Hello! Log in or Register   |  Help  |  Donate  |  Buy Shirts  See all banner ads | Advertise on TheSamba.com  
TheSamba.com
 
Is your van SAFE?
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Forum Index -> Vanagon Share: Facebook Twitter
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
Print View
Quick sort: Show newest posts on top | Show oldest posts on top View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sir Sam
Samba Member


Joined: July 19, 2009
Posts: 1667
Location: Fort Collins Colorado!
Sir Sam is offline 

PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PDXWesty wrote:
randywebb wrote:
but far less safe than a new MB, Volvo, BMW etc.


I for one (from very personal experience) would have to take exception to that statement.


Honestly man, thats not based on any kind of good scientific evidence.

Now thats not to say you didn't fair well, or that the van is unsafe. But can you honestly tell me that a 30 years newer mercedes, with umpteen airbags, more hours of crash testing simulation than what went into designing the van, led by the most anal retentive engineers in the world isn't better?

I know if I had to pick a vehicle to be in an accident in I would pick a brand spankin' new mercedes, not a 30 year old van.
_________________
'91 Carat Westy

87' Syncro + '87 Westy conversion coming soon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Gallery Classifieds Feedback
PDXWesty
Samba Member


Joined: April 11, 2006
Posts: 5767
Location: Portland OR
PDXWesty is offline 

PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There have been several accounts on here in the last several years where vans have been in extreme accidents, including t-bone, head-on, and rollover. All of the occupants walked away uninjured. The vanagon was designed with a rigid frame intended to protect the occupants, like a roll cage in race cars. I'm a mechanical engineer and I believe in the concept. I'm not convinced modern cars with air bags and crumple zones are any safer. Those cars are designed to prevent major injuries, but minor injuries still occur. If the vanagon was subjected to modern day crash tests, I think it would fair well. It's not up to insurance standards to minimize damage, but I believe it is a very safe vehicle for its occupants.

p.s. just as a side note, I've seen several pictures of other vanagons that have been in head on collisions and the driver window didn't even break. My door crumpled but the window stayed in tact. unbelievable.
_________________
89 Westy 2.1 Auto
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
DAIZEE
Samba Member


Joined: January 26, 2010
Posts: 7552
Location: Greater Toronto Area Ontario West Side
DAIZEE is offline 

PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 10:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not convinced that anything built in the last 15 years has been built stronger. Look at accident pictures and see how the vehicles collapse like accordions. Air bags are an absolute necessity on modern vehicles for reasons I mention.

When I owned two different 1954 A40 Austins, when I was 18 and another when I was 24 , it was a sherman tank. The body was solid, sure the lights were small and I have flapper signals but if anyone had hit me with a newer car with fins and other appendages, trust me they would have come out the worse.

Like others I say that if you keep your van in good shape with proper functioning mechanics combined with observant diligent driver, then you have a safe vehicle. I'd rather be in a vanagon than a new Mercedi SUV! I believe that the vanagon would be the sherman tank Smile
_________________
'09 2.5L Jetta 5 cylinder, 5 spd, super turbo, see thread in H2O Cooled Jetta, etc...
83.5 Vanagon L Riviera Model with 98 1.9L TD AAZ 4 speed Daily Driver 3 out of 4 seasons (sold)
84 Vanagon GL Wolfsburg Westy WBX 4 speed (sold)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Facebook Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Sir Sam
Samba Member


Joined: July 19, 2009
Posts: 1667
Location: Fort Collins Colorado!
Sir Sam is offline 

PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2010 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DAIZEE wrote:
I am not convinced that anything built in the last 15 years has been built stronger. Look at accident pictures and see how the vehicles collapse like accordions. Air bags are an absolute necessity on modern vehicles for reasons I mention.


Ya, collapse like accordians......obsorbing all that energy.

Look that kinetic energy has to go somewhere, either to the vehicle or to the occupants. The thinking in designing vehicles used to be "lets make the vehicle as rigid as possible so when it is in a collision it doesn't bend/break etc" Now the thinking is "lets transfer all that energy into the body of the vehicle, let the vehicle take all the deformation, not the passengers"

Airbags are critical to safety, but even without airbags I don't see how anyone can deny that modern vehicle structures aren't safer than anything on the road 30 years ago.

Once again I'm not saying I think the van is unsafe, I'm saying I think its irrational to think its safer than a brand new vehicle(all things being equal in a hypothetical test).

This is a poor comparison for our case(even to the point where its not worth pulling up), but it does illustrate my point:

http://colorado4wheel.com/images/misc/crash.wmv


PDXWesty wrote:
There have been several accounts on here in the last several years where vans have been in extreme accidents, including t-bone, head-on, and rollover. All of the occupants walked away uninjured. The vanagon was designed with a rigid frame intended to protect the occupants, like a roll cage in race cars. I'm a mechanical engineer and I believe in the concept. I'm not convinced modern cars with air bags and crumple zones are any safer. Those cars are designed to prevent major injuries, but minor injuries still occur. If the vanagon was subjected to modern day crash tests, I think it would fair well. It's not up to insurance standards to minimize damage, but I believe it is a very safe vehicle for its occupants.

p.s. just as a side note, I've seen several pictures of other vanagons that have been in head on collisions and the driver window didn't even break. My door crumpled but the window stayed in tact. unbelievable.


I'm a mechanical engineer as well and I believe the concept too(that is making a structure around the occupants to protect them, but putting an egg in an unbreakable ball and dropping it 30 feet is not as safe as surrounding it with pillows and dropping it), I also believe that 30 years of engineering have produced vehicles that are safer than they were thirty years ago.

To make this an apples and apples comparison(or as much as it can be), between a Vanagon and T5 I would pick the T5.

Between a smart car and a vangon......well thats a tough one and it depends on the circumstances. We have plenty of anecdotal evidence for the safety of the vanagon, and I don't doubt it. But by the same regard there is just as much anecdotal evidence for the safety of new vehicles(more really, but thats mostly to do with the numbers of new vehicles vs older ones like our vans).
_________________
'91 Carat Westy

87' Syncro + '87 Westy conversion coming soon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Gallery Classifieds Feedback
hellenic vanagon
Samba Member


Joined: December 28, 2007
Posts: 278
Location: ATHENS GREECE
hellenic vanagon is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:26 am    Post subject: Driving a T3 (2WD AND SYNCRO) since 1980 Reply with quote

Please keep in mind that any vehicle may be destroyed under specific circumstances in crashes, even a tank!

Driving a T3 since 1980, I can say that the next photos represent it's typical behavior, in "logical" situations, meaning in cases within the limits of expectations for a very safe car:

Both cars are posted here, in order to have your conclusions.

Because , to see a severly damaged car, (Vanagon or anything else), saying that it is not safe enough, knowing nothing about the real evidences, cannot be accurate!

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.



Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


Syncro:(1979 passive safety design) minor damage.

Audi: (2000 + passive safety design) almost demolished.

In fact, the SYNCRO is better than 2WD VANAGON, having a second, parallel, chassis, under the main unibody construction.

2WD or SYNCRO, in a lot of real life crashes, you get the notion of a very strong and safe car. (P.ex. the well known case with FOLKSAM-VOLVO).

In cases where the "deformation element" does not play role, the picture is not so good.


Last edited by hellenic vanagon on Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
madspaniard
Samba Member


Joined: August 18, 2008
Posts: 3795
Location: Alameda, CA
madspaniard is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

it looks like you are OK, any more details about the crash? did the Audi hit anything besides your van? looks like a lot of damage compared to your syncro.

I guess you will be now on the list to buy the Projekt Zwo foglight repros. God thing the nice headlights and grill seem to be OK
_________________
1991 Westy auto w/ Peloquin TBD

"The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad” - Salvador Dali
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
hellenic vanagon
Samba Member


Joined: December 28, 2007
Posts: 278
Location: ATHENS GREECE
hellenic vanagon is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

madspaniard wrote:
it looks like you are OK, any more details about the crash? did the Audi hit anything besides your van? looks like a lot of damage compared to your syncro.

I guess you will be now on the list to buy the Projekt Zwo foglight repros. God thing the nice headlights and grill seem to be OK


It is not my case.

You can read about it here:
http://www.vwt3.co.at/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=3584

(They asked him if the AUDI hit a wall, besides SYNCRO) Blue Vanagon
_________________
The Syncro Heresy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
levi
Samba Member


Joined: February 11, 2005
Posts: 5522
Location: Las Vegas
levi is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

madspaniard wrote:
it looks like you are OK, any more details about the crash? did the Audi hit anything besides your van? looks like a lot of damage compared to your syncro.

I guess you will be now on the list to buy the Projekt Zwo foglight repros. God thing the nice headlights and grill seem to be OK


the guy said he had just dropped off his kids a few minutes earlier, and he hurt his left knee, black eyes, (maybe no seat belt?), undercarriage damage.
12,000 euros damage estimated Crying or Very sad
but, this all happened almost 7 years ago!
_________________
One of these days I'm gonna settle down,
but till I do I won't be hangin round.
Going down that long lonesome highway,
gonna see life my way

https://youtu.be/cSrL0BXsO40
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
hellenic vanagon
Samba Member


Joined: December 28, 2007
Posts: 278
Location: ATHENS GREECE
hellenic vanagon is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

levi wrote:
madspaniard wrote:
it looks like you are OK, any more details about the crash? did the Audi hit anything besides your van? looks like a lot of damage compared to your syncro.

I guess you will be now on the list to buy the Projekt Zwo foglight repros. God thing the nice headlights and grill seem to be OK


the guy said he had just dropped off his kids a few minutes earlier, and he hurt his left knee, black eyes, (maybe no seat belt?), undercarriage damage.
12,000 euros damage estimated Crying or Very sad
but, this all happened almost 7 years ago!


1)Unfortunately says nothing about seat belt.

2)It was a really strong shock, some consequences are expected.

3)The car may be driven as it is, apart from aesthetics and lighting. AUDI is demolished.

4)Still it is a representative example of it's behavior in moderate crashes.
_________________
The Syncro Heresy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
levi
Samba Member


Joined: February 11, 2005
Posts: 5522
Location: Las Vegas
levi is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed on all points!, and thank you very much for posting this here.

It is a good reflection of just how well these vans fare in crashes against those who turn in front of us.
_________________
One of these days I'm gonna settle down,
but till I do I won't be hangin round.
Going down that long lonesome highway,
gonna see life my way

https://youtu.be/cSrL0BXsO40
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
hellenic vanagon
Samba Member


Joined: December 28, 2007
Posts: 278
Location: ATHENS GREECE
hellenic vanagon is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:46 pm    Post subject: Knalleffekt (= bombshell) Reply with quote

The results, for both vehicles, are similar to those of an early '80s test, where, again, they called T3 knalleffekt, (=bombshell), because it demolished the K70, although, after that, the very surprised from the unexpected result reporter, says that T3 was ready for...expeditions!

Have a look to this, rather, unknown semi-official test:


Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.

_________________
The Syncro Heresy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
randywebb
Samba Member


Joined: February 15, 2005
Posts: 3815
Location: Greater Metropolitan Nimrod, Orygun
randywebb is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Crash std.s have gone up quite a bit since the Vanagon was last sold.

Moreover, that only refers to passive safety.

Active safety consists of avoiding an accident and that covers all sorts of sports car or sports sedan type 'stuff' including that a low center of gravity means a vehicle is less likely to roll over, high hp/wt. means it can accelerate out of danger sometimes, and communicative suspension & steering can help too.

Many new active safety systems have been required on later vehicles, including electronic stability control and ant-lock brakes. Then there are options or std. equipment today such as radar warning systems for vehicles in the blind spot, or ahead, etc.


Also, how many people have claimed on this thread that the Vanagon is the ultimate in safety, yet moaned on other threads about the inadequacy of the brakes?
_________________
1986 2.1L Westy 2wd Auto Trans.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
hellenic vanagon
Samba Member


Joined: December 28, 2007
Posts: 278
Location: ATHENS GREECE
hellenic vanagon is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

randywebb wrote:
Crash std.s have gone up quite a bit since the Vanagon was last sold.

Moreover, that only refers to passive safety.

Active safety consists of avoiding an accident and that covers all sorts of sports car or sports sedan type 'stuff' including that a low center of gravity means a vehicle is less likely to roll over, high hp/wt. means it can accelerate out of danger sometimes, and communicative suspension & steering can help too.

Many new active safety systems have been required on later vehicles, including electronic stability control and ant-lock brakes. Then there are options or std. equipment today such as radar warning systems for vehicles in the blind spot, or ahead, etc.


Also, how many people have claimed on this thread that the Vanagon is the ultimate in safety, yet moaned on other threads about the inadequacy of the brakes?


1)AUDI (A6?), is year 2000 + car.

2)SYNCRO has 140 kgr. extra weight, under body, and resists 45o +, in it's top loaded camper configuration, to rollover. It is an A+ grade for any vehicle category.

3)Although this thread is about passive safety, T3 has a lot of active safety measures, such as, very, special geometry, independent, front and rear suspension, 50%-50% front-rear weight distribution, (better than many fast cars), rack and pinion drive, (yes, even today million, (billion?), cars, of it's category running without), first car of it's category with ABS, (optional), brake weight, front/rear, pressure regulator, 1.6 m2 windshield + body part in slope, acting as, (secret), spoiler, exceptional driver visibility, skidpad and slalom grades equal or, with proper tires and SYNCRO, better than the best passenger cars.

4)The brakes must be upgraded to the, 1992-2002, Southafrican edition. (At least).

5)Not saying anything about the standard engine, which is not proper for this car at all! But, in nowdays, there are a lot of excellent, after market, solutions, inline 4, inline 4 turbo, inline 5, inline 5 turbo, flat 6, V 6, V6 biturbo, V8, even W 12! The car is worthy, especially SYNCRO!
_________________
The Syncro Heresy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
IdahoDoug
Samba Member


Joined: June 12, 2010
Posts: 10007
Location: N. Idaho
IdahoDoug is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

While I will not disagree that the Vanagon's front end is very strong - it is - it is worth noting that the collision with the Audi highly favored the Syncro for purposes of pictures. The Syncro's front bumper over rode the Audi's, which means the harder bits of the Syncro (bumper level structure) sank deeply into the soft upper part of the Audi. From a pictorial standpoint, this exaggerates the strength of the Syncro vs the Audi. But it literally says nothing about occupant safety, and I'd bet the Audi occupants experienced less G force. At the end of the day it's who walks away without a limp that matters.

As a LandCruiser driver with a stock suspension, my bumper is much higher than other vehicles. It is common for members of our club to experience similar advantages when they are in collisions. The other car is towed away drooling fluids to a junkyard, while the LandCruiser is driven home after the police forms are filled out.

That is not to say the Van's front structure is not phenomenally strong, but it's worth pointing out that these photos exaggerate it because the Audi's bumper structure did not even engage the Syncro.

The Van's front end HAS to be strong because there is precious little crush space to use with the driver's legs 6" behind the headlights. However, that stiff front end would not work so well against a fixed object such as a bridge, tree or large truck where crush space is critical to reduce the occupant's peak G loads. It certainly works well against smaller cars, though!!

DougM
_________________
1987 2WD Wolfsburg Vanagon Weekender "Mango", two fully locked 80 Series LandCruisers. 2016 Subaru Outback boxer. 1990 Audi 90 Quattro 20V with rear locking differential. 1988 Mitsubishi Van w/ dual spinny seats, mid engine and solid axle.1990 burgundy parts Vanagon. 1984 Porsche 944, 1992 Lexus LS400, 1988 Toyota Supra 5 speed targa project in pieces, 2002 BMW 325iX
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
T3 Pilot
Samba Member


Joined: January 10, 2011
Posts: 1457
Location: Deep South of the Great White North
T3 Pilot is offline 

PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Check out this Van on Van action........

http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=175672
_________________
1988 Vanagon

The most important part in every vehicle is the nut behind the wheel......
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
hellenic vanagon
Samba Member


Joined: December 28, 2007
Posts: 278
Location: ATHENS GREECE
hellenic vanagon is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

IdahoDoug wrote:
While I will not disagree that the Vanagon's front end is very strong - it is - it is worth noting that the collision with the Audi highly favored the Syncro for purposes of pictures. The Syncro's front bumper over rode the Audi's, which means the harder bits of the Syncro (bumper level structure) sank deeply into the soft upper part of the Audi. From a pictorial standpoint, this exaggerates the strength of the Syncro vs the Audi. But it literally says nothing about occupant safety, and I'd bet the Audi occupants experienced less G force. At the end of the day it's who walks away without a limp that matters.

As a LandCruiser driver with a stock suspension, my bumper is much higher than other vehicles. It is common for members of our club to experience similar advantages when they are in collisions. The other car is towed away drooling fluids to a junkyard, while the LandCruiser is driven home after the police forms are filled out.

That is not to say the Van's front structure is not phenomenally strong, but it's worth pointing out that these photos exaggerate it because the Audi's bumper structure did not even engage the Syncro.

The Van's front end HAS to be strong because there is precious little crush space to use with the driver's legs 6" behind the headlights. However, that stiff front end would not work so well against a fixed object such as a bridge, tree or large truck where crush space is critical to reduce the occupant's peak G loads. It certainly works well against smaller cars, though!!

DougM


1)A common misunderstanding: VANAGON, even SYNCRO, are not higher than the average car!

Here you can see bumper height for SYNCRO:

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


And here for the 2wd:

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.



The middle of their bumpers, (average bumper height), is 44.5 cm for 2wd, 48.5 cm for SYNCRO, (we can see the lowest bumper point which coincides to the vertical marked, near bottom, side line), + 5 cm, which is half the bumper's profile.

Finally, it is 49.5 for 2wd and 53.5 for SYNCRO.

Now, these are some average height bumper measurements, of some cars, made by me, in cm:

Passenger cars:

Huyndai Getz

Front: 47
Rear: 50


Skoda Felicia

Front: 47
Rear: 50

VW GOLF 4

Front: 45
Rear: 55


Renault Sandero

Front: 52

Rear: 62


ΒΜW 316

Front: 45




VW POLO

Front: 45

Rear: 53


4x4

Toyota Land Cruiser (2000 model)

Front: 68 (The mountings on chassis much lower).

Rear: 61

Νssan xtrail

Front: 57

Rear: 51


Now, consider that in T3, because of its design, (front passengers over the front wheels), for a 75 kgr, person, the height is reduced about 1 cm.

Another, at least, 1-2 cm is reduced from braking.

The clear bumper height is, somehow, more or less, within the average limits.


And if in the case of SYNCRO-AUDI, there wasn't absolute compatibility, between 2wd VANAGON and K70 there was.

Results? The same!

2)Talking about the HIC, (head injury criterion), in real life crashes, the things are much different than the concrete tests.

This is the reason that although NHTSA measured a HIC of 1300, (about), in concrete tests with their standard procedure, (50 km/h or more),

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


in the well known VOLVO-VANAGON 50% offset collision, similar to the one with AUDI, the HIC for the VOLVO driver was...3.868, and for the VANAGON, (CARAVELLE), only 155!

This is why IIHS said:

a)Vanagon proved 60% safer than expected, (!), and
b)Vanagon, safest car, with less deaths than any other for '80s, death coefficient 0.6! (Better than many nowdays cars with airbags!)
http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr2604.pdf

(Jeep LIBERTY, 2002, 0.86, lAND ROVER DISCOVERY SERIES II 1.19, CHEVROLET BLAZER 2WD, 2 DOOR, 3.08 (!), adjusted to '80s way of measurement).
http://www.iihs.org/news/2005/iihs_sr_031505.pdf

And if you consider the crash photo, you will see that no airbag was able to save the "poor" VOLVO "driver", when VANAGON's "saved" with minor injuries:

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


http://www.vanagon.com/info/safety/volvo-crash/index.htm

Finally
3)Between the lights and the driver's legs are more than...air:


outer
Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.



and inner
Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.
[/b]

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


And the total thing works well against higher trucks

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


and..trees: (within the specifications limits).

no harm for the driver
Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.

_________________
The Syncro Heresy


Last edited by hellenic vanagon on Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:22 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
IdahoDoug
Samba Member


Joined: June 12, 2010
Posts: 10007
Location: N. Idaho
IdahoDoug is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't doubt your measurements of other vehicle bumpers, but everywhere I parked near other vehicles and happened to look, my Syncro bumper was clearly much higher than others. Another consideration regarding the way Vanagons tend to override other bumpers may be the lack of the weight of an engine up front favors their ability to move upward without the inertia of the engine as the collision begins. Though they are close to a 50/50 weight balance, the lack of weight right at the front bumper (vs traditional car) may allow the front of vanagons to rise more easily - favoring them in subsequent damage. A good thing if you are in the Vanagon.

I have never seen that Volvo picture, but from that angle it seems quite clear the Vanagon is again over riding the Volvo's front structure. I guess Vanagons like it on top!! Heh.

Just measured the bottom edge of the frame on my Cruiser at 17" and the top of my bumper at 27".

DougM
_________________
1987 2WD Wolfsburg Vanagon Weekender "Mango", two fully locked 80 Series LandCruisers. 2016 Subaru Outback boxer. 1990 Audi 90 Quattro 20V with rear locking differential. 1988 Mitsubishi Van w/ dual spinny seats, mid engine and solid axle.1990 burgundy parts Vanagon. 1984 Porsche 944, 1992 Lexus LS400, 1988 Toyota Supra 5 speed targa project in pieces, 2002 BMW 325iX
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Jake de Villiers
Samba Member


Joined: October 24, 2007
Posts: 5445
Location: Crescent Beach, BC
Jake de Villiers is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's really good information HV - thanks!

The cutaway photo that shows just how far the driver's knees are from the front of the van is really good.
_________________
'84 Vanagon GL 1.9 WBX
'86 Westy Weekender Poptop/2.5 Subaru/5 Speed Posi/Audi Front Brakes/16 x 7 Mercedes Wheels - answers to 'Dixie'
@jakedevilliersmusic1
http://sites.google.com/site/subyjake/mydixiedarlin%27
www.crescentbeachguitar.com
www.thebassspa.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Instagram Gallery Classifieds Feedback
PDXWesty
Samba Member


Joined: April 11, 2006
Posts: 5767
Location: Portland OR
PDXWesty is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vanagon Driver (no airbag): Not Injured.

Minivan Driver (airbags): Left the scene in an ambulance and spent 4 days in the hospital.

You tell me which vehicle you'd rather be driving...

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.

_________________
89 Westy 2.1 Auto
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
hellenic vanagon
Samba Member


Joined: December 28, 2007
Posts: 278
Location: ATHENS GREECE
hellenic vanagon is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IdahoDoug wrote:
I don't doubt your measurements of other vehicle bumpers, but everywhere I parked near other vehicles and happened to look, my Syncro bumper was clearly much higher than others. Another consideration regarding the way Vanagons tend to override other bumpers may be the lack of the weight of an engine up front favors their ability to move upward without the inertia of the engine as the collision begins. Though they are close to a 50/50 weight balance, the lack of weight right at the front bumper (vs traditional car) may allow the front of vanagons to rise more easily - favoring them in subsequent damage. A good thing if you are in the Vanagon.

I have never seen that Volvo picture, but from that angle it seems quite clear the Vanagon is again over riding the Volvo's front structure. I guess Vanagons like it on top!! Heh.

Just measured the bottom edge of the frame on my Cruiser at 17" and the top of my bumper at 27".

DougM


1)I gave you the official VW's data for T3 and some measurements of some cars which were in a specific moment in my neighborhood, trying to be as much possible accurate as I could, considering separately the height left and right and implementing an average number.

So the middle height point of your Cruiser bumper is 55.88 cm or 22 inches, much lower than I measured. Which era model is it?

This is like that I measured:
Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


2)Please consider this train crash: the engine, although much heavier than the wagon, climbs on it!

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


So it is not a matter of weight, which really plays an important role, but rather a matter of a relationship of the strength of the material and the construction which comes in contact.

The train engine is much harder, as construction, to the wagon, so the last one crumbles and makes a kind of ramp, which is "used" by the engine to climb on.

And this is really the case with the VANAGON, which has chassis stiffness grade of 7, when passenger cars have, up to, lets say 90%, no more than 3:

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.


Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.

_________________
The Syncro Heresy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Display posts from previous:   
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Forum Index -> Vanagon All times are Mountain Standard Time/Pacific Daylight Savings Time
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 4 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

About | Help! | Advertise | Donate | Premium Membership | Privacy/Terms of Use | Contact Us | Site Map
Copyright © 1996-2020, Everett Barnes. All Rights Reserved.
Not affiliated with or sponsored by Volkswagen of America | Forum powered by phpBB