Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 20:49:53 -0400
Reply-To: Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: 2.2 into a 1.9 case
In-Reply-To: <CAJPo2u3xM=r2ZR=5F+0xaRvcGiE2Lq-Z3OpUVhCxcuVRawRgbw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
There are many reasons for an engine to fail and there are differences
between a "failure" and the effects of normal wear. This becomes key in the
warranty world. For example, most extended warranties including those 10
year/100K touted by some manufacturers do not cover normal wear. They are
explicit to defects in materials or workmanship. For the most part if it
goes any length of time it wasn't defective or so the argument will go! As
for VW rebuild program failing I would like to see some real proof of that.
Most engine replacement failures are the result of poor installations or the
original cause(s) of the failure not being corrected. That even includes the
air cooled engines.
As you go into the industrial or even the truck-Bus world, engines get rated
based on a number of factors. For the Caterpillar engine in my motorhome,
the maintenance schedule includes overhaul considerations at the "B50" life
of 200,000 miles, 4,000 hours of operation, or my favorite 20,000 gallons of
fuel consumed. The "B50" life means half these engines won't go that far and
half will go further. Engine life is also related to the work performed
which is related to the fuel consumed. So an inline 4 that will go 200K in a
Jetta getting 30 mpg may only go 100k in a Vanagon doing 15 mpg.
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of
Angus Gordon
Sent: Monday, October 7, 2013 4:10 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: 2.2 into a 1.9 case
Interesting, especially with two waterboxers torn apart in my barn at the
moment! What are my odds?
I could also point out that the failure rate for every engine is 100%,
unless you specify some sort of service life or overhaul period.
Angus
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Jim Akiba <syncrolist@bostig.com> wrote:
> I like that GoWesty gives stats on their engines failures, it is
> really an important bit of info for customers.
>
> "There are inherent risks in undertaking what is already the
> complicated task of overhauling a VW waterboxer engine-even in the
> "stock," original form. VW's own waterboxer overhaul program in Canada
> ended miserably with an overall failure rate of close to 50%. By
> contrast, only around 5% of GoWesty-built engines have experienced
> some sort of issue-which is stellar by comparison. However, when you
> are talking about total engines built in the thousands, even a
> relatively small percentage of issues produces some extremely unhappy
> and loud people, many of whom feel the need to spread the bad news.
> The other 95% with no engine issues whatsoever are mostly... silent.
> Such is human nature, right?"
>
> http://www.gowesty.com/library_article.php?id=1452
>
> Jim
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Stuart MacMillan
> <stuartmacm@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > GoWesty warrants their 2200 1.9 case engine for 48,000 miles or 48
> months.
> > You should be able to do at least as well, and keep us posted.
> > Follow
> their
> > guidelines as well:
> > http://www.gowesty.com/library_article.php?id=860
> >
> > Stuart
> > '85 Westy, considering engine options while the 1.9 still runs!
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On
> > Behalf
> Of
> > George Laubach
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 4:49 AM
> > To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> > Subject: Re: 2.2 into a 1.9 case
> >
> > Thanks for the catch, Scott. Not drive shaft, I should have stated
> > crank shaft....I appreciate correct verbiage as well. As they say
> > in the
> birding
> > world, you're only as good as your last mis-identified bird....
> >
> > Re coolant changes and radiator, new rad 4,000 miles ago (10 months)
> > and
> new
> > coolant since May, and new "half pipes" from TK. I can imagine that
> > the engine may tax the cooling system a bit more (needle right over
> > LED and steady). I run Valvoline 20W 50 and premium gas.
> >
> > Has anyone else on the list done this conversion? I'm kind of
> interested in
> > hearing any counterpoints to doing this conversion; not necessarily
> > what would be a better motor option, but why this is not a good
> > idea. Total engine investment (engine parts and labor) = $2500.
> >
> > Skip
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > On Jul 24, 2012, at 10:34 PM, Scott Daniel - Turbovans
> > <scottdaniel@turbovans.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I wouldn't worry about the studs in a waterboxer ( other than
> >> corrosion from lack of coolant changes getting to them.)
> >>
> >> sure, air-cooled VW's had chronic case stud problems, but never in
> >> a
> > waterboxer that I have heard of.
> >>
> >> Not sure what is meant by a 'driveshaft' in an 84 Westy. It's not
> >> AWD
> or
> > anything.
> >> rear axles ?
> >> camshaft ?
> >>
> >> The heat load on the cooling system will be more than that
> >> produced by
> > tired 1.9 that came out of course.
> >> If the radiator is original , you may think about that.
> >>
> >> Just be nice to it and if it's going to hang together it probably will.
> >> 1,000 miles without any real engine issues is a good sign.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/24/2012 7:35 PM, George Laubach wrote:
> >>> Interesting, so extra stress on the head studs. I reused the
> >>> heads
> (and
> > studs), "refurbished" by the machine shop.
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPad
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 24, 2012, at 9:25 PM, "Tom Hargrave" <thargrav@hiwaay.net>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I don't know about the water cooled engines but pushing a set of
> >>>> air cooled cases could make the studs that fasten the cylinders &
> >>>> heads to the cases strip. We used to install a set of "case
> >>>> savers" in anything that made horsepower.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks, Tom Hargrave
> >>>> www.stir-plate.com
> >>>> www.towercooler.com
> >>>> www.kegkits.com
> >>>> www.grow-sun.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM] On
> >>>> Behalf Of George Laubach
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 8:59 PM
> >>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> >>>> Subject: 2.2 into a 1.9 case
> >>>>
> >>>> Now that I've driven subject for 1,000 miles or so with
> >>>> satisfaction, learning as I go about timing, rocker arm
> >>>> adjustment, compression, and brake, clutch, and coolant bleeding,
> >>>> etc., etc., etc., I was curious about any potential hazards that
> >>>> I should be paranoid about as it relates to this arrangement of a
> >>>> 2200cc piston/cylinder into a 1.9L case ('84 Westy) (longest
> >>>> sentence I've ever written). Along with the new P/C's I also
> >>>> installed new
> > driveshaft, connecting rods and cam (and new lifters).
> >>>>
> >>>> What might your wisdom conject? What might I worry about? I was
> >>>> thinking things like, well, the air flow, fuel injection, and
> >>>> cooling system was designed for a 1.9, but now is "managing" a
> >>>> 2.2L system. Maybe the larger system puts an extra strain on the
> >>>> components? I've seen no outward symptoms that I can correlate to
> >>>> an
> > "imbalance".
> >>>>
> >>>> So, care to wonder, perhaps with more wisdom or experience than
> >>>> this writer/driver?
> >>>>
> >>>> Skip
> >>>>
> >>>> -----
> >>>> No virus found in this message.
> >>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >>>> Version: 10.0.1382 / Virus Database: 2437/5152 - Release Date:
> >>>> 07/24/12
> >>>>
> >>
>
| 
