Date:         Wed, 12 Apr 2000 09:11:12 EDT
Reply-To:     KENWILFY@AOL.COM
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         KENWILFY@AOL.COM
Subject:      Re: Waterboxer longevity
Comments: To: william.fryer@worldnet.att.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Put an oil pressure gauge on the motor and make your own decision.  You can
then monitor your oil pressure and you will see if you have any bottom end
tiredness.
Bob Donalds has spoken with me about the weakness of the 2.1l bottom end many
times and the many 2.1l engines with holes in the cases that I run into bears
testimony to this problem.  The big ends of the rods go oval and then it is
all over but the loud bang.

The 1.9l engines don't seem to have this problem.  Bob feels that it is a
problem with the stretch to yield rod bolts on the 2.1l engines.  That these
bolts keep stretching and allow the rods bearings to oval.  The 1.9l engine
didn't have these bolts and they don't have a similar problem.  1.9l bottom
ends hold together over 200k miles without chucking a rod.  Usually the top
end on these motors gets pretty tired by 250k and people are ready to rebuild
them.  I wish the 2.1l could last this long without fear of catastrophic
failure.

Just my opinion,
Ken Wilford
http://www.vanagain.com
John 3:16
Office (856)-765-1583
Shop (856)-327-0027
Fax   (856)-327-2242