Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 09:43:05 -0600
Reply-To: Simon Reinhardt <simon@FARRSIDE.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Simon Reinhardt <simon@FARRSIDE.NET>
Subject: Re: Was: Why are campers higher at the rear? NOW: Westy air drag
In-Reply-To: <54326.216.253.218.250.1086957223.squirrel@www.spam-manager.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Yes, but what about when the load is not just behind the rear seat, and
what if a driver and passenger are going to get in? Now the fronts need
to handle a load as well!
Jeez, it's depressing, but maybe this is all boiling down to craptastic
quality control wherever Vanagon springs were made...
Anyway, I get what you're saying about load handling, but I'm saying
that a spring can be stiff w/out being tall. Take the sport springs in
the Cabby I'm selling (shameless plug!). They're lower AND stiffer than
stock, and I can still carry a full load of people and their junk.
I'm curious- did the load rating of the Van decrease when it got the
shorter Carat springs later on? Anyone know?
I've been thinking about a big piece of aluminum that would attach to
the cargo cleats. Then we have to get access to a wind tunnel...
Actually, looking at the turbulence, maybe a flat panel AND a mid-roof
spoiler would be the way to go. We just need to smooth out that
turbulence somehow! Anyone ready to rice out your Van?
-SImon
On Jun 11, 2004, at 6:33 AM, Chris S. wrote:
>> "But Simon, the rears are stiffer than the fronts because of the
>> engine's weight!"- No, stiffness and height are not necessarily
>> entwined.
>
> May I remind you of the Vanagon's 50/50 front-to-rear weight
> distribution?
> Yes, there's an engine back there but the total weight pressing down
> on
> the rear springs is same as the front. Rear springs are stiffer to
> handle
> more when the van is loaded.
>
>>
>> http://www.farrside.net/vanagon/windtests.jpg
>>
>
> Stock Vanagon CD (coefficient of drag): .44
> Flat pop-top: .45
> Westfalia pop-top: .51 <--- that sucks
> High-top: .40
> Camper-back: .46 <---- still better than the Westfalia pop-top
>
> Based on the picture my presumptions that carrying a flat, wide load,
> such
> as a cargo box, in the top luggage would reduce turbulence thus
> decreasing
> CD. Putting a plastic lid on the rack that slightly bulges out would
> have
> an even better effect and save fuel when on the road. Project, anyone?
> Any fiberglass masters out there?
>
>
>
>
> Chris S.
> '85 Wolfsburg Westy "Camel"
> http://www.knology.net/~vw/dadada.jpg
>
| 
