Date: Sat, 12 Jun 1999 13:18:00 -0700
Reply-To: Brent Christensen <bpchristensen@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Brent Christensen <bpchristensen@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject: Re: Advice needed on Van choice. (long)
Well, not to sound glib, but if you're main concerns are wife-friendliness,
trouble-free operation, and 4WD that you can "load to the hilt" I would have
to suggest an Explorer, Durango, or some such generic car. (All of which
are pretty much "wanna-be" 4WD's anyway)
If, however, you want a car that becomes a part of your life, one that every
time you drive puts a stupid, kid-like grin on your face, then opt for a
Vanagon. I assume that owning a Vanagon holds some importance for you,
since you posted to this list, and that is great!
It sounds like your family is very similar to mine. We do a lot of
adventurous activities, travel to Baja, Colorado, Oregon, etc. We prefer to
camp in places where the nearest person or piece of concrete is at least 10
miles away, etc.
My 5' 4" wife says that my Syncro Westy is as easy to drive as her Cherokee
(actually has a tighter turning radius!), and she loves how easy it is to
get the kids in and out for running to the beach, etc. If you want a
Vanagon, I would encourage you to consider a Syncro that has been
well-maintained. (Westy or otherwise). Mine has almost 200,000 miles on it,
and it has cost less than 1/2 as much to own per mile that the car that it
replaced, a Taurus SHO. This is even after replacing engines,
transmissions, etc. The biggest advantage to a Vanagon is that they hold
their value very well.
Yes, Syncros are a bit more work to keep up, and the parts can be more
expensive, but to me it is absolutely, without question, worth it. There is
no comparison between camping in the Syncro vs. camping in the Cherokee.
The best advice? SPEND THE EXTRA MONEY AND BUY ONE THAT HAS BEEN
METICULOUSLY MAINTAINED. I cannot overstate the importance of this. I'd be
willing to bet that the '87 you mentioned was bought inexpensively from a PO
that had not taken meticulous care of it. I have bought both kinds of cars,
and I can tell you that saving money on the buy will cost you much more in
the long run (especially if you factor in the time and frustration).
Oh, and the best years? My suggestion would be an '86 or newer GL. (this is
when Syncros first debuted) Better looking interior (IMHO), 2.1L engine,
etc.
Brent Christensen
'89 Syncro Westy "Klaus"
'95 Cherokee Sport
----- Original Message -----
From: Troy Donaldson <troy@MHCC.CC.OR.US>
Sent: Friday, June 11, 1999 2:59 PM
Subject: Advice needed on Van choice.
> Hi All,
> I am new to this list so excuse me in advance if I have broken any rules.
>
> I am not a current Vanagon owner. I had a 87 at one time and ended up
> dumping a lot of money in it in a short amount of time. Now I am unsure
> on my next van.
>
> I am a family of three, very adventurous people. We do all that is
> out there. Mainly Windsurfing in the gorge and BAJA, climbing,
> skiing etc. The van needs to be wife friendly . . . she will be the main
> driver.
>
> I have heard bad things about certain model years of Vanagons? Any help?
>
> We are not interested in a Westy, but would like a weekender package.
>
> I have heard bad things about the Syncro . . . but I would like the 4WD
> ability. Drivetran problems? Tires? Tranny's?
>
> We will load it to the hilt on trips to Mexico, Montana, etc.. Can they
> handle it?
>
> Any advice you could give would be great!!!!! Thanks
>
> Vanless . . . .and hating it.
>
| 
