Date:         Sat, 6 Jan 2001 19:21:30 -0600
Reply-To:     CHRIS STANN <cstann@HOME.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         CHRIS STANN <cstann@HOME.COM>
Subject:      Re: Swaybars-worth it(rear)?
Comments: To: Gary Stearns <gstearns@OPTONLINE.NET>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

> Vanagon, like the 911 has a significant rearward weight bias. As you round
a
> corner or execute an emergency maneuver the weight of the engine attempts
to
> move that end of the vehicle to the outside of the corner.  This is a
> significant reason why Vanagons require very high tire pressure in the
rear.

Let us shed some light on the Vanagon's weight bias.  The following specs
are for the '86 Syncro Westfalia.
(http://www.tiu.net/~des/vw/reports/synchro.html)


DIMENSIONS AND CAPACITIES
Wheelbase ........................ 96.6 in
Track, F/R ....................... 62.4 / 61.8 in
Length ........................... 179.9 in
Width ............................ 72.6 in
Height ........................... 82.1 in
Ground Clearance ................. 8.3 in
Curb Weight ...................... 4000 lb
Weight distribution, F/R ......... 49.3 / 50.7 percent
Fuel capacity .................... 18.4 gal
Oil capacity ..................... 4.2 qt
Water capacity ................... 18.5 qt

As you there's no significant rear weight bias in the '86 Syncro Westfaila,
unless you call .7% significant.  I agree that the standard Vanagon may have
a higher rear weight bias since it does not carry a differential in the
front.  Still, this would not be as severe as the problem described in the
911.  Put a driver and a passenger in the front seats and you have a nicely
balanced vehicle.

Installing a rear anti-sway bar will, however, make your vehicle more prone
to oversteer, although not as severe as the Porsche 911.  Providing the
added stability in crosswinds and on winding roads, the rear sway will prove
a worthwhile upgrade if you operate your Vanagon within its limits.

Chris.

'85 Westy.