Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 11:53:16 -0700
Reply-To: Jake de Villiers <crescentbeachguitar@GMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Jake de Villiers <crescentbeachguitar@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Some ride height and suspension observations..
In-Reply-To: <46dd6d75.0d1d640a.097e.ffffa0d7SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Just to point out Bill that you have the diff and axles up front but you've
got the gas and tank over the rear wheels now.
There is also a weight difference between the 2WD double wishbone front
suspension and the Syncro's MacPherson strut system.
I don't think its really useful to compare your Syncroweight distribution to
Don's 2WD GL.
You shouldn't be having traction issues anyway! :)
On 9/4/07, Bill Glenn <idahobill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 3 Sep 2007 21:23:29 -0700, Jake de Villiers
> <crescentbeachguitar@GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> >Don, you might find it very educational to weigh your van on the nearest
> >highway scale, front first, then the total.
> >
> >There is a surprisingly high front weight bias on the Vanagon which
> accounts
> >for the pathetic traction in slippery conditions. If you have any ideas
> on
> >how to rectify that be sure to post them.
> >
> Last March I had occasion to weigh my '90 Westfalia Syncro. All cargo was
> removed, the water tank was empty, the propane tank was full, and the
> driver
> (190#) was in the vehicle. Assuming that the weight of the driver is
> carried almost entirely by the front axel (seems likely), and subtracting
> that weight from the weight recorded for the front axel, the results were
> as follows: Front 2230#(1014kg), Rear 2160#(982kg). That's 50.8% front,
> 49.2% rear, and remember, this is a syncro with the additional weight of
> the differential up front. In this example, to achieve equal loading of
> the axels only requires moving 35#(16kg) from the front axel to the rear
> axel. I should think a two-wheel drive Westy is slightly weight biased in
> the rear, but not by much.
>
> When loaded with water and gear for camping, the front/rear weight bias
> shifts to the rear, but as yet I have not stopped at the scales on the way
> out of town when on the way camping.
>
> I have had occasion to drive off the main roads when the prop shaft was
> removed, and have found the syncro quite capable in this two-wheel drive
> mode (no specifically off-road tire--14" Michelin LTX). Due to the
> availability of the granny gear, and the differential lock when needed,
> steeper hills having a moderate amount of loose gravel and rock were no
> problem. However, being used to a syncro, I didn't push my luck exploring
> this two-wheel drive mode. I have not had the prop shaft removed for
> winter driving in snow, but previous experience in two-wheel drive
> Vanagons
> has informed me that the Vanagon is better than most rear-wheel drive
> vehicles in snow, due mostly, I believe, to the lack of power and torque;
> this lack of power and torque, which is often considered a failing in the
> Vanagon, is your friend in snow.
>
> Bill
>
--
Jake
1984 Vanagon GL
1986 Westy Weekender "Dixie"
www.crescentbeachguitar.com
| 
