

| Subject: | Re: oil pressure problem |
| From: | John |
| Date: | Sun, 12 Sep 1999 19:32:06 -0400 |
Bob Donalds wrote: > > Michael Y. Feng wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I was driving my 87 Vanagon out of town, and the oil pressure light and > > buzzer came on after driving up a long grade. I immediately pulled over > > and shut off the van. I waited about 10 seconds and started it up again. > > This time no light for the next few minutes as I was almost at my > > destination. As I drove home about the same distance, the oil pressure > > light and buzzer came on again as I got very close to home. I shut it off > > for a few seconds, started it up, and drove a little bit. It came on > > again, though. Then I walked the rest of the way to my girlfriend's house > > to eat dinner. > > > > I actually read my idiot's book by John Muir, and I think the oil pressure > > relief valve may be sticking. In other words, as the engine gets hotter > > the oil never passes through the oil cooler. The oil temperature > > constantly goes up and eventually the oil breaks down. The oil level was > > fine; as a matter of fact I just put in Mobil 1 oil a few days ago. > > There's no oil leaking onto my driveway either. So, my diagnosis is that > > the oil pressure relief valve is probably at fault. > > > > Question 1: do people on the list agree with my diagnosis? > > Question 2: how in the world can I get that oil pressure relief valve off? > > I've tried John Muir's screwdriver with pressure and a vice-grip to no > > avail. Any other suggestions? > > > > TIA, > > > > Mike Feng > > > > P.S. To those of you who answered my oil drain plug question, I finally > > found one in the tenth parts store I called for $2.05. > > Mike > this is something I wrote for the vanagon.com pages its called low oil > pressure at > warm idle > > I have had more than one 2.1 water boxer engine brought in for > rebuilding with > symptoms of low oil pressure. Despite having put in the longest spring > the customer > could find for the pressure relief and adding thicker oil, the engine > still had low oil > pressure at a warm idle. These findings had been confirmed with a oil > pressure gauge. So as I disassembled this engine I was very careful to > check for excessive clearances. > It turns out the clearance between the rod bearing and the crankshaft > rod > journal had gotten to the point that it allowed the oil light to come on > at warm > idle. While the crank usualy measures ok the rod bearing has worn and > the clearance has almost doubled. Unfortunately the more common results > of this problem in the 2.1 is that the rod winds up hanging out of a new > vent hole its has created in the top of the > crankcase. The 1.9 on the other hand is not known for throwing rods > unless it was > run low of coolant or oil. > The one thing that has been consistent in all the 2.1 engines I have > stripped and measured is that the large end of the connecting rods are > no longer > round. With this problem in mind I started paying more attention to > the big ends > of all the water boxer con rods that came into the shop. The first thing > I found was > that the 1.9 and the 2.1 con rods are the same size and length. In fact > they are the > same rods. My inspections showed the 2.1 rods had consistently more > distortion at > the big end. What is the difference between the two applications of the > same con > rod? The stroke is longer in the 2.1 engine so the rod angle is > greater, plus the 2.1 > make more power witch puts more strain on the rods. It�s clear to me > from my > days at the race track that nothing distorts con rods faster than > exceeding the > power curve but the fuel injection has a nifty rev limiter built right > in. This > doesn�t explain why we see rod distortion in one engine and not the > other. Next I > went to the Bentley book to compare the torque specs. The 1.9 rod has a > reusable > rod bolt that call for a torque of 33-ft. lb. and the 2.1 rod bolt has > torque of 22-ft. lb. plus � turn. The manual also says not to reuse con > rod bolts on the 2.1 engines. > The conclusions > > 1) NEVER reuse the 2.1 rod bolts > > 2) NEVER reuse the rods without having the big ends rebuilt ever! > > 3) NEVER rely on Plastagauge alone it does not always show if it�s out > of round > or if the cap is shifted. > > 4) Consider rebuilding your 2.1 waterboxer engine when the heads start > to leak if it�s got a hundred thousand or more miles on it. Keep in > mind the core may not be > rebuildable if you wait longer. There is no doubt the increased rod > bearing clearance is one of the major reason for the 2.1 engine > catastrophic failures. > . > More than one person that has told me that they got only six thousand > miles > from the 2.1 long block they rebuilt before a rod blew through the case. > They also told > me they reused the rod bolts and the rods had not been measured or > rebuilt. These facts speak for themselves. I see this problem on a > daily basis and thought I should pass on my observations. > hope this helps > Bob Donalds > Boston Engine Exchange > www.bostonengine.com Bravo Bob ! You really know what you're talking about !!!!!!! Regards, JP
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »