Does your T6.1 back end sag

[andyinluton]

Following from discussions on another thread, I am trying to understand whether from the factory, when empty should the crease line on on the bodyside ( the crease runs parallel to the floor & the bottom of the sills) be level, higher at the front or higher at the back.

Note the tops of the wheel arches should not be used as a reference point as the front is cut much higher than the back.

Historically the transporters always had an approx 40mm slope on the load bed when empty with the back being higher. A light load would get the van level & a heavy load would make it look saggy at the back.

Prior to T6.1 Californias all looked level, presumably because of the weight of the kitchen or seats. The exception to this was always the 4motion which have always looked a bit low at the back.

We now have a T6.1 150 Ocean owner saying his sags at the back & that VW have told him it is designed that way & if fitting the usual -30mm lowering springs only to put them on the front.

I want to lower mine & am concerned that it will look totally wrong with just the front done.

 

[GrannyJen]

I just drive mine (Cali that is)...

Whether my bottom sags or not is immaterial. It is the vehicle I climb into, drive, have adapted my driving to the vehicle I'm in and from my pov I have no sense of my bottom sagging, just accept it's the vehicle I'm driving and if any reference is made to my saggy bottom it's either a slap or a bill for a new frock

Sorry if I've made light of a subject dear to others.

 

[Joker 1299]

It appears that my response to this thread is awaiting moderator approval.

Assuming my rift with the owners of this forum has reached rock bottom if not saggy bottom.

Looks like you and me are in the same club...

 

[Joker 1299]

The awaiting moderator approval club...

 

[Joker 1299]

But if it doesn’t get approved no one will ever know. Whatever happened to free speech? Oh no, wait, it’s not free, I pay for this forum.

 

[Joker 1299]

Sorry, I’ll just go to bed. Told you I was bored.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Prior to T6.1 Californias all looked level, presumably because of the weight of the kitchen or seats. The exception to this was always the 4motion which have always looked a bit low at the back.

Just for information - I have a 2019 T6 std suspension set up Ocean with 235/55 tyres. The Cali is part loaded (rear bike rack, not loaded, pull out rear tray, kitchen stuff, some food tins etc) and it is just very slightly higher at the back, I checked with a spirit level.

 

[SusiBus]

Just for information - I have a 2019 T6 std suspension set up Ocean with 235/55 tyres. The Cali is part loaded (rear bike rack, not loaded, pull out rear tray, kitchen stuff, some food tins etc) and it is just very slightly higher at the back, I checked with a spirit level.

Hi Rik.
When you say you have checked it with a spirit level, does that mean you put a spirit level on the glass worktop?

 

[Jabberwocky]

Hi Rik.
When you say you have checked it with a spirit level, does that mean you put a spirit level on the glass worktop?

No I checked the level at the body waistline on the sliding door using a one metre level.

 

[Jabberwocky]

........we try and get the glass worktop as level as we can when we park-up if only to stop the cooking pans sliding off the burners. We have a set of those Ingenio (?) pans that are non stick on the outside and inside so unless the cooker is pretty level the damn things slide off. This was a particular problem with our older Cali as the kitchen was well out of kilter to the rest of the van.

 

[Calimili]

I made some measurements yesterday on T6:
From apex of wheel arch to side body line Front: ~16.5cm
From apex of wheel arch to side body line Rear: ~24cm
The body line of my partially empty Cali Ocean T6 4M seems roughly straight.
The height between the road surface and the lower side of the body just after the front wheel arch is slightly less than in the rear before the wheel arch, confirming the Cali is level if not slightly pointing down towards the front.
Still, when I look at T6 or T6.1 Multivans they seem to have same wheel to wheel arch distance front and back. Maybe they are pointing a bit downwards in the front, but somehow they look more "normal". T6 and T6.1 panel vans, if empty they are markedly higher at the back.

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

My back end sags, but my California’s back end is OK

 

[westfalia]

I made some measurements yesterday on T6:
From apex of wheel arch to side body line Front: ~16.5cm
From apex of wheel arch to side body line Rear: ~24cm

Those measurements should also apply for every T6 van.

Why didn't you measure from centre of the wheel to the wheel arch?

 

[Mr T]

Be an idea to measure from the sill just behind the front wheel (jacking point area) to the ground and same at back end of sill (just in front of rear wheel).

 

[GrumpyGranddad]

Be an idea to measure from the sill just behind the front wheel (jacking point area) to the ground and same at back end of sill (just in front of rear wheel).

That’s what I did, before and after lowering. Wheel arch gaps are irrelevant to the level of the van - they just create an optical illusion. If you have the sane wheel arch gap front and rear the floor of the van won’t be level.

 

[Calimili]

Those measurements should also apply for every T6 van.

Why didn't you measure from centre of the wheel to the wheel arch?

I know already the wheel arch is higher at the front... It' very visible even on the pics above from GG

 

[Calimili]

That’s what I did, before and after lowering. Wheel arch gaps are irrelevant to the level of the van - they just create an optical illusion. If you have the sane wheel arch gap front and rear the floor of the van won’t be level.

Agreed. Have a look at Multivans or Caravelle, they seem to have same wheel arch gap front and back...

 

[Tarquers]

Reckon mine is level?

 

[Calimili]

Reckon mine is level?
View attachment 74562

No, it sags at the rear because of the weight of the diff lock