks, suspension arms, hubs, etc)
> - expense of engine mounts (possibility of molding/making urethane mounts
> from broken old a2 mounts in-house?)
> - possible net weight increase in the end (due to added weight of
subframes)
>
> so, guys/gals, what should i do? stick with a1 style (cheaper, but more
> intrusive/complex subframe), or go with a2 (making the subframe simpler,
but
> adding expense)???
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scirocco-l mailing list
> Scirocco-l@scirocco.org
> http://neubayern.net/mailman/listinfo/scirocco-l