Date:         Tue, 5 Mar 1996 14:32:18 -0500
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         SyncroHead@aol.com
Subject:      Re: No Water here, Sir! Was: 'nasty' rumor! 

In a message dated 96-03-04 22:53:40 EST, MIKE.WHITE@law.utah.edu (Mike
White) writes:

>Based on the experiences shared by members with Vanagon's and EV's, I 
>could never be corageous enough to consider one of these as a primary 
>driver.
>
>The problems shared by many members describe inherent design flaws 
>with the wasserboxer, which would make anyone moving from an air-
>cooled VW to a water-based one shiver!  
>
>
I think that you're overstating the problems with the wasserboxer here.  I
have two as "daily drivers" and I thinhk the reliability has been fine.
 Here's the signifiicant repaire doe to date:

My wife's 88 (with 110,000 miles):

1. Replaced heads & waterpump at about 70k miles.  Extended warranty paid for
the water pump.  VW paid for 1/2 of the head replacement.

That's it.  The whole list of engine repairs.  I didn't even get the extended
warranty to pay for itself!

My 87 Syncro (with 145,000 miles):
1. Replaced the heads at about 100,000 miles.
2. Replaced the water pump around 115,000 miles.
3. Replace the entire engine with a used one at 140,000 miles.  I have not
opened the original engine yet to determine the damage.  The ouil light came
on & the engine made bad sounds befor turning it off.  I suspect worn out
bearings.

Given this, the only repairs that seem to be inherient to the water cooled
design appear to be the replacement of heads and water pumps.  An air cooled
engine would not likely do any better at getting it's bearings to last more
than 140,000 miles.  

Overall, I think that the additional power (68HP?? vs 90HP) and heating
capability of the wasserboxer is certainly an improvement.  I realize that
the engine has room for improvement, but I don't think that anyone needs to
be "courageous" to rely on a wasserboxer as a daily driver.

Jim Davis
87 GL Syncro
88 GL Wolfsburg