Date:         Wed, 31 Jul 2002 08:37:52 -0600
Reply-To:     Simon <simon@FARRSIDE.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Simon <simon@FARRSIDE.NET>
Subject:      Re: WBX bashing
In-Reply-To:  <f0510030bb96d475e29bb@[203.167.170.16]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

On Wednesday, July 31, 2002, at 04:12  AM, Andrew Grebneff wrote:

>> thanx for your opinion but like others before you, your position is
>> ripe
>> with lots of technical ignorance. The 2.1L WBX has enjoyed as much as
>> much
>> as 1 million kilometers of VW testing and with required proper
>> maintenance
>> has proven it's unique design.
>
> I think the sheer number of leaking WBXs is strong indication that
> there is a serious problem with the design (likewise the propensity
> of the 2.1s to throw rods).
>
> No other 80s engine that I know of needs constant painstaking care re
> coolant. Modern vehicles are supposed to be largely maintenance-free;
> this places the WBX in the "old-tech" basket.
> --

Absolutely. Keep it in the family, and compare it to VW's "real"
engines- the Inline 4's. They've got longevity, reliability, reasonable
power, and a design that appears to have been thought through properly.
Witness:
- a real head gasket
- a cooling system that is largely self-contained and easy to work on
- fewer potential oil leak spots
- greater tolerance for improper coolant (still not a good idea to USE
the wrong stuff, but you won't ruin your life)

Let's re-visit the cooling system design- and for that matter, we can
expand our comparison to include the old aircooled's. Every part of the
old wheezer's cooling design was thought through with meticulous care,
and the only real change necessary was moving to the doghouse oil
cooler. Likewise, the I-4's system stays within the engine except to go
to the radiator, the heater, and the expansion tank. Then you have the
wasserboxer... WHY are there external hoses just to go from one part of
the engine to another? WHAT is the deal with that external "ring" around
the engine compartment? And WTF is the deal with using flat head gaskets?

The impression I get from the wasserboxer is that it was a final bone
thrown to the flat-motor engineers at VW (Thanks, fellas, you've been
great!), with a technically incompetent or inexperienced oversight
committee thrown on top of them.
YES, the engine moves our big, heavy vehicles reasonably well, YES, they
can last a surprisingly long time, but NO, there should not be so many
ways for them to have such a quick & surprising death. That's one last
nice feature of VW's other engines- they tend to WEAR OUT instead of
having a catastrophe. Heck, even a casually maintained aircooled will
give you ample warning before biting the big schnitzel.
I'm done ranting now. And I truly appreciate the fact that the motor in
my van seems to be the original one at 166K miles, and seems like it
will run long enough to give me time to prep my 3A... but it feels like
living on death row.