when i decided to buy a 80's vintage snow-country hauler, it was between
the 87-89 4wd toyota van and the syncro.  they have similar boxy
styling, and fold-flat rear seats.  i went vanagon because they're way
bigger and there are far more parts/mechanics/listgroups available.  has
anyone had experience with both vans?  i'm still fascinated by the
toyotas.

aaron
'87 syncro gl

-----Original Message-----
From: Donald Baxter [mailto:onanov@GMAIL.COM] 
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 7:27 AM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Vngns ARE junk!

I don't have much to disagree with regarding this assessment except that
the the VW Type 2 vehicles are not, and should not, be defined as
minivans.  Minivans are built on car chassis and the Vanagon is clearly
built as a truck, albeit a small one.  I think the only thing that the
Vanagon has in common with the Chrysler product is the word "van."  With
that in mind, I think Chrysler can lay claim as the inventor of the
minivan.  VW can lay claim to the inventor of the small truck, perhaps?
Were there other small trucks in 1950?

Donald Baxter, Iowa City
'85 GL

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 08:20:12 -0800, jbange <hfinn@ingrates.net> wrote:
> At 07:27 AM 3/10/2005, you wrote:
> >The American Plymouth Voyager and
> >Dodge Caravan were also introduced in 1983, as 1984
> >models."
> >
> >The article seems to ignore the existence of VW
> >Vanagons on American streets as early as 1980(!), and
> >if the earlier Busses/Transporters weren't "mini
> >vans", I don't know what is.
>
> I think they don't count the Vanagon as a "mini-van" because it's too 
> capable!  Apparently to them a mini-van is a small economy car fitted 
> with

--
---------------------------------------------
Donald Baxter
316 Ridgeview Avenue
University Heights, Iowa 52246 http://www.mindspring.com/~onanov