Date:         Tue, 3 Mar 1998 09:57:18 -0600
Reply-To:     Fred Younger <f1y@CSM1.DOIT.WISC.EDU>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <Vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         Fred Younger <f1y@CSM1.DOIT.WISC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: different exhaust Q? studs or bolts?
Comments: To: vanagon@vanagon.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

I've replaced the exhaust pipes on my 85 GL more times than I've wanted to.
I don't blame anyone for putting bolts in instead of studs.  The studs
often come out, they get chewed up and unusable, they're harder to find in
the right size, and they're a pain to put in.  They are handy for holding
the pipes in place while you're tightening them down.  Is there any other
downside to bolts?

---------------
Fred Younger
f1y@csm1.doit.wisc.edu


>
> >This exhaust thread got me thinking. My relatively new to me 83.5 Westy had
> a
> >rebuilt water cooled engine that was "installed" by a DPOs "mechanic."
> >
> >On my bus the exhaust is bolted to the heads with bolts. It would seem to
> me
> >that the heads would correctly have studs with nuts holding the exhaust in
>
>
> On 2.1's both are used, studs on one side of the head (and engine as it ends
> up, looking from front or back) bolts on the other.  Studs by the flat
> coolant flange not the big nipple.
>
> Funny thing on the '85 I think it is mostly bolts, but previous idiot
> mechanic may have done that.  look at Bently
>
> John
> vwbus@mindspring.com
>