Re: Some details of the 2AZ-FE engine

Leftie  <No@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>    There are two problems with hydraulic lifters: they are more
>expensive to build and, more to the point for us, they tend to fail long
>before the rest of the engine. Who wants to have to spend $1k on new
>lifters on a car with 150k miles on it? The ****m & bucket type setup
>rarely needs adjustment when properly designed (and it is as used by
>Toyota and Volvo in their older engines) and it doesn't fail. I've had
>two cars and one motorcycle suffer from hydraulic lifter failure. I'd
>much rather have the valves adjusted every 5 years or so.

The unfortunate problem is that most people don't do proper maintenance on
their vehicles.  As a consequence, manufacturers design cars to avoid 
the need for that maintenance because, given the poor treatment of the
average owner, the car will last longer as a result.

This means hydraulic lifters, but it also means sealed chassis components
that don't need regular greasing with every oil change but which fail
before 80,000 miles is up.  It means "sealed for life" transmissions,
where
that life is about half what it should be.

This is what the market demands, and it's what is best for the average car
owner today.  Sadly it's not what is best for folks who actually intend on
taking good care of their vehicles, but those people are in a small
minority
and probably always have been.
--scott
-- 
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."