Date:         Sat, 16 Sep 2006 09:46:09 -0500
Reply-To:     Marion Lathem <resiolute@COPPER.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Marion Lathem <resiolute@COPPER.NET>
Subject:      Re: [SPAM] Re: vanagon engine conversions vs rebuilt 1.9
              waterboxer
Comments: To: Jeff Stewart <fonman4277@EARTHLINK.NET>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
              reply-type=original

UH... don't mean to be a wet blanket on the Carvair engine...BUT..my folks
had a Carvair, it was always broke down.  When I got out of the Navy, I went
to work in a big mechanic shop.  There was this old fellow that worked on
Volkswagens, Carvairs, anything basically.   One day, he had a Carvair
engine torn down, and as I looked at all the parts.  he said, don't look
like an engine does it..?  He then showed me a rod, wrist pin and rod cap of
both the Carvair and the Volkswagen.  The Volkswagen's endcap to the rod,
was almost invisible it was machined so close.  The Carvair rod and end cap
seam was clearly visible.  He told me, pointing to the carvair engine,
that's the best Detroit could do, trying to copy a Volkswagen.  It clearly
is a poor job.   We had a police officer that drove a Carvair Spyder, he had
his car in every week being worked on... it just could not hold up to
whatever he did to it.  I want to say Spyder Monza.. but I'm not sure that's
correct.?   I am new to Volkswagens,  but it was really clear to me
Volkwagen, clearly had the better machined engines back then.
Lyle Lathem
Vanagon GL
Quinlan, TX