Club 80-90 Forums

Is there anything bad we should know about these engines? (before we part with any cash!)

Cheers

Mark

Nothing really, only a very flawed design.

Would you like to elaborate Laurie?
ie, I am better off not buying a Multivan with a 2.1 engine (for example)?

3rustateers wrote:Would you like to elaborate Laurie?
ie, I am better off not buying a Multivan with a 2.1 engine (for example)?

Diesels are far superior, waterboxers are the worst engine vw ever made, an engineering disaster.

OK, so 2.1 engines aren't the best, so what about a multivan with a 1.6 TD engine, everyone seems to go for the LLE with the 2.1? DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO (I'm not shouting by the way )

BTW need to change the garage picture for a tent as van now sold

A good wbx is quiet and refined by comparison with the JX, not that much worse on fuel economy and a damm site cheaper to fix when it goes wrong, but hey that's just my opinion

Of course I have a spare rebuilt wbx on the shelf in case either of mine go bad, but one of them has a genuine VW exchange engine fitted after someone (you know who) did a pants rebuild of the original and then failed to honour the warranty and the other one seems pretty good despite it's mileage as it seems to have been properly maintained.

Beaker wrote:A good wbx is quiet and refined by comparison with the JX, not that much worse on fuel economy and a damm site cheaper to fix when it goes wrong, but hey that's just my opinion

Of course I have a spare rebuilt wbx on the shelf in case either of mine go bad, but one of them has a genuine VW exchange engine fitted after someone (you know who) did a pants rebuild of the original and then failed to honour the warranty and the other one seems pretty good despite it's mileage as it seems to have been properly maintained.

When JX's go wrong just go down the scrappys buy a 1.9 td and you have another good engine, where do you get a waterboxer when it goes wrong? The diesels share parts with the rest of VAG range even upto very recently so parts are plentiful, fortunately they only fitted waterboxers in transporters or vw's reputation for reliability would be even worse than it is.

Economy my very modified for power not economy td does at least 10mpg more than the waterboxers at similar speeds and has ability to maintain speed up any hill.

Waterboxers are pooh, they were when new and only get worse with age/mileage.

andysimpson wrote:

Beaker wrote:A good wbx is quiet and refined by comparison with the JX, not that much worse on fuel economy and a damm site cheaper to fix when it goes wrong, but hey that's just my opinion

Of course I have a spare rebuilt wbx on the shelf in case either of mine go bad, but one of them has a genuine VW exchange engine fitted after someone (you know who) did a pants rebuild of the original and then failed to honour the warranty and the other one seems pretty good despite it's mileage as it seems to have been properly maintained.

When JX's go wrong just go down the scrappys buy a 1.9 td and you have another good engine, where do you get a waterboxer when it goes wrong? The diesels share parts with the rest of VAG range even upto very recently so parts are plentiful, fortunately they only fitted waterboxers in transporters or vw's reputation for reliability would be even worse than it is.

Economy my very modified for power not economy td does at least 10mpg more than the waterboxers at similar speeds and has ability to maintain speed up any hill.

Waterboxers are pooh, they were when new and only get worse with age/mileage.

What he said.
I have the misfortune of drilling out another broken alternator mounting stud out a WBX at the moment.
makes a change from replacing engines tho..

Oh no.. not more dieselitus again.....

Personally I would look at the van and see what its conditon is (body etc).. I'd rather buy a nice tidy wbx powered one than a worn/not as nice, just coz its a D/TD...
the wbx can be changed for a TD if you so choose...

Just a note on waterboxer reliability. Back in the eighties my dad had a business for which he used to run various T3 caravelles. We had 3 brand new ones, one after the other, which dad would change after they had covered approx 130,000. All three new ones covered that distance without breakdown. He had a 5 speed gearbox whose diff bearings failed, but the only actual breakdown I can recall is when the plastic valve broke on the thermostat housing dumping out the water. He then went onto a second hand syncro, an ex vw demonstrator 27,000 miles on the clock, which had then been owned by a have a go mechanic who we found out after purchase, had replaced the waterpump, and not used any coolant in re-filling it. this led to a engine waterleaker failure, and a VW recon engine. This re-con then covered 80,000 trouble free miles till the syncro was written off in an accident.
These vehicles are very old now, and reliability of the original unit is a bit of red herring due to their age. In my experience I can say without doubt that the vw waterboxer engine is a good reliable unit capable of large mileages with the minimum of fuss. When a vehilce has had 12 owners from new what should you expect.
I like the fact that the waterboxer is an engine designed not by a commitee of boffins just doing a 9-5 job, but by a gradual evoloution of an inspired original design (albeit 1940's) It is the engine that the T3 was designed primarily for, and I love it's quirks.
If my experience of this flawed engine is over 350,000 miles of trouble free motoring then have I just been lucky??. What 15 to 25 year old vehicle does not have it's problems. Retro fitting a later engine is always gonna have benefits, but I am happy to stick with what was intended. I like the look of the waterboxer, the sound, the driving experience, everything really. I can see the benefits of a diesel, but I would probably just consider buying a diesel T4 or T5 rather than messing around with mine.
Horses for courses, waterboxers are flawed if they have not been maintained, and are very sensitive to not being maintained, but get a good one and they are excellent engines. The trouble is finding out which one is a good one, and for that probably luck is gonna play a big part, and after that service history and condition. We expect alot from these old vehicles, and you dont see many other similar aged cars on the roads.
As toomanytoys says, condition first.

WBX's are a gamble. From the factory and properly maintained they're good. My Multivan did 180k on it's original engine but it had been maintained to the letter of the service schedule. The replacement Remtec managed 55k before throwing it's toys out of the pram- again following the schedule religiously.

hey have to be maintained properly. They don't like to be stood unused for long periods. They don't like being revved. Parts are becoming a problem to source.

Just get as much info as possible before you let go of the dosh. Personally, I'm now used to them and their foibles- I always have the stuff in for a rebuild and I'm prepared to do either a diesel or Subaru conversion if I get really pi**ed off with WBX's

Wont say too much.. but the only rebiult ones that seem to hold together are the gen VW ones.. but even they can give trouble.. but so do any other engines...
I am afraid the Remtec engines are getting a "reputation" along with a few other supposed "quality" products..

i read somewhere that the cu Aircooled was one of the strongest petrol engines volky fitted to the t25? hope so cos thats what i have

Rozzo wrote:i read somewhere that the cu Aircooled was one of the strongest petrol engines volky fitted to the t25? hope so cos thats what i have

Atleast it has no water to leak.

Noticed we have a few responses from petrol syncro owners, how do the waterboxers cope in deep water? Why they were fitted to syncro's is beyond me, exhausts catch on everyhting, no torque, can't do water.