I think most of what you describe is due to the weight of the engine
being moved to the jack. The rear of the Vanagon is then lighter on the
rear suspension and the body creeps up. This is another advantage to
using a hoist that bridges the engine hatch opening. The weight of the
engine is still carried by the vehicle suspension even when not attached
to the engine mounting system. Much easier to get the mounting holes
lined up. I attach a chain to the 2 VW provided engine hoist attachment
holes and to a third hole I drill into the right side alloy mount arm
closer to the rubber mount end. Using these 3 attachment points keeps
the off balance 50 degree engine at the proper angle while it is
suspended from the hoist. I find this kind of hoist arrangement to be
far superior to the jack under the engine method when dealing with
inline engines. No worry about the alloy oil pan getting damaged either.

Mark

David Brodbeck wrote:

> My '82 diesel has this setup, too.  The bearer bars are on rubber bushings
> and then the engine is tied to them with rubber bushings as well.  I've
> heard the bushings between the bearer bars and the body were omitted in
> the '83 model.
>
> All those rubber bushings can be a pain if you have to remove an engine
> mount.  (Necessary, for example, to take off the diesel's exhaust
> manifold.)  You put a jack under the engine to support it and unbolt the
> mount -- no problem.  But when you go to put it  back in, you discover it
> doesn't fit!  With the weight off the bushings, the bearer bar has raised
> itself up.  You have to jack the engine up another inch or two to get
> everything to fit back together.  This caused me a bit of head-scratching.
> It's a slightly disturbing moment when you try to put a critical
> structural piece in and can't get it to fit back where it's supposed to.
> ;)
>