

| Subject: | Re: The Better Waterboxer Motor....the simpler 1.9L or the 2.1L with all ofthose additional hoses....reliability?...power? |
| From: | Chris Stann |
| Date: | Tue, 23 Apr 2002 08:43:21 -0500 |
>It seems that the 1.9L motor. with 82 bhp , while less powerful than the >2.1L w/ 95 bhp.....is alot less complicated with coolant hoses, failure >prone waterpumps and thermostats...... How do you plan on bumping up the displacement? A stroker crank? The only advantage of a 1.9 over a 2.1 that I am aware of is that 2.1 uses stretch rod bolts which tend to, well, stretch over time and cause costly engine self-destruction. Chris, '85 Westy.
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »