<VV> What's More Trouble-Prone? 140hp or 150/180hp?

[Tony Underwood]

At 06:58 hours 06/07/2004 -0400, N. Joseph Potts wrote:
>I think most are agreed that the basic two-carb Corvair engine is simpler
>and easier to keep running as it should than either of the two
>high-performance designs, four-carburetor and turbocharged. But which of
>these is harder to keep in good fettle? I owned a two-carb long ago
>(bullet-proof), and I find my present four-carb example predictably
>more-demanding. I've never owned a turbo, and have been cowed by the
>complexity and stress of a turbocharging system. Reading VV for a couple of
>years has NOT quite answered my question.
>     I'd like to hear ONLY from people who've had BOTH, optimally
>concurrently and/or in the same year of Corvair.  



I still think that if treated with kindness and not run to death, the turbo
engine is as trouble-free, if not more so, as any other Vair engine.    


tony..