Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 16:01:08 +0100
Reply-To: Clive Smith <clive.harman-smith@NTLWORLD.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Clive Smith <clive.harman-smith@NTLWORLD.COM>
Subject: Re: WBX bashing
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Well we all know it was just the aircooled engine with a water jacket
wrapped around it, hence all the pipes. Try doing that without external
pipes with an existing design! And don't keep forgetting, that Europe
doesn't experience quite as many of those problems it seems you do there -
and there are no doubt 3 reasons for that, as there is for every accident
that happens.
Especially, the head gasket problems, definitely not as common - but they
aren't loaded up so much and run for such large mileages per trip, maybe
without the mechanical sympathy thats taken for granted over here - long
hill, Ok, no big deal, do we really need that extra 50 seconds saved by
having foot completely on floor so we can hold top gear etc etc. The flat
four engine here is considered pretty reliable... The flat four aircooled
after all, is the basis for an aero engine, which have to be pretty
reliable - so its not intrinsic, just long term loads/rpms, fluids,
lubricants and attention to cooling requirements. Your country and climate
is also a lot more varied - and you never quite know the full history of
that vehicle you've just bought.
Clive
'88 Syncro Transporter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon" <simon@FARRSIDE.NET>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: WBX bashing
> 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.
| 
