Hello Volks!

My front heater blower fan has been doing those squeals for quite some
time, and I think it's time to take care of it before the bearing really
gives up the ghost...:-(
Has anyone else tried this procedure successfully? Any pictures to share,
or maybe post-conclusions or improvements to the described procedure?
Tnx, TM

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 10:58:06 -0600, Larry Alofs <lalofs@RCN.COM> wrote:

>If you want to try lubricating your Vanagon's front heater fan without
>removing the dash, etc. you need a reasonably small video camera.  I'll
>describe what I used and another option.  For either, you will need a
>monitor or TV that accepts standard NTSC video, typically thru an RCA
>type jack.
>
>The camera I used came from Allelectronics.com (item VC-360). Click on
>"cameras" to see various offerings.  It's a bare board pin-hole type,
>1.2 inches square for $49.  I wanted something small and cheap.  They
>now have a few other cameras that may also be suitable and less trouble.
>   The advantage of the "pinhole" type is that it is already focused
>reasonably well at all distances.  With this camera I had to put it in a
>small plastic box for protection and find a suitable power supply and
>connector.  Having done that, it worked well and the resolution was
>sufficient.  Since it does not have any built-in light source, I used a
>tail lite bulb dangled into the air intake and manipulating it as well
>as the camera and the lubricating probe was rather challenging.
>   About the time I was doing all this, I found that Harbor Freight had
>a small camera for $30.  I ordered one to see how well it would work,
>since the price was so low.  At Harborfreight.com it is item 47546.  In
>catalog 744-k it is item 47546-1rzh also at $30.  In some catalogs it is
>priced at $40 instead of $30.  The advantages of this camera besides the
>price are: built-in IR LED illumination, power supply included, small
>weatherproof case, 80 ft of cable!.  The disadvantage of this camera is
>that it uses a conventional lens which seems to be focused at infinity
>and therefore produces a rather blurry image when trying to view a fan
>at a distance of 6" or a foot.  After I received this camera, I pulled
>off my van's grill, etc. again and stuck it in there just to see how
>well it would work.  The built-in illumination was bright enough and
>very convenient, but when I bought it close to the fan the image was
>blurry enough that it would have been difficult to use if I hadn't
>already been familiar with what I expected to see.
>   I got this camera out again and played with it again today.  I found
>that by holding a small cheap plastic magnifying glass against the front
>of the camera, it would give sharp images of things at a distance of 6
>to 12 inches.  I tried a few different lenses and it seems that
>something with a focal length of 2" to 3 1/2 " would work with 2 1/2 to
>3 " best.  To check the focal length of a converging lens: in a dimly
>lit room let light from a window or other light source that is at least
>30 ft away come thru the lens and hit a plain white surface a few inches
>from the lens.  Adjust the distance between the lens and the "screen"
>until you see a clear image of the window frame, etc.  The distance
>between the lens and the image is approximately the focal length.
>(I admit it, I'm a physics teacher.)
>   Anyway, knowing what I know now, I would get the Harbor Freight
>camera and tape a small magnifying glass on the front of it, but YMMV.
>
>Have fun,
>Larry A.