Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 19:36:53 -0000
Reply-To: Pat Dooley <pdooley@gte.net>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Pat Dooley <pdooley@gte.net>
Subject: Re: How to throw a rod
In-Reply-To: <vanagon%2000081623551000@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
The inline VW rabbit motor is stout. Period.
To say this motor was built to wear out is a joke.
VW used the same shortblock and made a diesel. 23/1 compression. 10 times
the cylinder pressures. These diesels go 200k miles.
Techtonics built a 550HP I4 16V drag car.
Speedtek built a 450HP 8V GTI. In the 80's.
An 11 second car that has made over 200 passes with no failures. Stock
bottom end.
The rabbit bottom ends are that tough. Cast iron raised webbing to locate
the main bearings. All five of them.
The crank loads are distributed between 5 mains instead of 3 for the WBX.
Advantage=I4.
Balance shafts? Are we talking k-cars or Volkswagens?
No such thing. In fact, rabbit motors don't even have harmonic balancers.
They are internally balanced by their STOCK counterweighted crankshaft.
Fluid filled motor mounts-- Introduced on the 86 A2 series golf/jettas. My
81 rabbit pickup has the factory rubber mounts. They work great as long as
they are not collapsed. Most people don't know VW underspecd the engine
side motor mount in the A1's. When the mount fails, it feels like the car
is ready for the junkyard.
This is no fault of the motor. A heavy duty Techtonics mount completely
eliminates this problem.
So the gizmo count stands at one $24 motor mount, or a fresh factory mount
every 2-3 years.
I have run rabbit motors for 10 years now, never with a serious failure. I
beat the sh*t out my turbo rabbit pickup, 3rd gear burnouts, full throttle
power shifts.
Never a motor problem*. The entire truck project including vehicle purchase
was around $1200.
This a 14 second vehicle. Faster than many V8 sports cars. And smooth as
glass to 6500rpm.
*early on the truck blew a couple head gaskets due to my inexperience with
boosting motors and providing proper fuel/spark curves.
Robert, I respect what you have done with your waterboxer. I am sure the
list appreciates your willingness to take the time to share the details of
your successes.
I don't think you are well versed in the I4 VW motors, and maybe shouldn't
be downplaying them.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com]On Behalf
> Of Robert Lilley
> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2000 3:54 AM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: Re: How to throw a rod
>
>
> The Inlines NEED the counterweights to help them RUN SMOOTHER
> along with the special fluid engine mounts, counter balance
> shafts and what ever else, to keep the viberations from the driver pants.
> The flat 4's ARE SMOOTH WITHOUT THE ADDED gizmos and VW did not
> feel the need for counterweights.
>
> AND...
>
> Remember that ALL auto makers DESIGN THEIR CARS TO WEAR OUT!
> Some take longer than others. On the WBX engines VW knew that
> the WBX engines would fail around that mileage. They wanted you
> to buy a new VW or get the engine fixed.
>
> Fuel tank design was changed to cause them to wear out SOONER
> because not enough were being sold.
>
> This is sililar to the problem in the T1 engines.
>
> Engine that is SMOOTH as glass at 5600 rpms (and quiet) WITHOUT
> any gizmos to keep it smooth
>
> Robert
>
