Date:         Thu, 4 Sep 2003 09:22:56 -0400
Reply-To:     David Brodbeck <gull@GULL.US>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         David Brodbeck <gull@GULL.US>
Subject:      Re: T5 vans
Comments: To: Andrew Grebneff <andrew.grebneff@STONEBOW.OTAGO.AC.NZ>
In-Reply-To:  <a05210602bb7c1b90f9b6@[203.167.170.40]>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Andrew Grebneff wrote:

> These vans still have the in-vogue fatal flaw... gross
> space-inefficiency. A front-engined van cannot come close to that of
> a rear-engined (VW T1-T3) or underfloor-engined van (mainstream
> Japanese). And for that reason alone I wouldn't touch one.

I'd speculate there are three reasons we don't see vans like this sold in
the U.S. anymore.

- Federal crash standards.  Mid- or rear-engine vans end up with very
little crumple room in front, making these standards more difficult to
meet.

- A perception by the public that front-engine vans are safer.

- Cost and complexity.  A front-engine, front wheel drive van is extremely
cheap and simple to build, because all the drivetrain components go in as
a unit.


David Brodbeck, N8SRE
'82 Diesel Westfalia
'94 Honda Civic Si