Date:         Wed, 31 Jul 2002 22:12:49 +1200
Reply-To:     Andrew Grebneff <andrew.grebneff@STONEBOW.OTAGO.AC.NZ>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Andrew Grebneff <andrew.grebneff@STONEBOW.OTAGO.AC.NZ>
Subject:      Re: Vanagon Virtues and Type 2 contrasts( was ahhh..
In-Reply-To:  <OE22Gtroj0xJAH6AvFZ000033e0@hotmail.com>
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii

>I've seen many a cracked vinyl dash on the 68-79 Busses.

My 75 Bay had no dash padding. Standard.

>Vanagons are know for their very strong braking system.

My 84's brakes were in fine health and they were POOR. Very poor.
Like those on my mother's 75 Scirocco TS, my 74 Passat S, my 74 Golf
L and my 75 Kombi.

>Wheel bearings are stronger, last longer.

Never had problems with these in my Splits or Bay.

>I have removed and replaced almost every part of my 64 and 65 busses.

My aircoolers were extremely reliable, and I thrashed them.

>I have done this on Vanagon also. It is easier to work on a Vanagon
>than a Bus.

More room to work under a T1 & T2.

>Now consider the roominess of the Vanagon compared to the Type 2.

It's a little wider, but not much.

>How then does the Type 2 excel ?

Just because VW didn't market the Vanagon as a Type 2 in USA, that in
no way means that it ISN'T a Type 2 (Transporter).

I have to say that the T2's long-travel trailing-arm suspension gave
a distinctly better ride than the T3's shorter-vertical-travel
suspension.

--
Andrew Grebneff
165 Evans St, Dunedin 9001, New Zealand
<andrew.grebneff@stonebow.otago.ac.nz>
Seashell, Macintosh, VW/Toyota van nut