Anybody ever tote up what 'proper maintenance' per 'DM' costs?  If,
including the time spent doing or getting it done, this is less than a new
engine, it's worth it.  If you enjoy maintenance, it's worth it.  If you
really can't afford to go out of service unexpectedly [break down], it's
worth it.

Otherwise, it's not worth it.  Do the stuff that is worth it [like the
proper coolant [relatively cheap] and flushing the brake system annually or
biennially [SP?] [consequences of no brakes relatively expensive].  And run
it till it busts.  Unless of course your love for your wasserleaker knows no
bounds, in which case don't buy a KIA.

FWIW

Mike
'85 Westy [And I hope it gets me to the Thanksgiving feast.  Happy
Thanksgiving to all!]

----- Original Message -----
From: T.P. Stephens <doktortim@ROCKISLAND.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 1999 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: Wasserleaker Head Job - What am I getting myself in for

> At 09:44 AM 11/25/1999 -0500, you wrote:
> >As for special tools, only a torque wrench if you are only doing the head
> >gaskets and don't have to mess with cylinders.
>
> And do note that a clicker type wrench won't do, a beam type is specified
> for reasons determined by the Neanderthal Engineers. Things like, long
> special alloy steel head studs with special sealant under the head nuts
> while torquing, just off the top uff mein noggin, above the brow ridge.
>
>  In my case, the
> >wasserleaker's heads were OK, a bad coolant pipe had been the culprit for
> >the coolant leak.
>
> I must suggest the foundation of the problem is not the cooroded pipe, but
> the source of the coorosion. Improper and/or inadequate maintainence for
> desired result and/or combined with non-spec coolant.
>
> But while I was in there, I found that one of the pistons
> >was about to self-destruct, necessitating the more indepth teardown.
>
> Due to overheating because you didn't monitor your coolant tank and noted
> more addition of coolant than has been required in your past rates, known
> by your past notes and thereby noted a leak was progressing somewhere by
> empirical DATA, therefore, knew to find the mystery leak before you
> billowed steam and cracked or holed a piston. The coorosion founded upon
> inadequet or non spec procedures is again the foundation of the problem,
> rather than enhanced given spec and procedures desugned obtain the desired
> results of no coorosion ever getting started.
>
> When I do this procedure, WasserLeaker heads, I have 2 legal pad sizes
> pages of notes by the time I'm done. It starts with a complete patient
> history of past parts/supplies/services documented. That's before I do the
> estimate for the parent (owner). I look for the gaps in verified
> maintenance, any recent or past procedures, spec or non spec fluids/parts.
> I discriminate.
>
> If I see a past compression test listed, but no figures, it provides not
> the data that would have value. If I see one that shows 135/125/130/120,
> they need better guages or need to learn the concept of interpolation or
> more probably both. But poor data is better than no data. I can look to
> more of their invoices in this or any other patient history and know at
> least compromised data is available. If I see also they use polypropalene
> glycol, I know they are not associated with spec fluid or don't much care
> about spec. It is proof I should not trust their engineering sence. They
> don't know, and they don't care that they don't know. I will validate what
> I can of their work.
>
> If I see, similar to my invoice, "134/127/129/122, spec = 110-138,
variance
> less than 10%", I know the motor was getting weak on variance. I want to
> update those numbers to see if wear has progressed further. If no. 4 is
now
> 112, I do a leakdown test to confirm a valve going south as the cause of
> the problem and not the rings, and I know to add head replacement. If I
see
> leakdown by the rings or pistons getting poor, I know to add a long block

> reman or new into the procedures.
>
> All that can be known about the patient should be known if you want to
> identify the true source of the problem before you assume what limit or
> extent of the procedures are required to put the patient right for use
again.
>
>  The officail tools
> >are probably more efficient, I only expected to do this job once or twice
> >in my life.
>
> With adequate enhanced spec maintenance, once every 30 years is possable.
> And you will have the records to found that success upon and prove what
> works with empirical data.
>
>
> Doktor Tim
> Maintenance Repair and Restoration of European Vehicles
> San Juan Island, WA