Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 10:55:11 -0700
Reply-To: Old Volks Home <oldvolkshome@GMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Old Volks Home <oldvolkshome@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: several questions about my 1984 westy
In-Reply-To: <44D530EC.9010208@charter.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
When I bought my 84 Westy Automatic for the princely sum of $1000 in 1996,
the owner indicated it wasn't running and would make very loud noises when
the starter was engaged. When I flat-bedded it home, I opened the engine
cover and promptly saw a nice hole the size of an average fist. Definitely
thrown rod. In fact when I pulled the engine and pulled all of the FI and
other stuff off, it was even more pronounced than what I could see (the
plenum covered the rest of the outside damage. After pulling the engine
apart, I found the camshaft in 3 pieces, a very bent rod and a piston in
several hundred small pieces, amongst other damage.
Fortunately, the person I bought it from had a complete (if brief) service
history during his tenure as well as the previous owner before and the
original owner, both of which had kept meticulous service history records
back to the date of delivery. Very well maintained up to the point of
engine detonation <grin>. I am the 4th owner.
Oh yeah, it was an original 1.9 with 87,000 miles on the engine. I think I
have some polaroids laying around, probably in my "deep" storage. If I find
them, I'll post them to my site.
--
Jim Thompson
84 Westfalia 2.1 "Ole Putt"
73 K Ghia Coupe "Denise"
72 411 Station Wagon "Pug"
oldvolkshome@gmail.com
http://www.oldvolkshome.com
**********************************
On 8/5/06, John Rodgers <inua@charter.net> wrote:
>
> In my experience the 1.9L is a little tougher than the 2.1L wbx. I
> personally have never seen a 1.9L with a rod through the case, but I
> have seen several 2.1L engines with holes in the case. In my own case I
> had an '85 GL with 205,000 original miles on the original 1.9L engine.
> Used a little oil, but otherwise strong. On my 88 GL the 2.1L engine
> blew around 89,000 miles. One of the reasons for the apparent weakness
> in the 2.1L is the rod end bolts on factory engines were stretch type
> bolts and the rod end tended to go oval in time, thus allowing a loss of
> oil pressure, after which the engine would seize and throw a rod through
> the case. This didn't happen on 19.L engines. I think most good shops
> eliminate the stretch bolts in modern rebuilds, but I would surely
> follow up on it if any major engine work was done.
>
> Regards,
>
> John Rodgers
> 88 GL Driver
>
> Geo & Kathleen Hahn wrote:
> > Ronald Michaels wrote:
> >
> >> Would anyone care to compare the 1.9 engine to the stock 2.1 engine
> >> and to the GoWesty 2.2 engine, and to any other rebuilding options.
> >> I could use the hill climbing power here in East Tennessee. Long
> >> life is useful as well.
> >>
> >
> > Ron --
> >
> > A couple of months ago I replaced my 1.9L with the GoWesty rebuild that
> > takes the same block out to 2.2L. Noticeably more power, still get good
> > gas mileage (low 20s). I live at 7,000' but I'm just 16 miles outside
> > of a city that is about 2,200' and my PO Box is at 8,200' so anywhere I
> > go begins and ends with a 'hill'. Never really struggled before but
> > it's even better now.
> >
> > Way to soon to comment on long term results -- took one short trip
> > (~1000 miles) and everything seemed perfect. Will take a longer trip
> > next month with some drives above 12,000' so we'll see how that goes.
> >
> > Geo H
>
|