Date:         Thu, 18 Jun 1998 22:44:12 -0400
Reply-To:     PAT <pdooley@GTE.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <Vanagon@vanagon.com>
From:         PAT <pdooley@GTE.NET>
Subject:      Re: Pre-loading Rear Springs re Syncro Suspension (even long-er)
Comments: To: Vanagon@VANAGON.COM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

The syncro drivetrain sits lower than the2wd, so the cv angle is different
anyway.  Heavy loading will make the angle different too.
I used this info when deciding to lower my drivetrain 2 inches to make my
2.3 swap fit better.  BTW, I hope to make some progress on it the weekend.
I put new rod bearings in the shortblock and welded the hole in the oil pan.
I think the EPA makes the junkyard punch holes in the oil pans.  Nice to
know I am paying taxes to keep people on the payroll who deem it necessary
to destroy my recycled parts.
But I digress...

-----Original Message-----
From: Steven X. Schwenk <sxs@SCHWENK-LAW.COM>
To: Vanagon@VANAGON.COM <Vanagon@VANAGON.COM>
Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 10:07 PM
Subject: Re: Pre-loading Rear Springs re Syncro Suspension (even long-er)


>If the cv's are designed to function at any angle within the range of the
travel of the
>suspension, how would the 1" spacer have any significant effect on the cvs.
The spacer does
>not increase the axle angle beyond what was envisioned within the range of
normal suspension
>travel.  Heck, it's no different that using an air shock and increasing the
air pressure to
>raise the vehicle height a little, but still within stock dimensions.
>Per Lindgren wrote:
>
>> By the way, I forgot to mention something.
>> Raising the car with donuts produces a much sharper angle on the CVs than
the 16" wheels
>> would do. This would wear out the joints quicker. On the other hand, that
would possibly the
>> heavy wheels do too.
>>
>> Per