Used or Rebuilt 2.2 liter 5S-FE '96 engine?

[WAGator]

Which is better, a low milage (~41k miles) used/salvaged engine verses a rebuilt engine, with regard to a 1996 Camry (5/96 manufacture date) 2.2 liter 5S-FE non-California engine? I do realize the warranty is much better on a rebuilt, but what is the deal with wall thicknesses, such that some engines are less reliable as rebuilds? Or is this a cleaver ploy on the part of salvagers to promote their merchandise?

Thanks,

WAGator

[don24mac]

If the cost was similar, I would likely go with the rebuilt, depending on who rebuilt it. Factory rebuilds are probably the best. In a rebuild, the cylinder walls are usually honed to accomodate the seating of new rings. In most cases, unless the engine has been rebuilt many times, the reductions in wall thicknesses would be miniscule, and not a concern.

A used engine can be OK. But, you don't know if it was broken in properly, whether the engine oil was changed regularly, how it was driven, etc.

Since a properly rebuilt engine is like a new engine meeting all tolerence specifications, That's what I'd choose, unless it was "Joe," the shadetree mechanic that rebuilt it. Of course, if there's a wide variation in cost between them, then that might be my determination.

[yotatechie04]

I agree with don24mac completely. A rebuilt engine would be much better than a used engine, mainly because you don't know what the whole story is behind the used engine, although with the rebuilt one, it's almost like new.

[Brian R.]

Another thing to consider is whether the used engine is currently installed in a car and can be driven or tested. A good-running used engine is worth alot if you can test it.

[jspousta]

Rebuilt is ussually better because of the fact the warranty, and then the engine has quality control making sure every part is within specs so performance would be better