I beg to differ... My experience tells me that the Vanagon is lighter, not heavier. That would be in keeping with engineering advances made over the years. I suspect that if one put a couple of sacks of sand in the back they just might get through some of the rough stuff. Jim Arnott WetWesties Union, OR CHRIS STANN wrote: > > The old Breadloafs are lighter than our Vana-gones. So they tread more > lightly. They have more rear-biased weight distribution plus lower gearing. > Every little bit helps. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jim A <jrasite@eoni.com> > To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM> > Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 9:27 PM > Subject: Re: off road in a Vanagon Was Tires > > > I'd be curious to know the weight of a V'gon vs. a loaf. My ASI > conversion > > ('77) crosses the scales at 4750 two up, loaded for camping. Anybody KNOW > how > > much their V'gon weighs? > > Unca Joel writ: > my 88 bus non-camper weighs in at 3640 lbs empty (but full fuel). the > 87 full camper weighs in at 3960 empty (but full fuel). :) > > joel |
Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of
Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection
will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!
Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com
The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.
Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.