Don, I'm no Vanagon purist. I have 3 right now that have engines never
installed by VW in Vanagons. 2 are inline 4 cyls and 1 is an inline 5
cyl, all VW motors. I love them all but I don't fool myself into
thinking they will outlast an original 2.1. Plenty of 2.1 motors make it
to 150-200k without major engine work. Most of the dead ones I have seen
died because the owner/driver ignored needed service too long or cheaped
out by taking them to Jippy Lube or such.

I have a couple still powered by 2.1 waterboxers as well. One will
become a turbo diesel next week.

Mark

Don Hanson wrote:

> Whoa!
>   I knew that statement about waterboxers being  a 'weak design', when made
> on the Vangaon list, would bring some heat..I have my flame suit on anyway,
> just in case.
>   No dissrespect meant to anyone about their motors..Sheesh!  Right there in
> my post, it says "I've never owned one".  I have had every other VW
> imaginable, of the older models.  Yah, the waterboxer is probably the most
> dependable stock motor ever put into a rear engined van...So that makes
> it...whatever. ................................
>   As for the diesel motors..I rode extensively in a friend's Canadian diesel
> Westy before I even decided I wanted a van.  The Westy package decided me on
> the style, but I did not want a vehicle that was so very very slow.  Perhaps
> his was extra slow, but not from what I hear from other diesel owners..That
> particular van was well maintained and ran right, but it was dangerous to
> others, who are not expecting a slow moving vehicular obstruction...
>   Didn't mean to piss off the Vanagon purists..Sorry..
>   Don Hanson
>
>