Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1998 11:07:07 -0400
Reply-To:     Patrick Dooley <pdooley@GTE.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <Vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         Patrick Dooley <pdooley@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: "Extraordinarily bad engines"
Comments: To: Marilyn Nelson-Ehret <ehretrm@seanet.com>
Comments: cc: Vanagon@VANAGON.COM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

-----Original Message-----
From: Marilyn Nelson-Ehret <ehretrm@seanet.com>
To: Patrick Dooley <pdooley@GTE.NET>
Cc: Vanagon@VANAGON.COM <Vanagon@VANAGON.COM>
Date: Tuesday, April 14, 1998 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: "Extraordinarily bad engines"


>We have 126,000 on our 90 Syncro Westy on original engine and no leaks
except
>occasionally from hoses.  Roger
>
>Patrick Dooley wrote:
>
>> >Hey guys,
>> >
>> >Thanks for telling me how bad the waterboxer engine in my 1986 GL is.  I
>> >guess that is why I had to replace my first engine at only 170,000
miles.
>> > I once thought that was pretty good for a plain old VW.
>>
>> Maybe someone could organize a list survey.  Use 100,000 miles as an
>> acceptable engine lifespan.  Lets see how many wb's have made it past
100k
>> w/o headgaskets.  The results would be interesting.  Personally, if I
could
>> get 170k out of a rebuilt wb, I certainly wouldn't be screwing around
with
>> engine swaps.
>
>
>
>
Sorry to be so particular, but please be careful when snipping text.  For
example, I wrote the second paragraph above, not the first.  Yes, that does
mean I started the engine survey thing, sorry if it inconvenienced anyone.
Anyway, I am doing an engine swap now partially based upon the survey
results.  I haven't put ANY miles on a WB motor as the first paragraph
would indicate.  My van was purchased dead.  My point, while this snip was
not damaging, others could be.  Pardon my preaching.
-PSD.