

| Subject: | Rebuild? was: Model/year recommandation |
| From: | Rob S. |
| Date: | Thu, 9 Oct 2003 01:57:40 -0400 |
What exactly goes wrong that requires every vanagon to have an engine rebuild done around 100K miles? My 82 is original un-rebuilt motor (as far as I know) and it runs out VERY strong. with 92,000 and a broken odometer... should I be ready to spend for a rebuild soon, regardless of how good it runs now? should I not fix the odometer so that it never reaches that dreaded 100K mark (where the engine will instantly destroy itself)? -Sealover On Thursday, October 9, 2003, at 12:19 AM, Art McGinn wrote: > jp: as a longtime bus owner and later a vanagon owner, i have a very > strong bias against the water-cooled vanagon and a very strong > preference > for the air-cooled van, although the latter are getting harder to > find. the > waterboxer (water-cooled) has inherent heating problems, as most the > posts > on this list indicate. an air-cooled vanagon in reasonable shape with > a > recently rebuilt engine and a recently rebuilt transmission (rebuilt > engine > is necessary since the most recent was new in 1983) could run for many > years > with minimum trouble if reasonably maintained. good luck on whatever > you > choose. cheers, art mcginn, san fran, '82 westy (ex-'82 vanagon, > ex-'68 bus) >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »