TheSamba.com :: View topic - Syncro Off-Road Abilities vs. Competition

Wed Oct 23, 2013 1:32 pm

Thanks for the Swimcro links, but, its still off topic
this is the OFF ROAD thread :-)

maybe we should move this to the English Channel Crossing Challenge, or start a thread about the Syncro's OFF LAND abilities.. LOL

http://www.gizmag.com/go/2857/

So far Dampervan zero, English Channel 1

"The amphibious car challenged driving from Sidcup to Dover, and then across the English Channel. Hammond modified a Volkswagen Transporter (nicknamed the "Dampervan") by using a fibreglass hull and adding sealant although the "Dampervan" floated, the choppy waters eventually damaged his steering on the first attempt and the vehicle subsequently sank during the next day's attempt. "

more channel crossing

Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:42 pm

insyncro wrote: If I wasn't wasn't supporting Factory and Geico Honda teams at Unadilla I would have liked to have watched Brady rally.
Luckily a mentor talked sense into my dreams of completing the course.

Not sure if I am supposed to broadcast this, but event coordinators are allowing Syncros to bypass certain elements of the course as to not end up broken or damage body panels.
They will not be penalized if they throw the white flag.
I thought that was pretty cool.

Just catching up on this thread now. Last time I read this, I had not done the Vermont Overland Trophy... Boy is my opinion different after the fact.

Brady is pro and that's that. He laced technical sections together like you wouldn't believe.

They actually had marked alternate routes for the "Challenge" sections that were intended to be challenging, just not nearly as crazy. Anyone could take the alternate routes, and we took them all. There were in fact challenge sections that a syncro was not going to get through. And this was not a rock crawl event by any means. But it was Vermont.

If the VOT was any comparison of off road capabilities across a wide selection of vehicles, I'll give you an example based on one of the campsite locations...

The campsite was nicknamed "the rainforest". It was basically a small, heavily overgrown mountain, with a hard climb to the top. We were told to find a spot, bushwhack it, and camp. The best spots were at the top (and that's where the bonfire was), and so the natural selection occurred based on vehicle capability. There ended up being three camps on the small mountain: the lowest tier were the esoterics (unimog, pinz, syncros). The second tier was almost all Land Rovers. The highest tier was almost all jeeps. A land rover rolled trying to get to the top. It was quite conclusive!

Wed Oct 23, 2013 11:55 pm

Quote: The highest tier was almost all jeeps.

Please clarify if they were modified or stock.

Thu Oct 24, 2013 1:38 am

Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:30 am

hellenic vanagon wrote: Please clarify if they were modified or stock.

this might help
http://www.vermontoverland.com/vot/

and no, none of the vehicles were stock. For one thing, winches were required I believe. And I would bet most of the vehicles had front lockers with solid shafts, not Viscous couplings like a stock syncro. And I would bet nobody was on stock tire sizes either.

And no, Bradys syncro is not stock either.

steewoz wrote: There ended up being three camps on the small mountain: the lowest tier were the esoterics (unimog, pinz, syncros). The second tier was almost all Land Rovers. The highest tier was almost all jeeps. A land rover rolled trying to get to the top. It was quite conclusive!

thanks for the report, glad you had fun

tell us a little more about the feature differences between the Syncros, the Land Rovers, and the Jeeps.

here are my guesses
1. The syncros could not crawl as slow, lacked suspension articulation, and had problems with front overhang.
2. The Landrovers could crawl slower than the syncros, and had better ground articulation (all 4 wheels on the ground even in deep ruts, while the syncro was on three wheels most of the time)
3. The Jeeps had the best approach and departure angles, and bigger tires than the syncros and Landys. So they could roll right up against tall rocks and ledges, and then crawl over them suuuper slowly (reduction gears)

and a guess why the Landy rolled:
Too much front overhang prevented it from using the line the Jeeps used. Instead the Landy tried to work around the edge of an obstacle, with just one front wheel, instead of attacking it straight on with both front wheels.

these are just guesses to give you some idea of the variables I would consider in an analysis. What are your assessments of the differences between the 3 camps equipment. Obviously it had nothing to do with the drivers, since the groups were sorted by vehicle limitations, not driver limitations.

Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:35 am

hellenic vanagon wrote: Quote: The highest tier was almost all jeeps.

Please clarify if they were modified or stock.

Every vehicle in the event had modifications of some sort, whether it was lockers, or body protection, tires or suspension. But the jeeps weren't over the top with their mods under any circumstance. I would even venture say that several of the jeeps had very little modifications beyond a stock Rubicon package. No surprise there... A quick stroll through expeditionportal.com will show that a stock Jeep Rubicon is the best off-roading vehicle available today.

Pics are here: http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5...p;start=80

Thu Oct 24, 2013 9:57 am

Jon_slider wrote: hellenic vanagon wrote: Please clarify if they were modified or stock.

this might help
http://www.vermontoverland.com/vot/

and no, none of the vehicles were stock. For one thing, winches were required I believe. And I would bet most of the vehicles had front lockers with solid shafts, not Viscous couplings like a stock syncro. And I would bet nobody was on stock tire sizes either.

And no, Bradys syncro is not stock either.

steewoz wrote: There ended up being three camps on the small mountain: the lowest tier were the esoterics (unimog, pinz, syncros). The second tier was almost all Land Rovers. The highest tier was almost all jeeps. A land rover rolled trying to get to the top. It was quite conclusive!

thanks for the report, glad you had fun

tell us a little more about the feature differences between the Syncros, the Land Rovers, and the Jeeps.

here are my guesses
1. The syncros could not crawl as slow, lacked suspension articulation, and had problems with front overhang.
2. The Landrovers could crawl slower than the syncros, and had better ground articulation (all 4 wheels on the ground even in deep ruts, while the syncro was on three wheels most of the time)
3. The Jeeps had the best approach and departure angles, and bigger tires than the syncros and Landys. So they could roll right up against tall rocks and ledges, and then crawl over them suuuper slowly (reduction gears)

and a guess why the Landy rolled:
Too much front overhang prevented it from using the line the Jeeps used. Instead the Landy tried to work around the edge of an obstacle, with just one front wheel, instead of attacking it straight on with both front wheels.

these are just guesses to give you some idea of the variables I would consider in an analysis. What are your assessments of the differences between the 3 camps equipment. Obviously it had nothing to do with the drivers, since the groups were sorted by vehicle limitations, not driver limitations.

As far as the differences between the Landys, the Jeeps and the Syncros are concerned, the basic Jeep platform is just too perfect for technical off road. The Landy's were amazing to watch, but they were mostly all older vehicles, and therefore more susceptible to breakdowns. Watching all of the vehicles tackle the same obstacles was pretty amazing. And yes, driver ability had a lot to do with vehicle capability. I watched Brady execute a technical climb way smoother than two modern jeeps, an LR3 and a mog. It was probably the single best piece of driving I've ever seen. But compared to every other vehicle in the VOT, the Jeeps had the least amount of difficulty completing the event (although the event was won by a pair of well outfitted FJ Cruisers). I also watched less skilled Jeep drivers make mistakes that they would not have gotten away with in a different vehicle. So yes, the capability of a Jeep can make up for lack of driving skill to an extent. I would also say that I was most impressed by the Land Rover drivers. They were some of the most skilled drivers and weren't afraid to swap a clutch in a field the night before the start. (the rollover was upright and running better than ever by noon the next day).

By the end of the event, the two things I really wish I had was a front locker and a solid shaft (Brady had both, but he also had nearly bald tires). Other than those, our biggest handicaps were the poor approach angle and lack of articulation, but there's not much I can do about those. While we did show a lot of people what a Syncro was capable of, we were definitely the most handicapped vehicles in the event. I wouldn't trade it for anything!

I should also mention that, while everyone else had to set up and break down their campsites every night, we would roll in, park, unfold a chair and crack a beverage... and be camping a minute later.

Thu Oct 24, 2013 3:47 pm

steewoz wrote: compared to every other vehicle in the VOT, the Jeeps had the least amount of difficulty completing the event (although the event was won by a pair of well outfitted FJ Cruisers).

our [Syncro's] biggest handicaps were the poor approach angle and lack of articulation

we were definitely the most handicapped vehicles in the event.

Thanks for the most fact based answer in this thread. If I read it right, here is the ranking in terms of offroad capability, based on that event

1. Toyota
2. Jeep
3. Land Rover
4. Volkswagen

thanks for bringing us back on topic

and congratulations on completing the event with no front locker, and no winch.

Thu Oct 24, 2013 4:42 pm

I would make one change to that list...

The two FJ drivers were extremely skilled drivers. I would actually put the Jeep on top, as far as off road capability is concerned, only because the wheels stick out considerably further away from the body. I'm convinced that that was a significant factor in passing through several challenge sections. Most of the off camber mud sections resulted in vehicles getting stuck due to the body panels running into the ground, whereas the Jeeps would just drive on through without body contact.

Thu Oct 24, 2013 5:00 pm

I'd put Jeeps on the top of the list too. There are very few things a Landy can do better, and I think one of the only things I can think of is they can carry more stuff and be better overlanders.

I still wouldn't trade out for anything though. I can still get to some pretty awesome places and be relaxing with a beer minutes after arriving.

Thu Oct 24, 2013 5:05 pm

thanks for your first hand, eyes on the ground, report

I like that you have highlighted a specific feature of the Jeep, the way the wheels stick out past the rocker panels, giving it an advantage over the FJCruisers.

Is this a more accurate list?:
1. Jeep
2. Toyota
3. Land Rover
4. Volkswagen

btw, Im guessing that ranking may also be correlate with ground clearance, that is to say, Im guessing the Toyota has more ground clearance than the Landy, which has more than the Syncro.. Is that accurate? (I would have thought the FJ's had as much ground clearance as the jeeps, not sure, do you know?)

So, the factors in ranking the vehicles that outperform a Syncro equipped with a decoupler, solid shaft, and front locker are

1. ability to crawl slower than a syncro
2. better approach angle than a syncro
3. better side body and rocker panel clearance, wheels stick out past the body further than on a Syncro
4. better suspension articulation than a syncro

sound about right?

I was expecting to hear something about ground clearance, was that not a meaningful advantage for the jeeps and fjcruisers, that the syncro and landys did not have?

was ground clearance not a significant limitation for the syncros? Is largest tire size a meaningful factor, did the Syncros have the smallest wheels?

Thu Oct 24, 2013 5:41 pm

hans j wrote: I can still get to some pretty awesome places and be relaxing with a beer minutes after arriving.

Im not sure BS (beer speed) varies by vehicle. I know you mean ease of setting up camp though, and I agree. :-)

The Vanagon base camp advantage is more obvious when its stormy outside, and while others need to exit their vehicle into the elements to set up a sleeping quarters, Vanagonauts just walk through into their living room, with a couch bed. And there are lots of urban places a Vanagon can provide the owner a chance to sleep, incognito. When a Jeepster setting up a tent outside is simply not an option.

So I think it is fair to say, the interior of a Vanagon makes camp more easily than vehicles that rely on a tent outside the vehicle. But this thread was about offroad abilities mainly. Clearly offloading is not the strong suit of a Vanagon, inside the vehicle camping IS the Vanagon advantage.

Another absolute favorite feature of a Vanagon, for me, is passenger front swivel seats. They create a really useful face to face seating arrangement for sharing private BS sessions :-)

I think of a Van as a rolling living room, not a rock crawler. And no, a Syncro can not do the Rubicon, but that is not important to me. I dont even feel the need to do the VOT, even though it has been demonstrated to be possible in a Syncro.

Thu Oct 24, 2013 5:45 pm

I'd say that is an accurate list. Of course any one of those vehicles (except the Syncro) can be modified enough to level the playing field.
Quote: btw, Im guessing that ranking may also be correlate with ground clearance, that is to say, Im guessing the Toyota has more ground clearance than the Landy, which has more than the Syncro.. Is that accurate? (I would have thought the FJ's had as much ground clearance as the jeeps, not sure, do you know?)
Ground clearance between the Toyotas, Landy's and Jeeps were relatively close. We were lower even though both of our Syncros were lifted and running 16's. But that wasn't a severe limiter as long as you knew where to place things in relation to axles etc. For the extreme challenges, no, we were not nearly high enough or articulated enough to play there. Quote:
1. ability to crawl slower than a syncro
The crawl speed also wasn't too much of an issue. Of course, in a Jeep or Toyota, or newer LR, you're most likely driving an automatic with what I like to call, 4x4 buttons. "Oh there's a tricky section ahead? I'll just press a bunch of these 4x4 buttons, take my feet away from the pedals and steer"
Quote: 2. better approach angle than a syncro
We suffered there.
Quote: 3. better side body and rocker panel clearance, wheels stick out past the body further than on a Syncro
Just about everyone suffered the same fate here except the Jeeps.
Quote: 4. better suspension articulation than a syncro
Every single vehicle had better articulation (and approach angles) than our Syncros.

I have three fun observations to add:

1. The cool factor of Land Rover Defenders was through the roof! So much style and ability. Those drivers in those vehicles are the real deal.

2. The jeeps were about as exciting as stale white toast. Zero points for style. Maybe that's why Jeep guys and Rover guys don't play well together.

3. I'm pretty confident in saying that Team Syncro was definitely "the people's choice". We had a lot of fans rooting for us based on how cool our vehicles were, and how crazy we were to drive them in this event. We had a lot of people looking out for us even though we were completely self sufficient.

Mon Nov 04, 2013 9:30 am

Great video with a syncro and Toyota doing the same trail. Awesome hair metal playing in the Toyota too...

The syncro seems to walk over some stuff quite easily but looks like the Toyota has bald tires. Also likely the syncro is fully locked (which as discussed, is the band-aid for poor articulation) and the syncro could definitely use some rock sliders!

Mon Nov 04, 2013 10:20 am

well, lets compare floatation angle :roll:

Toyota, diving for pearls

Vanagon, stays level

Mon Nov 04, 2013 10:28 am

Actually, it looks like they both have great tires, perhaps Simex's which are not available in the states and a phenomenal tire. Beautiful driving by the Syncro pilot - truly impressive and clearly a knowledgeable and experienced off road driver who can showcase the fully locked Syncro's ability. Thanks!

DougM

Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:04 pm

How about comparing the Syncro to an Isuzu Trooper?

Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:17 pm

Hmmm I'm really not sure you are all giving them a fair shake

how about comparing a Syncro van to a AWD Dodge caravan or AWD Chevy Astro?
wouldjn't those be more fair comparisons to a van chassis people/gear mover?

Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:23 pm

danfromsyr wrote: Hmmm I'm really not sure you are all giving them a fair shake

how about comparing a Syncro van to a AWD Dodge caravan or AWD Chevy Astro?
wouldjn't those be more fair comparisons to a van chassis people/gear mover?

Exactly my thought. When I was looking to buy a van, I looked all over for a good Sportsbmobile vs. Syncro comparison. They all seemed to more of a religious discussion than anything really objective. I do recall a pretty funny video of a Sportsmobile vs. a Pace Arrow though. Off-roading with the Arrow was pretty hilarious.

Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:25 pm

You can buy a very well equipped syncro for the cost of a sportsmobile!

Astrovan has been mentioned, here: http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6771714#6771714

I think the syncro would actually do a little better due to higher ground cleanance and less overhang, but anything can be lifted!