Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 11:10:54 EST
Reply-To: NotaJeep@AOL.COM
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Steven Denis <NotaJeep@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: 2.1L Oil pressure problem: Rods: SYMPTOM NOT CAUSE:UNBALANCED
crank the ....
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
<< All I am doing is passing on the information that I have learned from
others that have been there and discovered better ways to do things than
"factory."
Have you been to the Gene Berg Enterprises web and looked at the technical
information there?
http://www.geneberg.com/
http://www.geneberg.com/crankshaft.htm
How much do you know about the T1 T4 engines, the problems that developed
and the way the VW engineers fixed a problem only to create another problem?
Err, the "problems" with the aircooled engine had little to do with
"screw-ups" but the engineering staff at VW..
Market factors: "More power!" and legislation: "less pollution!" kept them
busy making "fixes" to the design
And the way after market solved problems VW created (some are junk but there
are good items out there)
Any year/model VW engine will do what it was designed to do and do it
well..did you KNOW the the recommend maximum engine speed on a 1200cc 40
horse was 3750 rpm? SO the the aftermarket "solved" this problem by offering
CW crankshafts...IF people used the engine the way the VW intended, it would
not need shuffle pins and CW crank shafts...it was an ECONOMY car...if you
wanted more than that? you need to change things..
One:
The 8 mm head studs were constantly pulling from the case. VW came up with
10 mm studs and case savers: Bigger threads in the case problem solved...well
the studs started breaking in half... They then went to 10 mm ends and 8 mm
shafts...No more breaking or pulling out studs. The 10 mm studs did not grow
with engine and were over stressed and broke.
Err you got that backward.. the big studs are the original design..as the
head temps went up with the greater power/emission controls they went to a
different alloy with a higher expansion modulus. the expansion was enough so
that they knew they needed to allow the studs to 'give"..hence the 8mm
jogs...Earlier engines DID pull studs..ONLY when the engine was over
heated..as in "worked too hard" or "out of tune" or any of a handfull of
"no-no's' that you can do to them.
There are bigger head studs for the WBX, but I think that they will create
the same problem that VW faced when they tried that.
the studs on the WBX are stretch studs like the stretch bolts on the rabbit
diesel. they are designed to "give" and then return to normal. I don't KNOW
what they are made out of..I know that I could'nt remove a broken one with a
EDM machine!....
The rod breakage can be attributed to the longer stroke on a
un-counterweighted crank according to many.
OK..I'm not in that group..it's simple fatigue
It is NOT MY idea, BUT others before me that researched this and discovered
it.
Well my point of view is based on my experience and my degrees in thing like
automotive technology, mechanical engineering and a LONG realtionship with
the VW engine. I'm NOT Gene Berg (Mr."I'm god and VW engineers are
stupid"Berg)
VW wants to make a car last only so long, so you will have to buy a new car
or part...
And there is a 1000 mpg carburator too...
There are market realities to any product..you can make a perfect product,
but you can't sell it! They have to build to a price and I think they do a
darn good job..the NEWEST van on this list is 10 years old...
Porsche did a study and found that building a "forever' car was foolish..it
seems, on average, that 280K miles and or 21.5 years and over 90% of the
autos would be destroyed in some sort of accident...
I heard about a tire company that made a tire so good, that they soon went
out of business because they had no repeat business...
Yes, you seem to "hear" a lot of things.
"good for 150 hp and 8500 rpm" or something, wasn't it?
I don't know what that means...where is the data? where are the
caclulations..that fact that someone, somewhere MIGHT have reached those
numbers for a short time means NOTHING...
Hearsay is hearsay..period
<<<No..sorry I'm in a manufacturing envrioment here and if you change the
crank, rods pistons as they did with the 2.1 it would NOT have cost ANY MORE
to have made a 2.5..>>>
New crank molds, more material, redesign needed, etc., would be needed,
Right ! and they DID all that to build the 2.1 ANYWAY..so whay not build a
2.3 or 2.5 or the like?...no more $ than that 2.1 once you change .001 you
might as well change it 1.00!
VW was working on a 3.2L flat 6, but they moved to the Eurovan and front
wheel drive before it was released (all in past post to the list...).
Ottengier (sp) built such a beast...I'm SURE the idea crossed the minds and
the drawing boards of the engineering staff..and I'll bet some of them had
plans to put one in their OWN vans..but..the real world comes crashing
through the door and says "front wheel drive"
and life goes on..
>>
steve...
"Hey! nice Jeep, Mister!"
"Look kid, it's NOTAJEEP"
