Date:         Wed, 14 Mar 2001 14:52:07 -0500
Reply-To:     Jay L Snyder <Jay.L.Snyder@USA.DUPONT.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Jay L Snyder <Jay.L.Snyder@USA.DUPONT.COM>
Subject:      Re: To unite, or separate (the air bags)
Comments: To: Terry Kay <CTONLINE@WEBTV.NET>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

But if one fails, they both fail and both will be damaged if you continue
driving on dead bladders.  The instructions clearly say the bladders could
be damaged by pinching in the coils if driven with no air in them.

                                                   Jay '85 Westy that still
leans




Terry Kay <CTONLINE@WEBTV.NET> on 03/14/2001 02:04:13 PM

Please respond to CTONLINE@WEBTV.NET

To:   vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
cc:    (bcc: Jay L Snyder/AE/DuPont)
Subject:  Re: To unite, or separate (the air bags)




Rolling forces?
We are talking about weight transfer from one side of the vehicle to
another, in a hard cornering situation.
No, the Cadillacs not a performance vehicle, but the Vanagon isn't
either.
Neither of them was ever intended to be.
I highly doubt that you could ever exert enough G forces in a Vanagon in
a corner to cause a big enough difference in the pressure in the air
bags to make a catastrophic difference in the suspension from one side
to the other, without laying the Weeble on it's side.
I personally would rather have the bags tied together, so in the event
of one of them failing, the van would drop to it's original ride height
evenly, without laying to one side like a dead carp.
The intallation proceedure is one I have made many times ( air shocks,
air bags) with excellent results, no failures, no suprises.
Later,
  ______________
 |[  ] [  ] [ ]\
 |    |    |    |
||-(())----(())-|
Terry 85 GL