Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2012 13:33:19 -0700
Reply-To: Scott Daniel - Turbovans <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Scott Daniel - Turbovans <scottdaniel@TURBOVANS.COM>
Subject: Re: Low compression, more test results-busaid inying used vans!
In-Reply-To: <CAB2RwfiaDq5yRPbbb_FcYLxStEgUtD+emZzO1j6JP=et0Aj+5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
It is true that a waterboxer engine can sound and feel about the same at
say, 60 mph in 3rd or 4th gear if manual trans, or 2nd and top in auto
trans.
With road and wind noise ...and an unusually flat torque curve .
there's not much in the way of an 'automatic signal' that it's time to
shift up.
In most cars you go through each gear, and at about 80 some percent
of total rpm power drops off noticeably,
telling the driver it's time to shift.
Also ..the rapid build-up to peak power is another clue ...the
driver 'automatically' knows when to shift up.
not so on a waterboxer ....really ....the sound, feel and power are
amazingly similar at 2,800 rpm and 4,200 rpm.
And I do think sometimes, when I see a sepearated rod cap with
catastrophic failure,
I wonder if the driver was going 80 mph in 3rd for a while not realizing
it. OK, 65 to 70 ..exaggerating some with the 80 mph figure.
Or, with 2.1's perhaps the rod bolts stretch or loose strenght ..
possibly changing oil clearance on the bearing part of the engine that
gets by far the most stress on it.
I do wonder sometimes.......was it oil /bearing failure leading to total
rod cap and bolt failure ?
or is it just rod bolt failure, possibly due to excessive extended high
load, high rpm operation.
Likely both. I've sure seen diesels do that, and waterboxers. ...mostly
2.1's.
In all cases of engine design, more or less..
the first iteration is the most conservative ....
a 1.9 wbxr has a nice short stoke ...non-stretch rod bolts I have been
told by engine rebuilders ..
and less overall stress, and more smoothness, compared to the 2.1
It would be interesting to know if the 2.1 was in mind when the 1.9
waterboxer was designed in the first place.
Oil pressure is one way to know about bearing and oil pressure health.
Generally ...on any old waterboxer engine ( over 150K miles ) I run an
oil pressure guage on for a while...OP runs between 60 cold at say 2K
rpm, and a low of 6 psi at a hot idle ....with 20W50 engine oil. Or
with 15W40 sometimes.
Same on diesels , roughly.
As far as I'm concerned though ..there is 'no reason' for a rod to go
through the case.
Having that happen would be due to long term neglect and
,insensitivity,, let's say.
or abuse by the DPO. That happens for sure. I have a tiico engine that
blew a rod right through the distributor drive area ..breaking everything.
The other three rods that didn't blow ....the bearings obviously were
badly worn, copper showing, and the cam journals and bearing surfaces on
the cam where trashed too. The next owner had seen really black old oil
in the engine before he bought the van ...just plain ole abuse and
neglect is what did that engine in.
Oil Analysis too ..if anyone is really serious about keeping their
engine alive for a long time..
or they wonder about the real interior condition ..send an oil sample
off for Oil Analysis...
a most useful tool.
Learn a lot ...if there's fuel in the oil, or coolant, or say .high
chromium levels ..
which they'll flag as likely worn rings ...or other metals associated
with bearing wear ..
well worth doing once on a high miles mystery engine ..
if just for the learning aspects even.
I had one customer with a very noisy 'nebulous' volvo engine ..it had
OKish compression etc..
it was just 'nebulously lousy' seeming. Oil Analysis made it very clear
..that engine was basically kaput.
auf vedersein ! ( sp ? )
Scott
www.turbovans.com
On 9/8/2012 1:10 PM, neil n wrote:
> Just recently, I somewhat ignorantly issued a blanket statement to a
> local Vanagon mechanic that the 2.1 rod bolts were prone to failing.
> >From his POV, he was pretty adamant that when the rod(s) blew, it
> wasn't always, or usually, due to poor design of an engine part. He
> suggested that since the WBX is a well balanced engine, people ignore
> the engine sound, tach or speedo, hold it at higher RPM's for too
> long, and "boom". Moreover, when they discover the new engine vent
> hole, they aren't likely to admit to (or know they were) pushing the
> engine too hard before the metallic bongos started.
>
> Since I now own a 2.1, I was curious of the rod bolt issue. His
> opinion balanced out my thoughts on the rod bolt and the overall
> reliability of the 2.1
>
> As I'm learning, determining a given WBX engine's work history and use
> or abuse, is pretty hard to do.
>
> Neil.
>
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Jim Felder <jim.felder@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> With all due respect to your particular experiences, the statement that the
>> Waterboxer wasn't meant for continuous duty would be news to the thousands
>> of owners with 20+ year old Vanagons.
>
>> ..... What ends up getting the
>> Waterboxer is not so much thrown rods or dropped valves but death by
>> overheating.
>
>
> --
> Neil n
>
> 65 kb image Myford Ready For Assembly http://tinyurl.com/64sx4rp
>
> '88 Slate Blue Westy to be named.
>
> '81 VanaJetta 2.0 "Jaco" http://tubaneil.googlepages.com/
>
> Vanagon VAG Gas I4/VR Swap Google Group:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/vanagons-with-vw-inline-4-cylinder-gas-engines
>
| 
