

| Subject: | Re: I rather drive the Vanagon |
| From: | JRodgers |
| Date: | Wed, 11 Jun 2014 05:51:36 -0500 |
In my 88 GL, I never failed to get to where I wanted to go because of tire, traction and weight distribution - except the one spin-out in the middle of the hill on a snowy day in Alaska. A quick change to studded tires fixed that. There have been times life would have been easier with a posi-traction rear end. John On 6/11/2014 12:01 AM, Don Hanson wrote: > All Westies except the beetle....hmmm...maybe I should put in the rear > closet and the second story balcony into my tin top... > > On not making it over rocks....I do ok with that on my stock 14" steel > wheels, as long as I keep up a good pace and don't stop on anything > slippery when pointed uphill...or anything deep and soft on the level... I > can drive around the lack of traction but I have to be more careful than in > most other vehicles I have owned.... > > A Vanagon should not be called "ok for traction" when it's often spinning > it's wheels on wet grass lawns that are very slightly uphill, right? > Worse in reverse, but even in my almost compound low first gear 5sp and > super careful clutch modulation, unless I have ballast in the way back...it > is likely to just sit there with one wheel turning.. My uphill driveway > in the snow is as exciting to try to negotiate as a lap of Willow Springs > racetrack was in my Porsche race car....You gotta balance speed with > control and catch the rear end all the way up while feathering the throttle > and trying to conserve as much speed as possible....I often crest at about > 1mph with the revs going up and down as I try to re-gain traction... > > I too have had lots of Volkswagens and most were outstanding for > traction...not the vanagon. > > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 6:55 PM, OlRivrRat <OlRivrRat@comcast.net> wrote: > >> I find this conversation to be quite interesting ~ I have only had >> 4 RearEng' Vehicles in my 54Yrs of driving ~ a 73SuperBeatle ~ a 76Westy ~ >> an 83.5Westy ~ a 90Westy ~ All were 2(1)wd & I can Honestly say that I >> never ever felt like they were TractionChallenged & I took all 4 of those >> Vehicles to many places in NM, CO, UT that a lot of folks would not even >> dream any StreetVehicle could go ~ I did always run BFG AllTerrainRadial >> 27x8.50 14s on the Rear of the 76 & 83.5 Westys & up until a Couple of Yrs >> ago the 90 wore CooperBuilt Dominator 235/75r15 on the Rear~ >> >> >> ORR ~ DeanB >> >> On 10 Jun , 2014, at 6:47 PM, Vanagon wrote: >> >>> "You would be hard pressed though to find another vehicle with these >> weight characteristics to have a 185 width tire that is then inflated to a >> point of limited contact patch." >>> >>> When I told my son about the rough time my van had when pulling up a >> fairly rough and steep dirt/rubble road a couple weeks ago - with trailer >> filled with camping gear in tow, he, who four-wheels with friends and >> drives a Jeep Cherokee with mighty burly tires, said, "yeah, those little >> tires probably have a hard time climbing over even small rocks." >>> >>> Kind of like trying to ride over a garden hose on a skateboard. >>> >>> Sent from my 1963 aqua 702B Western Electric Princess phone. >>> >>>> On Jun 9, 2014, at 10:25 PM, Dennis Haynes <d23haynes57@HOTMAIL.COM> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Many rear wheel drive vehicles have more weight up front than at the >> rear and the vanagon is not always front heavy. You would be hard pressed >> though to find another vehicle with these weight characteristics to have a >> 185 width tire that is then inflated to a point of limited contact patch. >>>> >>>> Dennis >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On >> Behalf Of SDF ( aka ;jim lahey' - Scott ) >>>> Sent: Monday, June 9, 2014 2:35 AM >>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM >>>> Subject: Re: I rather drive the Vanagon >>>> >>>> look up the weight distribution for a 2WD vanagon .. >>>> oddly, amazingly ..their is more weight on the front axle than on the >> rear ( drive ) axle !! >>>> >>>> which why they are traction-challenged. >>>>> On 6/8/2014 3:18 PM, Dennis Haynes wrote: >>>>> While the Hakka's are very good tire quality wise and that tire has >> some winter capability you simply will not get much traction on a 185/80 >> tire inflated to 50 psi or more. If you want to make any improvements you >> need to begin where the rubber meets the road. >>>>> >>>>> Dennis >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On >>>>> Behalf Of Don Hanson >>>>> Sent: Saturday, June 7, 2014 11:36 PM >>>>> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM >>>>> Subject: Re: I rather drive the Vanagon >>>>> >>>>> You haven't tried enough. >>>>> >>>>> Well, nice discussion but it doesn't alter the way 2wd Vanagons >> normally >>>>> behave. They just are not as good, traction-wise, as many other >>>>> vehicles.. On a scale of 1 to 10 I would rate mine about a 3..maybe a >> two. >>>>> I had a long bed 2wd ford pickup that was awful in snow...I'd give >>>>> that a >>>>> 3 maybe 4..... Oh, I've made lots of improvements trying to make mine >> go better but it still gets stuck without much effort, if you are not >> really careful about how you ask it to move.... If I park on any kind of >> slick or soft surface that has any slope...I better park headed downhill, >> or I am >>>>> stuck. If I stop in sand...stuck. If I have the front wheels >> turned in >>>>> sand and try to move...stuck. If it snows while I am away from my >>>>> house....I am stuck at the bottom of my driveway... >>>>> >>>>> This is with brand new Nokian Hakkapellita mud and snows on the rear, >> the suspension reworked and the van corner balanced and many years of snow >> and sand driving experience...They just plain don't work that well..You >> *can* drive around this crummy traction, most of the time, but I think it >> is one of the few things my Vanagon does badly.... >>>>> >>>>> Yes, a limited slip diff would be a huge improvement...Or better >> yet, a full locker for when you need it... >>>>> >>>>> I think it is partly due to the rear suspension not being >> particularly supple or having very much travel...It doesn't take much to >> get a wheel completely off the ground at the rear...there is little "droop" >> in the Vanagon...Droop being the amount a suspension will hang down when >> the vehicle is lifted.... >>>>> >>>>> When it begins to snow and sleet around here I have to load at least >> a few hundred lbs onto the rear deck lid to keep driving my vanagon without >> being constantly stuck...that's not very convenient nor safe and it is a >> real pain when you need to access the engine.. >>>>> >> >
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »