Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 2015 21:13:48 -0500
Reply-To:     Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Power & MPG Summer/Winter
Comments: To: Dan N <dn92610@GMAIL.COM>
In-Reply-To:  <CAFdLW6mZjCw2Kr=6ir3MXfx-zOEG8aPJZHY-03MSquTGv7zjQg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

So why did the 88 engine need a rebuild? Maybe you got lucky with the 85. Seriously there are many variables that can affect the life of an engine and to some extent there is a luck factor. Just one overheating event or bad fuel or an engine management problem can change everything. The 1.9 and 2.1 have the same size bearing journals. The 2.1 does have a longer stroke, produces a bit more power so there is slightly more strain and the longer stroke also causes an increase in the rod angle. The 2.1 does put more heat into the oil thus the oil cooler. The 2.l also has a slightly improved main bearing design with separate thrust plates for the flywheel side. The 2.1 vans also have bit more load as most have power steering and air conditioning. Anytime a 1.9 van comes my way needing an engine I try to get a 2.1 in there. 

Dennis



-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf Of Dan N
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 9:00 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Power & MPG Summer/Winter

I have no idea ... except that my mechanic, a specialist in vanagon engine said that the main crank is thicker and stronger

I wish I know more... I had an 1985 with a 1.9 that went for 260K miles before I sold it...

I had a 1988 with a 2.1 that need a rebuild at 140K miles