Shaun Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 Sorry, double post. Can't these be deleted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyStothert Posted August 16, 2009 Author Share Posted August 16, 2009 The biggest problem I have with this bleedin' Fiat is that I actually like it. We have now done nearly 30,000 miles in the damned thing and only half of one (when the first box fell to bits on the steep hill) was anything but pleasurable. And, even though it is still not quite right in reverse, I haven't found another alternative which I prefer. But that said I will Never (EVER) buy another Fiat badged product - not because the van is rubbish (because it isn't) but because the company (or the idiots fronting it at Fiat UK) have absolutely no scruples. The answer? I may have to buy a Peugeot version next time. When the problem has been properly resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peter Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Tracker - 2009-08-14 8:06 PM Please Peter before you go shouting your mouth off again read my posting slowly and give it time to sink in this time before getting back on your holier than thou high horse again. So lets deal with a few points shall we? I do have a very good life indeed thanks for asking - due in no small part to NOT owning an X250 based motorhome. I too have no intention of spending my weekends preaching to the unconverted. However if I am in an X250 based motorhome at a show or a dealer and a conversation breaks out with another viewer - as it so often does - I do mention the POTENTIAL - as I stated earlier the POTENTIAL - for transmission problems and the reluctance of Fiat to rectify them properly. At no point have I ever said that the X250 is a pile of crap, and neither did I say that ALL dealers deny any fault - that's your imagination running riot again. As for questioning dealer's (and converters) integrity - as well as Fiat's - if you look you may well find several hundred other owners of faulty vans doing something very similar - and you won't have to look very far! I don't think it unreasonable that Fiat should have tested their vans fully laden reversing uphill ability before launching it upon an unsuspecting Europe - and many others might agree with me there too? I would be mighty unhappy if the salesman with integrity said to me on handover of my shiny new £40,000 toy - 'it's a very nice van sir and it drives well forward but please don't take it anywhere where you may need to reverse it uphill'. It's not a case of Fiat not fixing vans that they do not know have a fault - let's try and get them to fix the vans that they DO know have a fault first! The Jaguar comparison is plain stupid and just shows your lack of ability to post a reasoned reply. But by all means have another go at me if it makes you happy because if nothing else it keeps the topic in the headlines - but do try and do it without the red mist clouding your eyes!Read your own post again you pompous idiot. You clearly stated that ALL dealers are denying there are any problems. In any case what value do you think your utterings give to this topic, as you don't own one and have said you never will. So just wind your neck in and go back on chatterbox and post stupid remarks to the ladies on there. It's where your best suited. I apologise to the affected people who post on here for diverting attention from the main topic, but I have to respond to this person who keeps popping up and talking out his rear end by slagging off the many honest dealers of motorhomes who know very well that there may be a problem with some vans and are willing to have them fixed if it materialises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 With (as they say) respect, Peter and Rich, what is your egocentric slanging match contributing to this string? Where is the benefit? What do we learn? Eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Sorry, another double post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peter Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 O/K Brian point taken. The sensible people on here can no doubt see that Trackers one man persecution of Fiat is not that of a rational sane person. So will no doubt ignore it as I will also do in future. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyStothert Posted August 16, 2009 Author Share Posted August 16, 2009 Without wishing to offend anyone, but a reverse gear ratio which is too high is reverse gear ratio which is too high. That the reverse gear ratio is way too high on the 6 speed models is unarguable - Fiat wouldn't be spending millions on the modifications in the box otherwise. The incidence of the 'juddering' is almost irrelevant, and the vehicles which aren't the subject of a complaint are the ones to worry about on the second hand market. This is the issue, and until they are all modified, they all have a potential problem in the right (or wrong) circumstances. That thse circumstances may be rare is also irrelevant - it should have been right. Why are we having any arguments over what we all now know is a very simple design fault which Fiat have (by any means possible) attempted to cover up? And does anyone think that after denying this fault for so long that Fiat have spent all these millions on the attempted rectification for other than business reasons? Everyone needs to get their vans done, not only because the next buyer may want proof that it has been modified (or decide they want to go to hilly places) but because you never know when you may get stuck in the place which wrecks the gearbox or clutch. You just don't know what lies around the next corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libby Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 Perhaps Tracker does get a little word happy, but by attacking him for being outspoken over a vehicle condition that should never have left the factory, it may persuade some new buyers to ignore him and BUY ONE. And that would be awful. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melvin Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 AndyStothert - 2009-08-16 9:11 PM The biggest problem I have with this bleedin' Fiat is that I actually like it. We have now done nearly 30,000 miles in the damned thing and only half of one (when the first box fell to bits on the steep hill) was anything but pleasurable. And, even though it is still not quite right in reverse, I haven't found another alternative which I prefer. But that said I will Never (EVER) buy another Fiat badged product - not because the van is rubbish (because it isn't) but because the company (or the idiots fronting it at Fiat UK) have absolutely no scruples. The answer? I may have to buy a Peugeot version next time. When the problem has been properly resolved. All I can say Fiat could do with learning a little customer care from Toyota, the difference is night and day. Their customer care carries on throughout the life of the vehicle, regardless of whether you were the original purchaser. With Fiat it end once they have got your cheque. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 Brian Kirby - 2009-08-16 11:18 PM With (as they say) respect, Peter and Rich, what is your egocentric slanging match contributing to this string? Where is the benefit? What do we learn? Eh? I apologise to all that may be offended but my final word on this is that I simply replied to yet another unprovoked personal attack from the Wellingborough Whinger, who seems to think that having a go at me will in some way encourage others to buy a new or used van (that someone else has rejected) with what has been proven to be a badly designed and, for many mechanically faulty, transmission. If you stop making unprovoked personal attacks on me Peter I'll have no need to reply in kind - but by all means do politely question my postings when you feel the need - that's what a forum is all about! Do we have a deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rupert123 Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 Brian Kirby - 2009-08-16 11:18 PM With (as they say) respect, Peter and Rich, what is your egocentric slanging match contributing to this string? Where is the benefit? What do we learn? Eh? Well Brian I am just back from Scotland, so catching up, and I have to say it is very entertaining. As for contributing it keeps it going if nothing else. What do we learn, well nothing buts whats to learn, we must have heard it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dshague Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 to all x250 owners just reverse up on to your leveling blocks and you will find out you have the judder and burning clutch .then go looking for that hill .now phone fiat .good look.my van in for work to be done end September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkc Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Hi, While in no way trying to divert this thread from from its original task of getting Fiat etc. to accept their responsibilities in this matter, may I float an idea while the seconds are working on Tracker and Peter in their respective corners? Would it be beneficial to change the tyres to one with a lower aspect ratio? In another life as a 'tugger, I changed the tyres on a Landcruiser Colorado from a 215 80 16 size to a 225 70 16 . While seeming to be a small change, the difference on the gearing was quite noticeable. From memory ( a quality I seem to have in alarmingly decreasing amounts) this dropped the cruising rpm by approx 250 rpm, with a useful gain in acceleration and tractability. Obviously there would be issues with speedo/ground clearance etc, and I am not proposing this as a complete fix, but as they say, "many a mickle could make a muckle", any tyre/transmission techies out there do the maths? Just a thought before the bell rings, 'Seconds out' round 63413. Regards PKC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melvin Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 PKC It will unset your speedo, which a legal requirement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 You can use a calculator like this to compute the difference and it may help to know your true speed both before and after by checking it against a sat nav. http://www.alloywheels.com/TyreCalc.asp Bear in mind that the sat nav is a reactive speed indicator and you will need to drive at a set level speed for a few seconds to get an accurate reading and this is where a cruise control can come in handy as it lets you do this at various speeds along a level road. I would doubt that smaller diameter tyres would help in first or reverse gear as the differences only really take effect at higher wheel revolutions, and then there is the issue of reducing ground clearance and many vans have little enough of that already these days! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyStothert Posted August 18, 2009 Author Share Posted August 18, 2009 The problem with reducing the overall gearing is (besides a possible increase in fuel consumption) is that the main thing the Fiat and Peugeot have going for them is the way they drive - in such a quiet and civilised manner. A lower overall gearing will result in a higher engine speed, so therefore a loss of refinement and increased noise. We all worried that Fiat may go down that route and alter the diff ratio as the easiest or cheapest option, but either it wasn't cheapest or it couldn't have been the easiest, and would anyway have been less satisfactory than their gearbox modifications. Which still aren't perfect, but may suffice for the lighter vans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkc Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 You've lost me there Tracker? "I would doubt that smaller diameter tyres would help in first or reverse gear as the differences only really take effect at higher wheel revolutions," ? Andy, I don't know about the latest smaller vans, but I had a 2000 reg 2.8 Autoroller that had a top gear ratio so high it was unusable under 45 mph, long uphill inclines could only be tackled by getting a run at them like Eddie the eagle, or sitting with teeth gritted in 4th gear with the engine growling at you like a pit bull on steroids, a lower top would have been a Godsend, the so called weedy 2 litre I presently own would just run away and hide from the 2.8 thanks to perfectly spaced and well chosen set of ratios. From my ever fading memory the change in 'effective tyre diameter' ( threw that in for Trackers sake) altered the mileage reading by about 10%, assuming an original over read of say 5% possibly it would still be legal and there would be no need for a reactive speed indicator whatever that is. Anyway I didn't mean to suggest that this should be seen as a manufactures fix, but more of a theoretical exercise while you sit drumming your fingers on the table waiting for a sane response from the manufactures, and anyway the pub isn't open yet, and it beats the hell out of throwing our toys at each other. Regards PKC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 I may be wrong, it has been known, but as I see it if smaller tyres reduce your road speed by say 10% that would mean that at 60 mph indicated you are actually doing 54 mph, or 6mph less, but the engine revs would be the same? Therefore if you are going backwards at 4 mph a reduction of 10% would be 3.6 mph at the same engine revs, and I have to wonder whether that amount would make enough real difference to effective low speed gearing to offset the increased wear, fuel use and noise at 60 mph - which would then arrive at an indicated 66 mph?? Ummm - does that make sense - or am I confusing myself - again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkc Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Dunno Tracker, You lost me after "I may be wrong". Regards PKC. P.S. the pub is open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomo3090 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 I take Andys' point about getting the fix done whether your van judders or not, but how do I go about doing this? Would I have to lie to them about the juddering and if so when they test it they will find out about the lies, and that wouldn't sit well with me anyway. If FIAT are accepting that all vans will need doing then will they send out a recall letter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Re changing tyres, this is something I have done a number of times to my phaeton as I've increased the engine size, but in reverse, on the last change a 4.24% increase in rolling radius meant I could use first gear something that prior to change would result in wheelspin in almost any situation. As I've stated before, It's my opinion the 2.3 6 speed would have a resonable top gear even if the overall gearing was reduced as I often forget to change up to 6th as 5th is in most cases a good cruising gear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alf Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Tracker - 2009-08-18 12:37 PM You can use a calculator like this to compute the difference and it may help to know your true speed both before and after by checking it against a sat nav. http://www.alloywheels.com/TyreCalc.asp Bear in mind that the sat nav is a reactive speed indicator and you will need to drive at a set level speed for a few seconds to get an accurate reading and this is where a cruise control can come in handy as it lets you do this at various speeds along a level road. Thats a handy link thanks Alf I would doubt that smaller diameter tyres would help in first or reverse gear as the differences only really take effect at higher wheel revolutions, and then there is the issue of reducing ground clearance and many vans have little enough of that already these days! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 One problem with the 'reducing the tyre-circumference' idea is that the vast majority of X250-based motorhomes are marketed with camping-car tyres and these are only available in a very limited number of sizes. To obtain a sufficiently wide range of tyre sizes to experiment with reduced overall gearing, you'd need to look at ordinary 'van' tyres and be prepared to junk your heavy-duty camping-car tyres. There's also the question of whether a smaller circumference tyre (camping-car or van type) could be obtained with an equal load-bearing capability to that of its larger circumference brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkc Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Thanks Derek, as ever, clear, concise, knowledgeable. Well that's another of my crackpot schemes up in smoke. Back down to the Pub. Regards PKC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennyhb Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 colin - 2009-08-18 8:00 PM As I've stated before, It's my opinion the 2.3 6 speed would have a resonable top gear even if the overall gearing was reduced as I often forget to change up to 6th as 5th is in most cases a good cruising gear. I did about 70 miles on motorway forgetting to change into 6th, fuel consumption went form 27/28 mpg down to 22mpg & I kept wondering why it was so noisy. 6th gear is not particularly high it's about right for the vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.