

| Subject: | Re: Vanagon vs Alternative Vehicles |
| From: | David Brodbeck |
| Date: | Tue, 25 May 2004 14:11:57 -0400 |
On Tue, 25 May 2004, Doug in Calif wrote: > These rigs do not have a fully independent suspension systems so they > handle like a turd on twisty roads. > if they are rear wheel drive they will spin on even the slightest ice or > slick surface as they have no weight on the rear wheels. True, but you will never have to replace a CV joint. A limited-slip diff helps a lot with traction on slick surfaces, and if you do a camper conversion you *will* be adding weight to the rear. The front-mounted engine means you will never air-lock the cooling system and there are no complicated bleeding procedures. Those big rear-wheel-drive, live-axle vans are great freeway cruisers, they track straight and stable with little steering input and their torquey engines make cruise control a viable option instead of an annoyance. I've driven both...I'm not saying that they're better or worse than a Vanagon, they're just designed with different goals in mind. David Brodbeck, N8SRE '86 Volvo 240DL wagon '82 VW Vanagon Westfalia Diesel
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »