In a message dated 1/29/05 11:48:04 AM, albell@UVIC.CA writes:

<< Having owned both a '72 and '82 (diesel) westies I can saw with no
hesitation that the Vanagon is much worse in the snow or any low traction conditions.
>>

I have never owned a loaf, but that will not stop me from agreeing with
Alistair.  Before the Syncro's, I had a 2WD and as the first winter approached I
anticipated unstoppable performance in the snow.  It was not naivete which
fueled my expectations but the performance I had witnessed years before in my
brother-in-law's '68 Westy.  My brother-in-law was a bang-bang type and he took
great pleasure in recounting how he would amaze his hunting buddies with the
prowess of his van on the fire trails.  He also silenced the chuckles of more than
a few 4X4'ers.

With those thoughts in my head, I was stunned by the poor performance the
first time I used the Vanagon in the snow.  That was when I became acquainted
with Hakkapeliitta's and 200 pounds of anti-skid (pea gravel) over the rear axle.
 Those measures improved the Vanagon's performance, but it never equaled that
of a loaf.

Perhaps it is the weight distribution, the ground clearance and the larger
wheel diameter.  In the snow, the narrower tires of the loaf might be
beneficial.  As a kid, I heard old codgers tell about how well Model T's got around in
the snow.  Their theory was that the narrow tires of the Model T would cut
through the snow instead of compacting it and floating on it.

George