

| Subject: | Re: More on rods and bolts/2.1 in '83.5-'85 |
| From: | Pat Dooley |
| Date: | Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:54:06 -0000 |
Me, not being the waterboxer expert, would still say your mechanic is full of sh*t. > -----Original Message----- > From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com]On Behalf > Of MOST,DAVID > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 3:40 PM > To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM > Subject: Re: More on rods and bolts/2.1 in '83.5-'85 > > > REgarding putting a 2.1 into an 83.5-85 vanagon, a mechanic I spoke to > yesterday suggested that this was not a great idea because the cooling > system in these earlier models is not as efficient. He said that excess > heat would be created by the 2.1, and the 1.9 cooling system is not > designed to handle it (I'm assuming that we're talking about an earlier > water cooled vanagon in which only the internals of the 1.9 engine have > been modified to make it a 2.1). > > Is the mechanic wrong on this point? > > David > > > On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Stuart MacMillan wrote: > > > I took what was left of my 2.1 to my rebuilder, Jerry at Northwest > > Connecting Rod, and after close examination we determined that I had > > "spun a bearing". This means that the rod bearing shell literally wore > > away, leaving steel on steel, not a good thing. According to Jerry, at > > high speeds this will generate tremendous heat, even to the point of the > > metal becoming red hot with sparks flying off. The heat then will > > either cause the bolts to stretch, nuts to loosen or the rod or bolt to > > break, leading to catastrophic breakdown, which ever comes first. And, > > indeed, the parts of the rod I recovered were "blued" from extreme heat! > > > > I thought he might get a couple of rods out of it he could rebuild, but > > he tossed the whole wretched mess in the scrap barrel, salvaging only > > the flywheel and pulley. Jerry is my kind of guy, do things right the > > first time, and don't cut any corners! > > > > So, perhaps the stretch bolts themselves are not the problem, but > > excessive bearing wear is the true culprit. That means scrupulous > > attention to maintenance coupled with careful oil pressure monitoring is > > the key to longevity for this engine, just as it is for any other. > > > > This engine works very hard to push our nearly two ton rigs around, and > > 150,000 miles is still the recommended point to rebuild the engine. > > > > So, I'll reiterate my recommendation: If your engine is between 100,000 > > and 150,000 miles, install the gauge to make an assessment of the > > bearing condition, and then monitor pressure trends if things are within > > limits. If you are over 150,000 miles, you can do the same, but better > > yet, rebuild the engine now and install the gauge on the new one. > > > > Happy motoring! > > > > P.S.: I picked up the new engine yesterday, what a thing of beauty! > > New everything for $2500. I also had Jerry install the 1.25 rockers > > with swivel adjusters and do a three angle valve grind as per Robert > > Lilly's recommendation, which is all I had time to do. Jerry also likes > > these mods, he keeps these parts in stock and also has a three angle > > valve machine in his shop. > > -- > > Stuart MacMillan > > Seattle > > > > '84 Vanagon Westfalia w/2.1 engine > > '65 MGB (Driven since 1969) > > '74 MGB GT (Restoring) > > > > Assisting on Restoration: > > '72 MGB GT (Daughter's) > > '64 MGB (Son's) > > > > Parts cars: > > '68 & '73 MGB, '67 MGB GT > > >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »