Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 12:55:44 -0600
Reply-To: Blue Eyes <lvlearn@MCI2000.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From: Blue Eyes <lvlearn@MCI2000.COM>
Organization: Vexation Computer
Subject: Unnecessary negativism
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I responded to Mark directly, rather than through the List, in which I said,
>"If you heard a rod knocking, you'd pull the pan and
>change the bearings rather than waiting for it to break wouldn't you? Why
>react to this (Syncro transmission warning sound differently?"
Mark good naturedly responded to my private note by answering it through
the List.
Joshua Van Tol -- jjvantol@lear.csp.ee.memphis.edu
in one of a whole bunch of generally negative postings said ~
"Except that by the time you can hear a rod knocking, it's already too late.
By that time the crank throw will be worn undersize, and the rod may be
distorted."
Jeeze, silly me. I'll have to go back in a time machine and not repair a
knocking
Chevy for a friend that way. And while I'm at it, I'll have to have a stern
talk with
that motor. It went over 80,000 miles that I know of before he sold it
without
giving bottom end problems, but maybe the next owner did. If you read the
history of how and why bearings are made as they are, you'll see discussion of
how they intentionally designed yield capacity into bearings to accept
scratches
rather than forcing a particulate to scratch the hardened journal. The same
thing is true of clearance impacts. My advice on that particular put down, is
to
leave some wiggle room in your fault finding for happier realities. As you
stated it, your comment sounded patronizing, overbearing, and yet it was flat
wrong. If the first warning bearing noises cause a timely response, their
replacement often offers a lot more functional life without a complete
rebuild.
Mark publicly stated in his note that he DID hear bearing noises. Yet
Joshua went on to say,
"As for transmissions, I doubt it would be of much value to preemptively
replace the bearings. If you listen carefully, you'll hear bearing noise long
before the thing grenades." Speaking of listening carefully, did you listen
to Mark's statement before you went public with that comment?
Another of Joshua's notes says:
****copy follows****
>Talk to me. What do you see as the costs and benefits to this kind of
>approach? Would it screw up the interior too much?
>John
Well, if you don't need your rear seat, and you don't mind cutting a hole
in your van the size of a washing machine, then it's no problem. :-)
Seriously, it would mean a lot of fabrication, and you'd lose a whole bunch
of interior space. It would be much less work to modify the transmission to
allow the differential to be flipped.
Get out a tape measure, you'll soon find it's pretty unworkable.
****end copy****
I addressed the fact that this speculative proposal would require a new
removable access cover toward the front of the rear axle equivalent to the
factory opening that's currently behind it. Since the factory opening is
"the size of a washing machine," naturally the one I proposed would be
too. Why the put down patronizing negative evaluation of the new cover
I had already said would be needed?
Obviously I already knew what I proposed would require some fabrication.
I outlined it. I don't have as many fingers as the number of transplants I
performed before some List members were born. Lighten up please. But
again you flatly state "you'd lose a whole bunch of interior space." You mean
that installing the transaxle/motor package in the reverse direction would
cause it to project further forward of the axle center line than it would
project backward from the axle center line if it were conventionally mounted?
If that's not what you're saying, then I think the comments in my proposal
addressing interior space still fit well. I happen to be at another of my
places
over a thousand miles from my parked Westy, so I can't run out and throw
a tape at this, but judging by photos and drawings of the rear seat position
compared to the real axle center line, I still think it might be workable. If
someone would measure an Audi A6 5 cylinder TDI diesel setup with the 6
speed trans (the lowest rpm/mph option I've found), I would love to learn it's
minimum axle to motor end projection so we can compare it to the rear seat
space. You flatly stated, "you'd lose a whole bunch of interior space." More
than I already described in my proposal? Please share your actual
measurements so others can know this too. Where did you gain access to the
needed measurements of an Audi A6 140 hp. TDI diesel with 6 speed since
they have never been imported into the US or Canada? Surely not in
Memphis. Yet you flatly state, "Get out a tape measure, you'll soon find it's
pretty unworkable." If this is based on facts you know to be true, please
post
those measurements. I did ask for them in my note. But if it's just based
on
speculative opinion, why are you so damned sure that you don't even leave
the possibility open for reality being different from your speculations?
To the best of my knowledge, that proposal is the ONLY Vanagon transplant
that comes close to matching the world's lowest BSFC engine series at its
lowest BSFC rpm range with typical Interstate highway cruise speeds. That
implies to me that every other approach would give inferior mpg and lack
other benefits I mentioned. That's why I proposed it despite its
difficulties.
All these assertions are based on FACTS that can easily be verified without
even leaving your I-net connected computer, yet I stated my conclusions
as only my opinions, rather than as flat statements of fact. Do you see the
difference? I have yet to see anyone contest the benefits of optimally
matching the world's best auto engine BSFC to cruise rate through gearing.
He gave others in that same note series what appeared to me to be
patronizing put downs. He even attacked Robert Alexander's obvious
humor for technical merit. Get a grip. Surely you don't want to be known
as Mr. Quibbler, or the Black Cloud that follows Linus, the Rain Man or
something like that, do you? Maybe you were having a bad day, but if
you review the barrage of notes you sent out in that group Joshua,
even you may agree that your were in a "dog kicking mood" or something
was eating you.. I felt the same about how you offered only negative
feedback to others. It formed an obvious pattern. I have empathy for dogs.
Please don't kick them either. I wish I had felt responding to this privately
would have been fitting, but you went after others. Feedback, based on
negatively or positively impacting FACTS would be welcome. But when
it's virtually all negative and based on speculative opinion, it doesn't feel
good. Stop attacking and I'll stop defending. Peace.
John
