Syncro 4&4 Discussion and Q&A last answered over 2 years ago.
You may also want to visit the Wiki(pedia) for a more structured index of T25 repair, maintenance, technical and ownership topics (browse for Syncro links)
You can find further syncro specific information on the Syncronauts website.
max and caddy wrote:Seems worthwhile...but...if its such a great thing why didn't SDP just make the front subframe a bit higher? Is such a lofty perch really needed? Who has massive problems with grounding out and would 10 mm cure those issues?
A unimog has all these issues sorted but is very slow and thirsty...
A Unimog was built as a 4x4 vehicle for off road driving like the Nissan Patrol, Land Cruzer etc so they dont really go wrong because they were built for it with nice big engines that the gear box and drive train can handle in standard form. Dont get me wrong I love a Syncro but they are pretty crap as a serious off road vehicle and most of the problems that happen with them is when people take them and modify them with TDI engines (although tiny 1.9 ones) and raising suspension etc that pushes everything else past its capabilities and things give. Why do we do it? because the standard engines are rubbish and they look and act sh!te on tiny 14"wheels and road tyres. The vans were built as 2wd vans and although a little bit clever they were given 4wd and diff locks. The diff locks were given because the suspension is rubbish as a 4wd vehicle and you cant get any traction so you need a diff lock to get you round any kind of bend on a hill on a grassy rutted track.
They do make a good campervan that has 4wd though and finding the compromise between fitting the latest untested thing on the market for the most amount of money and being grounded enough to get a reliable vehicle is the key. I usually find that a Synrco will have its driver bottle it before the van gives up but I think Mark would really like to go on a trip a couple of thousand miles away from home without worrying if a simple part like a CV boot is going to give him grief. Lets face it there are much more expensive and harder to get hold of parts that usually give up and by the sounds of it the boots have gone while going down the shops.
silverbullet wrote:The potential to get it all out of line and make the van "crab" or any number of nasty things is considerable. IMHO.
that is even more scary
There's this little voice that says; 'no matter what you do in mods, you are always likely to arrive down the track too far and its knowing when to turn around, drive around, use a spade or build a bridge.'
As voices go this one is making a bit of sense, even though i have been out for a pint or two. To be honest I think concern for my lpg tank got the better of my judgement with the lift; Jake managed to puncture his in wales some years ago which has stuck in my memory. Id move the tank inside if it werent for the air-con, hot water tank and associated guff taking up all the cupboard space
We are off to Greece for three weeks in July and there is a lot of miles to get through! Ill be on to TPS monday morning, thanks for the input; will need to apply a belt and braces approach to the fitting; perhaps a bit of glue on the fronts? and maybe some wire on the inner rears.
What are the thoughts on Andreas's suggestion for a 'remedy'; I would have thought stretching the boot apart in its relaxed position would be as bad as any other stress ?
It's just worth keeping in mind that people have been having the GKN boots split without the Andreas springs fitted. Just fit the VW ones, the rubber is MUCH thicker. If for some crazy reason these split (can't see it myself) then as we are lucky 16" owners we can fit Porsche 930 boots (the ones the sand buggys use, meant to be indestructible)
lloydy wrote:It's just worth keeping in mind that people have been having the GKN boots split without the Andreas springs fitted. Just fit the VW ones, the rubber is MUCH thicker. If for some crazy reason these split (can't see it myself) then as we are lucky 16" owners we can fit Porsche 930 boots (the ones the sand buggys use, meant to be indestructible)
all the rears, the cv joints fit straight on our shafts, 28 splines so same as ours?.. They are a thicker joint and there is varying opinions on whether that is ok. I havent looked into it too much, but i think the inner cage is the same thickness?..
some measurements here http://www.blindchickenracing.com/How_t ... ts_101.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
this is the boot http://www.gowesty.com/ec_view_details. ... parent_id=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
i have seen them advertised in the uk
silverbullet wrote:It's all a compromise, what SDP and VW thought was acceptable with regard to the COG of the vehicle, roll centres, weight transfer under braking and acceleration, predictable safe handling and blah blah we've done this all before.
As max'n'cad observes, body lift keeps the drivetrain and suspension box:standard, so factory roll centres are unaffected for safest handling but the COG will be raised, so handling will still be compromised to some degree.
It's a big job, since at the front you have to cut off the upper wishbone mounts and move the whole lot down by the same amount as the drop on engine and transaxle mounts. You also have to drop the rear swingarm mounts down to preserve the andgles The potential to get it all out of line and make the van "crab" or any number of nasty things is considerable. IMHO.
But...the resulting increase in arch clearance means you could run bigger diameter tyres and gain a bit on approach/depart angles (assuming the engine can pull the increased gearing) and so gain more ground clearance that way.
Or you could try travelling lighter, let the wagon sit up at the correct height and all of which has precious little to do with poor quality CV boot rubber.
Nighty night
You really were tired when you wrote that Ian!!
Its not that big a job at all. The only panel that needs modifying is the steering rack panel. No top arm mounts to be hacked off ..... simply use a top ball joint spacer and lengthen the front shock. Cut and re weld the engine bar mounting plates and space the gearbox mounts to the right height. No need to cut rear swing mounts - just lengthen the rear arms and reposition the bottom spring mount and shock mount ..... Its all on IG16" !!
Ah, but if you put a top balljoint spacer, the upright is effectively made taller and the front geometry changes... Likewise for lengthening the rear arms, but if kept to 16" specs I guess that it is within acceptable limits, even if it does put quite a bit more load on the trailing arm bushes.
As for lengthening damper rods...
Again, it's naff all to do with cv boot premature failure
1985 Oettinger 3.2 Caravelle RHD syncro twin slider. SA Microbus bumpers, duplex winch system, ARC 7X15 period alloys
silverbullet wrote:
As for lengthening damper rods...
Nope didnt say that!
This is what I have been preaching for ages but no one seems to be picking up on it. These can be made any length you want and it keeps the standard damper functions intact - no spacers, no daft screw on extenders or collars - it simply slides over the existing shock after you remove the eye!
