Date:         Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:48:12 EST
Reply-To:     NotaJeep@AOL.COM
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Steven Denis <NotaJeep@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: EXPERTISE NEEDED!  oil pressure woes con't. part 4
Comments: To: dhaynes@optonline.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

In a message dated 2/9/01 8:39:34 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dhaynes@OPTONLINE.NET writes:

<< As for 2.1's having more rod failures, the only difference
 between it and the 1.9 is the longer stroke and slightly more load. >>

Ummm do the math......*SLIGHTLY????*????????
The same weight piston and rod in the 2.1 and HOW much more piston speed?
The load goes up exponetially.....
I'm not saying that you haven't seen some high mileage examples..but the 1.9
is a "turbine" compaired to the big, raggy 2.1...the 2.1's have lighter
valves too..as the stroke went up that relation to the valve changed and the
cams are "hotter" (more lift) in the 2.1's..the lighter valves prevent the
valve from being "tossed" into the piston..Oh VW knew what they's done by
stroking that motor..and SOME of the things they did are BAND-AIDS!!!!
I've put 2.1's in 1.9 busses..there is a noticable difference in the "pulling
power" when a westy is laden...but on the top end?..Hmmm keep the speed in
the "green", OK?

steve

"Hey! nice Jeep, Mister! "
"Look kid, it's NOTAJEEP! "