Date:         Fri, 22 Oct 1999 18:05:57 -0700
Reply-To:     "T.P. Stephens" <doktortim@ROCKISLAND.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         "T.P. Stephens" <doktortim@ROCKISLAND.COM>
Subject:      Re: The much maligned 1.9 head on 2.1 engine
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>To: Vantaztik@AOL.COM
>From: "T.P. Stephens" <doktortim@rockisland.com>
>Subject: Re: The much maligned 1.9 head on 2.1 engine
>In-Reply-To: <0.933cc05b.2542568d@aol.com>
>
>At 08:08 PM 10/22/99 EDT, you wrote:
>>Thank you to the few who have sent positive and sensible responses.  But my
>>oh my, so many negative responses.  I guess some of us that grew up as free
>>thinkers with the old split-windows have now become the Pat Buchanan
>>generation, condemning anything different out of hand without regard for the
>>facts.
>
>There are two types of people in the world. Those that work to improve
things,
>and those who live vicarilously off people who work to improve things.
>
>>1.  1.9 heads are identical to 2.1 heads, the only difference is the squench
>>area, which gives the higher compression.
> still within the specs of the Bentley manual
>
>Dead right, good idea.
>
>>2.  Head longevity:  My heads should last just as long as anybody's.  What
>>kills the Vanagon heads is corrosion and overheating.  I have the lower
>>thermostat on the radiator fan I am using non-phosphate
>>antifreeze to prevent corrosion.
>
>Dead right, and still in spec.
>
>>3.  Stress on the lower end:
>
>The bottom end on these motors is excellant. If it never saw dirty oil it
>would very likly still be within spec. at 300k. They gave us results
>El Grande here.
>
>>4.  After market exhausts:
>
>He ain't just agonna run down to the FLAPS for the wizband exhaust.
>HE DISCRIMINATING. Being selective and doing some experimenting for
>us. I hope he was able to get data on these pipe from an indepent
>test. If he keeps good notes, which I'm sure he does, were going to
>get some data.
>
>>5.  Proper oil:  After break-in, Castrol 5/50 is the best there is.  If you
>>use any oil with a top rating of 30, you are risking thinning and break down
>>of lubrication in hard use, or if the engine overheats.  I will also use
>>Slick50.
>
>As to Castrol, there are at least five others that produce the same top notch
>results. I won't venture to say which one is best. I'd have to see some data.
>I could't disagree more about the teflon (Slick50). Just ask DuPont.
>LubroMoly Molitminum (sp?) is what I might try, after full break-in.
>
>>6.  For the person who suggested I can't tell how powerful a Vanagon should
>>feel, I have been driving VW busses and vans for almost 30 years.  I know
>>when one goes faster than new, and the one I drove had extra power.
>
>Seat of pants opinion is valid only if you understand how the psyche plays
>with us. And that is possable with practice. Dyno would document real data.
>
>What he is doing is ENHANCING SPECIFICATIONS. I smell success.
>
>
>
>
Doktor Tim
Maintenance Repair and Restoration of European Vehicles
San Juan Island, WA