Date:         Thu, 19 Aug 1999 10:36:07 -0700
Reply-To:     Alistair Bell <albell@UVIC.CA>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Alistair Bell <albell@UVIC.CA>
Subject:      Re: Vanagon Traction
Comments: cc: Mark Gajewski <mgajewski@manvillerubber.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Hi Mark,

I've noticed the same difference (lack of vanagon traction) between my '72
westy and my '82 westy. Its not the differential, I think its the relatively
long and compliant suspension in the older buses coupled with a rear biased
weight distribution.

I've gotten stuck in my '82 (in places and situations that wouldn't give the
'72 pause) and noticed that just a bit of uneven terrain will allow one rear
wheel to be unweighted and spin (of course, good tires will help a lot!).

Alistair

----------
>From: Mark Gajewski <mgajewski@MANVILLERUBBER.COM>
>To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>Subject: Re: Vanagon Traction
>Date: Thu, Aug 19, 1999, 7:14 AM
>

>>What gives?  The vanagon has the engine and
>>transmission mounted over the drive axle.  Why
>>would it have poor traction?
>>
> I would love to know the answer to this one myself.....I have a '72 Westy
> that at times I could swear must be 4wd because the traction is that good.
> My '85 GL is as horrendous, though, as the '72 is good.  It must have
> something to do with differential design so that power in the '85 is
> completely shifting to the spinning wheel.  Maybe the old bays had "posi"
> type differentials???
> Mark
>