A bit to low

[Defender90]

After 3k miles of travel I think the standard height of the Cali is a bit to low,the rear mud flaps have often caught the road on sharp bends also when coming off kerbs.Has anybody lifted the van ? and if so how does the propshaft handle the increased angle of drive.

 

[WelshGas]

After 3k miles of travel I think the standard height of the Cali is a bit to low,the rear mud flaps have often caught the road on sharp bends also when coming off kerbs.Has anybody lifted the van ? and if so how does the propshaft handle the increased angle of drive.

Seikal

https://www.seikel.de/produkt-kategorie/volkswagen-t6-1-eh/?lang=EHU om

 

[Defender90]

Seikal

https://www.seikel.de/produkt-kategorie/volkswagen-t6-1-eh/?lang=EHU om

Expensive gear might just put up with the rubbing lol

 

[kurienp]

After 3k miles of travel I think the standard height of the Cali is a bit to low,the rear mud flaps have often caught the road on sharp bends also when coming off kerbs.Has anybody lifted the van ? and if so how does the propshaft handle the increased angle of drive.

The 'sagging bottom' as it is called is a common issue that can be rectified with stiffer springs at the rear and the handling can be improved a lot with stiffer anti-roll bars. Not very expensive, but transforms the vehicle. Depending on where you are located, speak to CRS Performance or Bognor Motors and they will sort it out for you.

This will not be lifting the van, but correcting it to what it should have been from the factory.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[WelshGas]

The 'sagging bottom' as it is called is a common issue that can be rectified with stiffer springs at the rear and the handling can be improved a lot with stiffer anti-roll bars. Not very expensive, but transforms the vehicle. Depending on where you are located, speak to CRS Performance or Bognor Motors and they will sort it out for you.

This will not be lifting the van, but correcting it to what it should have been from the factory.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

This is an OPTICAL illusion.
If you take measurements from ground to the horizontal body line you will find the front wheel arch is cut higher than the rear to allow for suspension travel when turning and Braking simultaneously.
By all means adjust suspension height but do it for the correct reasons.

 

[Velma's Dad]

This is an OPTICAL illusion.
If you take measurements from ground to the horizontal body line you will find the front wheel arch is cut higher than the rear to allow for suspension travel when turning and Braking simultaneously.
By all means adjust suspension height but do it for the correct reasons.

Stiffer springs and thicker ARBs would not alter ride height per se, and I don't believe @kurienp is saying that it would.

However stiffer springs will obviously reduce suspension deflection and that will presumably reduce the degree of bottoming out at rear.

 

[WelshGas]

Stiffer springs and thicker ARBs would not alter ride height per se, and I don't believe @kurienp is saying that it would.

However stiffer springs will obviously reduce suspension deflection and that will presumably reduce the degree of bottoming out at rear.

If that is the case then the correct term should be used eg: " excessive suspension travel " which has a whole different meaning and different methodology for tackling the problem.

 

[kurienp]

If that is the case then the correct term should be used eg: " excessive suspension travel " which has a whole different meaning and different methodology for tackling the problem.

@WelshGas the keywords from the OPs post for me were " rear mud flaps have often caught the road on sharp bends also when coming off kerbs". The OP does not mention the stance being visually low/high.

This IMO, can only happen with springs that are not correctly rated ... and while changing the springs, also good to check - if thinner ARBs fitted, then upgrade to thicker ARBs. Makes a world of difference in handling.



Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[WelshGas]

@WelshGas the keywords from the OPs post for me were " rear mud flaps have often caught the road on sharp bends also when coming off kerbs". The OP does not mention the stance being visually low/high.

This IMO, can only happen with springs that are not correctly rated ... and while changing the springs, also good to check - if thinner ARBs fitted, then upgrade to thicker ARBs. Makes a world of difference in handling.



Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

In that case the rear end suspension has excessive movement not a “ 'sagging bottom' as it is called is a common issue “.

 

[TripleBee]

This is an OPTICAL illusion.
If you take measurements from ground to the horizontal body line you will find the front wheel arch is cut higher than the rear to allow for suspension travel when turning and Braking simultaneously.
By all means adjust suspension height but do it for the correct reasons.

Tell me the optical illusion in this picture. The towhooks are aligned (i.e. they will touch each other if one van backs up)
This is an empty (2200kg) Multivan (Caravelle? for you) against an empty California SE (Ocean = 2550kg empty).

 

[clarinetbcn]

Both CRS Performance and Bognor Motors say that the side body line and the floor of the vehicle should not be level, but should slope 40-50mm from back to front so that the wheel arch gap front and rear are the same. I can see that being the case for an empty panel van, precisely because it is meant to be level when carrying a load. A higher rear spring rate could improve stability, but raising the rear 50mm on a fully equipped California so that the wheel arch gap front and rear are the same would not. That would raise the center of gravity at the rear of a heavy vehicle.

 

[andyinluton]

Tell me the optical illusion in this picture. The towhooks are aligned (i.e. they will touch each other if one van backs up)
This is an empty (2200kg) Multivan (Caravelle? for you) against an empty California SE (Ocean = 2550kg empty).
View attachment 79985

What does the Caravelle looklike with an extra 350kg in it?
More importantly what do they both look like at 300kg? - I would expect the two to be the same.

 

[Louis II]

After 3k miles of travel I think the standard height of the Cali is a bit to low,the rear mud flaps have often caught the road on sharp bends also when coming off kerbs.Has anybody lifted the van ? and if so how does the propshaft handle the increased angle of drive.

I found this thread really useful and have been very pleased with the results from replacing the rear springs and shocks. Low cost and relatively easy DIY job that left me much happier with the rear suspension.

T6 suspension upgrade

once loaded up for our last trip to Europe, found the van handled like a bar of soap . Have looked into suspension options , to stiffen up the van on corners - roundabouts . Our van is a 204 4 motion with heavy duty anti roll bars

vwcaliforniaclub.com

 

[andyinluton]

Cheapest & easiest solution for the OP would be to just shorten the mud flaps.

 

[Calimili]

The “sagging rear” topic keeps reoccurring and i think both parties are correct. The California is camper van: It does have a saggy bottom and regular caravelle/multivan body lines slope downwards rear to front and have identical wheel arch gap front and rear. Not so the California, and i am confident a Multivan drives better Because of this.
But 1) the Cali has a higher roof because it is an elevating one, therefore the back has to be lower to stay within the 2m hight. Infact the rear Ocean‘ springs are the same of the factory lowered option of a Multivan.
2) you need the body line to be leveled horizontally and not sloping otherwise the floor and more importantly the bed would be sloping down towards the front. The head is usually towards the front and feet to the rear, so even more of a concern unless you use very high ramps but then you end up with a huge step to get it.
So the saggy bottom is an optical and driving “defect” that allow for a level camper van to stay below 2m height.

 

[clarinetbcn]

Infact the rear Ocean‘ springs are the same of the factory lowered option of a Multivan.

That is a very interesting piece of information. Has anyone else noticed this?

 

[GrannyJen]

I'm totally inferior.

I am clearly without any form of love for my vehicle.

Two Cali's, 120,000 miles, 500 nights overnighting in one, both 4mo and been bounced over all sorts of crap,

and I totally have abused and misused them. I've just simply got in, driven, gone everywhere, camped anywhere and the only saggy bottom that I have been concerned with has been my own.

Sorry Albert and Alfie

Next time, I will worry over your springs and not mine and will shorten your mudlfaps

 

[B J G]

After 3k miles of travel I think the standard height of the Cali is a bit to low,the rear mud flaps have often caught the road on sharp bends also when coming off kerbs.Has anybody lifted the van ? and if so how does the propshaft handle the increased angle of drive.

Propshaft isn't a concern ref lifting the rear as the Diff is centrally mounted. driveshafts will be but remain within their operating range, CV joints.

You don't mention the load carried as dragging mudflaps are an indication of overloading.

Raised height can be achieved by fitting 'wamper' springs but the centre of gravity is raised causing increased body roll on bends.

rear springs are available with adjustable seats to permit setting ride height as required.

Air suspension is the ultimate, but costly, solution.

 

[bob_summers]

The “sagging rear” topic keeps reoccurring and i think both parties are correct. The California is camper van: It does have a saggy bottom and regular caravelle/multivan body lines slope downwards rear to front and have identical wheel arch gap front and rear. Not so the California, and i am confident a Multivan drives better Because of this.
But 1) the Cali has a higher roof because it is an elevating one, therefore the back has to be lower to stay within the 2m hight. Infact the rear Ocean‘ springs are the same of the factory lowered option of a Multivan.
2) you need the body line to be leveled horizontally and not sloping otherwise the floor and more importantly the bed would be sloping down towards the front. The head is usually towards the front and feet to the rear, so even more of a concern unless you use very high ramps but then you end up with a huge step to get it.
So the saggy bottom is an optical and driving “defect” that allow for a level camper van to stay below 2m height.

Interesting re the Multivan lowering springs.
I'm still measuring showroom T6.1 Oceans at 2030mm at the rear though.

 

[andyinluton]

Load

Interesting re the Multivan lowering springs.
I'm still measuring showroom T6.1 Oceans at 2030mm at the rear though.

Load them up a few times & it soon drops.

 

[sidepod]

Obvs a full 4 wheel alignment will be required post ride height change to correct toe/camber gain/loss.

 

[Defender90]

Cheapest & easiest solution for the OP would be to just shorten the mud flaps.

That did cross my mind lol

 

[WelshGas]

That did cross my mind lol

Give it a while and they'll auto-adjust.

 

[scooter]

Interesting re the Multivan lowering springs.
I'm still measuring showroom T6.1 Oceans at 2030mm at the rear though.

My van is now 1960 mm with sportline springs fitted measured to the top of the Fiamma canopy

 

[SusiBus]

I'm totally inferior.

I am clearly without any form of love for my vehicle.

Two Cali's, 120,000 miles, 500 nights overnighting in one, both 4mo and been bounced over all sorts of crap,

and I totally have abused and misused them. I've just simply got in, driven, gone everywhere, camped anywhere and the only saggy bottom that I have been concerned with has been my own.

Sorry Albert and Alfie

Next time, I will worry over your springs and not mine and will shorten your mudlfaps

I think you should be reported for Cali abuse. Poor old Albert and Alfie. No quite sure who you would report this type of behaviour to. Anyone got any ideas?