

| Subject: | Re: Westy Configurations and Bear-proffing (was Re: Westy's vs Other Configurations for Camping) |
| From: | Dave Mcneely |
| Date: | Sat, 26 Jun 2010 11:46:01 -0500 |
---- Pat Sloan <pmsloan@SHAW.CA> wrote: > This thread brings up two questions that have been lurking in my > subconscious: > > 1. How bear-proof is a Vanagon? Since I like to camp in remote forestry > campsites or even just pull over at a wide spot in the road, how easy would > it be for a bear to open the oblong tin can that a Vanagon is, if there were > leftover cooking smells wafting on the night air? Anyone heard of any > experiences? A bear did a masterful and completely silent job on my backpack > once, years ago. As I slept in my tent about 10 yards away! > 2. Why did VW switch the Westy inner configuration from the dual-side > of my 1973 Westy to the all-on-one-side setup in my current 1982 Westy? > Personally, I prefer the older layout - that great little cantilevered shelf > right by the sliding door; the more-balanced weight distribution, etc. So > what were the perceived advantages that motivated the shift to locating > everything on the driver's side? Vanagon historians? the vanagon, being heavier and built with stronger steel, is likely more bearproof than lots of other vehicles -- but people don't cook in most vehicles. In Yosemite it is illegal to even store food in a vehicle. But most places, a hardsided vehicle is reputed (including by most park and wildlife services) to be adequate protection from bears. I imagine that the newer configuration was perceived as offering more convenience in use -- larger single open space. David McNeely
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »