Deathtraps!

[Careful]

I'm not flaming here, but don't you feel compromised driving those vans? I don't like vans in general, but the front seating position of the vanagon terrifies me! If it weren't for that, I'd really like to have one.

[Ecoman]

Actually, the vans are quite safe according to reports I have researched on the internet. I was also leary of getting my face smashed at the slightest front impact accident. Apparently, there are strong crash rails that run from the front bumper, under your feet, and on back, that cause the front end to buckle upward, caving in the roof slightly, protecting front occupants. That's not to say you might not get some broken feet in the bargain. But at least the front doesn't just smash straight in, like you would expect by looking at the van. Do a search and find some photos of crashed vans; you'll be surprised.

[Careful]

I'm sill skeptical. Maybe if some sort of custom "front trunk" could be welded on the front end with crumple zones incorporated into it. That would probably raise the safety of the vehical to better than average!

[jetta90]

A quick look at the front end of a Vanagon would indeed make one wonder how safe a vehicle it would be in the event of a collision. I have one and still ask myself the same question. The only time i consider a vehicle safe in any collision is when i'm NOT in it. Some vehicles are safer than others, and i for one feel "safer" with an engine in fromt of me, but:
Take a look at this web page
www.vanagon.com/info/safety/volvo-crash/

[DougFromMaine]

I realize this is reviving an old thread, but I just noticed it and have to chime in here...

Regardless of the crashworthiness (or lack thereof) of a Vanagon, there are other factors to consider in assessing vehicle safety.

One HUGE advantage of a Vanagon is that you can see over the top of almost every other car on the road. Being able to see far ahead gives you several precious extra seconds to react to brake lights applied a few cars ahead, or to see that approaching truck over the hedge that might obscure the view of an non-vanagon driver.

Also, the Vanagon is NOT a "sporting" vehicle. It doesn't beg to be driven to it's limits, and it doesn't go very fast, especially in relation to the rest of the traffic zooming by at 85 MPH on the interstate. Driving a Vanagon requires a certain "I'm really not in a hurry to get there" mindset, and that philosophy goes a long way toward avoiding accidents.

And of course, the fact that the rigid front construction of the Vanagon in essesce employs the other car at its crumple zone doesn't hurt either. Plus, the height of the Vanagon's mass - especially the Syncro models - allows the other car to submarine in a crash, resulting in horrible injuries to the occupants of the other car, but leaving you relatively unscathed. Socially irresponsible? Definitely. But apparently effective as demonstrated in the link from the post above.

[vwtyp133]

How about a few Vanagon safety-positive attributes that have not been mentioned in this thread: rack & pinion steering for more accurate control, large & well-placed turn signals up front to let others know your intentions, good headlights(by U.S. standards) & easy to replace with 7" Bosch or Cibie H4 type for 'great' headlights, and a weight balance that avoids the typical(car/van/pickup) understeering, plowing action in a tight accident-avoidance manuever. Please note that every one of these designed-in features can (in the hands of an awake, aware & experienced sober driver) contribute not only to the safety of the Vanagon inhabitants, but also to the welfare of those in other vehicles which were not hit by the Vanagon. As to the 'socially irresponsible' nature of the Vanagon's front end height, I think I can somehow stave off feeling guilty about that just knowing that I can probably avoid accidents more readily in the Vanagon than in other vans even close to its size. If that's not enough, its suspension, brakes, tires, & wheels can all be upgraded to even higher levels of safety & performance.

Now if I could just get one of those 3.3L Audi V8TDI engines over here & into a diesel vanagon... !

J.R.

[Guest]

Hey! I must share my story about the safety of the VW Vanagon. I own an '83 air cooled VW VAN that purchased in 1985 for the purpose of a trip to Alaska in 1986 from here in Kentucky. I wrecked it in the fall of 1987. It took a beating and I walked away unhurt. The seat belt system, as well as all other features held up well. I went down a ditch line along the side of the left side of the road. The van was sliding on its right side and taking down small trees with the front bumper and left side. When it come to a stop (it was like riding a bronco), it was on its right side and the left door was up in the air (like a hatch on a tank). The left door wouldn't open due to damage in the hinge part of the door jamb. So, I rolled down the glass and crawled out. Now, I repaired it, and have driven it back to Alaska five times since then plus down to Key West. I might add, the front structure of the Vanagon is strong.... trust me!

AndyBees

[newtfam@swbell.net]

I have an '85 vanagon w/2.2 Legacy that starts to go at 85 (top end of 3rd gear), I really don't want to know what the top end is Has anyone tried putting a 1.9tdi in one of these vans?

[Fuss]

I was in an accident in our Vanagon Westy. We got T-Boned by a 1965 Mustang going 50 mph. OUCH. It rolled our westy on the side. The impact was in the slider door area. The Mustang was totaled... The Westy needed a new slider and a little bit of floor straightening and a new driver side window which broke when we went over and a new paint job just to freshen it up! A lot of this was due to the fact that the vanagon sits higher than most cars.

I know we didn't get hit by a surburban but the 65 mustang is as heavy or more than most cars built today..

If you got T-boned in another vehicle at that speed most people would be in the hospital or worse. we all walked away from this one. Even the lady in the Mustang.
In the front the vanagon has a very strong cage unlike the older vw vans of the 60s and 70's I've owned both... and 2 vanagons.

While I wouldn't want to get hit in the front of any... take a look at vanagon.com there is a picture of a head on with a vanagon and a volvo.. I would have not wanted to be in the volvo...

Fuss

[danfromsyracuse]

unless your the one at fault (ie. fall asleep, drive drunk)
it's HIGHLY unlikely that the FRONT of my vanagon is going to hit/be hit by another..

Heck I can't even hit a shopping cart in a parking lot to move it..
with no hood/deep nose.. your depth perception will keep you from being anywheres near an object in front of you..
I feel far more liekly that it'd get hit in one door or the other.. depending on flinch, and reaction time.. it's a rather manuverable vehicle compared to a Dodge mini-van...


and don't thinkt hat those dodge minivan front occupants are much safer, I've seen the engine pused nearly to the drivers door from a run in with a telephone pole.. (fell asleep/drunk, or swinging @ kiddies in the back seat)

it's always interesting to see wrecked vehicles in the JY..

dan stevens
1980 ASI TD camper

[myke_w]

dangerous compared to what? what do you drive?

[diesel dunk]

There was a famous crash test between Type 25 vans and volvo's (supposedly the most ruggid cars on the british roads) and the verdict was not good for the volve. As previously mentioned in this post, the other car (volvo) became the crumple zone for the vanagon. It slid straight under and collapsed. Added to this the speed that vanagon drivers go at and the amazing vision you have when driving. I dont think you can get safer (unless you drive a tank). That's what I think.