Skip to main content
Gerry | Vanagon
Checking account...
← vanagon.com home · Continue the discussion in the forum
Subject:Re: ebay Vanagon with extra headroom - poptop only - no roof.
From:Tom Buese
Date:Tue, 28 Dec 2010 10:34:37 -0700

On Dec 28, 2010, at 9:45 AM, Alistair Bell wrote:

> the westy's cross brace has its analogue in the tin top van. A box section  cross beam at the point just aft of where the sunroof would go. In both cases i believe the cross brace is needed for torsional stiffness in the body

Unless that cross brace is welded in, it doesn't add any torsional stiffness to the body- a "moment resisting connection" would be required to transfer that stiffness to the body & if the brace is only siting on a lip in the opening, it is only supporting axial or gravity loads on it.

Mr. BZ-licensed architect who can legally design some structural members, but uses much smarter structural engineers to do that instead

> (and as mentioned, to support forward end of westy bunk plywood). In the tin top, the beam is curved to match roof curvature, in the westy its not.
> 
> Both van types have box section cross beam at forward end of roof opening area.

yep, that box section is what provides the torsional stiffness around the opening
> 
> alistair
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 28-Dec-10, at 8:10 AM, Thomas Buese wrote:
> 
> In my professional experience w/ structural engineering, I believe
> that the Westy cross brace in the ceiling is more for the structural
> support of the upper bunk than for cross bracing the roof-sunroof
> models don't have that brace, right Craig?
> 
> YMMV,
> 
> Mr. BZ-you can never have too much headroom, but where do you store
> your stuff?
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 28, 2010, at 7:40 AM, craig cowan wrote:
> 
>> Ahh. I guess they did pull out some structural stuff.
>> In that case, it may be somewhat compromised. How much? It's hard to
>> say.
>> 
>> -Craig
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 12:05 AM, Loren Busch <starwagen@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 7:30 PM, craig cowan
>>> <phishman068@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> It's only missing the top bunks right? They're not structural....
>>>> So, "YES"?
>>>> 
>>>> It looks good!
>>>> If you don't use your top bunks, that looks slick!
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> BUT it is missing all the sheet metal part of the top in that area
>>> and
>>> maybe more important the  very beefy cross brace at the front of
>>> the bunk
>>> the VW/Westfalia put in.
>>> 
>