Fiat/Peugeot/Citroen transmission defect

[rupert123]

colin - 2009-08-23 12:50 PM

 

rupert123 - 2009-08-22 11:55 PM

 

This thread is starting to drift into a lets discuss anything topic. It was about the Fiat transmission defect but no one has anything new to say, about time it was allowed a decent buriel.

 

Not at all, a point was made that changing tyres might help, and this has progressed from there, so mostly relavent to a problem that Fiat still seem unwilling to fix for some, viva la thread.

 

Not at all relevent, tyres have nothing to do with the basic problem and did not progress anywhere. Making suggestions that might overcome or help the problem is just ignoring the issue. Fiat have addressed the 2.3 six speed, even Andy seems ok with the fix, the 2.2 five speed does not have a problem, I have one, not a clue about the 3.0 ltr. but not to many complaints here and perhaps those who have a problem should keep this thread going and let us all know what you are doing and response received.

[colin]

rupert123 - 2009-08-23 3:35 PM

 

Not at all relevent, tyres have nothing to do with the basic problem and did not progress anywhere. Making suggestions that might overcome or help the problem is just ignoring the issue. Fiat have addressed the 2.3 six speed, even Andy seems ok with the fix, the 2.2 five speed does not have a problem, I have one, not a clue about the 3.0 ltr. but not to many complaints here and perhaps those who have a problem should keep this thread going and let us all know what you are doing and response received.

 

Some 5 speeds owners have the problem, as yeti has posted some 3l owners have a problem, not all 2.2/2.3 6 speeds have been fixed and of those that have, not all are 100% happy, changing the overall gearing may, or may not, be an option that those unhappy owners might have to consider, especialy those who now report a judder going forward as well as reverse.

[AndyStothert]

Rather than consider the rights and wrongs of the situation Fiat are playing the numbers game. Call it modern business practice if you like, but some of us consider it to be just dishonest.

They know all too well that this design defect (the reverse gear ratio being too high) affects all of them. Whether they judder or not. They know that they are still selling a vehicle which continues to carry the problem, but have masked it slightly with modified engine mountings and the clutch damper.

They know (for sure, because Peugeot are admitting it) that the gearbox mods are not a completely satisfactory solution, but they also know that most owners (this includes me I suppose) have had enough after over 2 years of lies and evasion.

They know damned well that they are gradually eroding the strength of the resistance, but not by sorting it out properly just wearing us down. They also know that most of the owners who have had the work done would prefer to think this long running saga is over, and certainly won't go loking for an extreme place to test it. So the number of complainants will be drastically reduced.

 

They know that a high percentage of new owners (with unmodified gearboxes) will not get themselves in the situation where gearbox or clutch damage will occur, that only a percentage of those will find about about this fiasco within a couple of years, so they will escape their responsibilities to the few who suffer financially (and emotionally possibly with wrecked holiday) from their cock-up.

And they also know that once they have worn down the resolve of the small number of 2.3 litre owners who realise that the improvements are still, at best, marginal, then it will leave a very small number of 3 litre and 5 speed owners to consider.

And.... because the damage on the 3 litre models is restricted to a few clutches they can claim that the damage is driver-related rather than a too high reverse gear ratio combined with a DMF flywheel which overheats very quickly if the clutch is slipped at high revs for more than a few moments.

And they know that the fewer there are whinging and shouting inevitably they won't be heard.

Just a cynical game of numbers. Nothing to do with doing the right thing.

Sorry about the rant.

 

[spospe]

Has anyone tried to sell an affected vehicle and if so what was the reaction?

 

What I am asking is, have second-hand values been reduced and are folk actually buying these 'judderers'?

[dshague]

spospe - 2009-08-23 6:08 PM Has anyone tried to sell an affected vehicle and if so what was the reaction? What I am asking is, have second-hand values been reduced and are folk actually buying these 'judderers'?

in my experience changing the van in may no problem and a very good px was given .

[Guest peter]

spospe - 2009-08-23 6:08 PM

 

Has anyone tried to sell an affected vehicle and if so what was the reaction?

 

What I am asking is, have second-hand values been reduced and are folk actually buying these 'judderers'?

The previous owner of mine part exchanged it and I subsequently bought it. Does that answer your question?.

[Brian Kirby]

The manufacturer, the dealer, and the customer.  Three wise monkeys?  See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.  Anything else, and you have a problem.

Schtums the word.  :-)

[mike 202]

dshaque.

 

Did you buy another Fiat or a different base vehicle ???

 

Mike

[brom]

As Andy says, the mods may mask the underlying problem of the overly high reverse gear; even if judder isn't so bad, the clutch may burn out because the driver slips it to retain control and maintain low speed in reverse - then Fiat don't have to cough up because it's driver 'error' and a consumable item.

 

Though not an X250 owner, I've watched this thread throughout with interest, and I'm sure that replacing the Dual Mass flywheels with solid ones was mentioned some time ago. Apparently some people who had trouble with Transits burning their flywheels have resorted to this and it is said to work, but might make the transmission a bit rougher.

 

Might a replacement flywheel be a further modification for the X250 to beef up the clutch, if nothing further can (or will) be done to lower reverse gear by the manufacturers?

 

Brom

[AndyStothert]

Brom (et Al),

The 2.3 litre versions have a traditional solid flywheel, so the clutch was actually quite an abusable item - unlike the gearboxes, which destroy themselves not because of the juddering when the clutch is released, but the vibration occurring when reversing in steep places at low speeds without slipping the clutch. No matter how many times this has been pointed out to folk very few seem to have grasped the point - the juddering on clutch release isn't the serious issue.

Whether the new clutch on the modified versions is quite so abusable we don't yet know, because as usual Fiat will not release any technical information to its customers.

On the 3 litre models which do have a DMF, but more torque, and a tougher spec box, the combination of the high reverse gearing with a DMF means that with inevitable clutch slipping on steep hills or in awkward places the very thin flywheel face which mates to the clutch gets very hot very quickly whilst slipping the clutch, and can easily result in a burnt out clutch.

After all the lying and evasion until Fiat actually tell us what they have done (i.e clutch spec and what they hope to achieve with the clutch damper) it seems completely reasonable to expect an extended warranty on the transmission, and really quite foolish to buy one new until the issue of the overly high reverse gear is sorted out properly.

[rupert123]

Thats better things back on track, no more daft talk about tyres just some facts and rants from owners of affected vans. You have to keep going to have any chance because this issue is dying and Fiat are winning the war.

[TerryL]

Are people buying these "judderers". The answer is yes.

 

We spent over twelve months looking for our ideal layout - after all that is what we were told to do by other motorhome owners in these forums - to ensure we got as close as possible to what we wanted. And guess what? the only one we found was on a Sevel X2-50. We thought long and hard about the reversing problem but in the end decided to go ahead anyway.

 

We found our ideal van at a well-known national dealer which ticked all the boxes. It was priced almost exactly where we expected it and came with all the usual extras as a bonus, the previous owner having had to give it up due to ill health. The salesman did admit that a problem had been identified with some of the base vehicles, particularly the heavier ones. So I tested it for reverse judder at the dealer where there happened to be a convenient hill and found it did indeed judder, but as a professional driver covering many thousands of miles every year in a range of vehicles I considered it manageable. So we bought it. With our eyes wide open.

 

Now having completed several trips we are highly delighted with our purchase. On every trip so far I have been faced with having to reverse in one or other of the situations reported in previous posts, but by careful use of revs and clutch control all has been well and the vibration kept to a minimum.

 

Yes we are a little disappointed that our pride and joy has a fault, but we do try and stay out of the "reversing situations" wherever possible and intend to enjoy this wonderful pastime - c'mon guys (and gals), look on the positives!

 

Terry (awaiting with anticipation all the doom merchants out there!)

 

[spospe]

TerryL

 

You are not a Fiat dealer in disguise are you?

 

(lol)

[rupert123]

TerryL - 2009-08-24 10:45 AM

 

Are people buying these "judderers". The answer is yes.

 

We spent over twelve months looking for our ideal layout - after all that is what we were told to do by other motorhome owners in these forums - to ensure we got as close as possible to what we wanted. And guess what? the only one we found was on a Sevel X2-50. We thought long and hard about the reversing problem but in the end decided to go ahead anyway.

 

We found our ideal van at a well-known national dealer which ticked all the boxes. It was priced almost exactly where we expected it and came with all the usual extras as a bonus, the previous owner having had to give it up due to ill health. The salesman did admit that a problem had been identified with some of the base vehicles, particularly the heavier ones. So I tested it for reverse judder at the dealer where there happened to be a convenient hill and found it did indeed judder, but as a professional driver covering many thousands of miles every year in a range of vehicles I considered it manageable. So we bought it. With our eyes wide open.

 

Now having completed several trips we are highly delighted with our purchase. On every trip so far I have been faced with having to reverse in one or other of the situations reported in previous posts, but by careful use of revs and clutch control all has been well and the vibration kept to a minimum.

 

Yes we are a little disappointed that our pride and joy has a fault, but we do try and stay out of the "reversing situations" wherever possible and intend to enjoy this wonderful pastime - c'mon guys (and gals), look on the positives!

 

Terry (awaiting with anticipation all the doom merchants out there!)

 

Welcome to the forum, nice to see a good sensible post on this matter. You do not say what engine/gearbox you have, if it is the 2.3 six speed you may wish to investigate the fix if not already done.

[rolandrat]

There is a very good article on page 15 of Augusts 3 m's regarding a satisfied customer who had a transmission problem with his motorhome. He obviously went the right way about getting it resolved and should be a lesson to all of us. The SMMT code of practice is the way to go. Fiat obviously got egg on their face with that one.

[TerryL]

SPOSE

 

Nope - just a satisfied customer

 

 

RUPERT123

 

2.3 6-speed gearbox. Yes I'm investigating it. I think the original Warranty has expired but the original owner paid for it to be extended and I have been registered for the remainder of the period. Don't think it covers the mechanicals - but I knew that when we bought it.

 

Terry

[Defyn]

I am just a visitor with no experience of Motorhome driving or use, so please forgive my ignorance. Any help is appreciated however.

My wife hired a 2007/8 Ace Firenze 6 berth MH (Fiat Multijet 2.3 engine?) however after 1.5 miles the clutch went. The hire company are blaming her and therefore witholding rental and insurance deposit - a total of £1300 for 5 mins use!!!

I am going through small claims court however I would value your opinions on the following:

1. Is this MH the Fiat platform and transmission that so many have experienced problems with?

2. In your experience, would it have been possible for my wife (an experienced driver of big 4x4s/towing etc) to burn out a 'healthy' clutch in 1.5 miles of flat driving?

 

I am looking for background info as have to represent myself to try and get my money back

 

rgds

[euroserv]

I would have to say that this is highly unlikely, though nothing is impossible. We hire out vans and trucks and occasionally even an experienced driver has been witnessed leaving our yard furiously slipping the clutch while getting used to the vehicle. I have gone through many emotions while watching and I always pray that things improve very quickly. The Fiat X250 and for that matter most new vehicles have very light clutches and will easily stall if insufficient revs are applied during take-off.

 

I know that there is no way on earth that we would get away with charging a hirer for this kind of damage within such a short distance though and we often have to take this sort of thing on the chin due to lack of evidence.

 

I don't think you will have too much trouble defending your position if you get Consumer's Advice or Trading Standards involved first. The rental firm is wrong and they know it.

 

Nick

[mike 202]

Defyn,

 

If you have house insurance then you should have legal cover on that policy which does just what it says "it provides legal cover"and does not cost you a penny.

 

I thought it only covered lagal matters to do with the house, but an insurance broker friend of mine told me it covered the motorhome and in fact any other problems . In my case a new coachbuilt by a large manufacturer was falling apart. (no need to name them as it now serves no purpose).

 

So give your house insurance Company solicitors a ring. The special tel no will be in the policy wording. If you need further info PM me with your Phone No.

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

Defyn - 2009-08-24 3:56 PM I am just a visitor with no experience of Motorhome driving or use, so please forgive my ignorance. Any help is appreciated however. My wife hired a 2007/8 Ace Firenze 6 berth MH (Fiat Multijet 2.3 engine?) however after 1.5 miles the clutch went. The hire company are blaming her and therefore witholding rental and insurance deposit - a total of £1300 for 5 mins use!!! I am going through small claims court however I would value your opinions on the following: 1. Is this MH the Fiat platform and transmission that so many have experienced problems with? 2. In your experience, would it have been possible for my wife (an experienced driver of big 4x4s/towing etc) to burn out a 'healthy' clutch in 1.5 miles of flat driving? I am looking for background info as have to represent myself to try and get my money back rgds

If they are withholding your money they are, de facto, holding you liable for the failure, and that will mean the cost of repairs and consequential losses.  To be clear, they are saying you caused the damage, and they intend to recover whatever it has cost them.  If they are not holding you liable, they have no right to withhold the deposits.

You will need to read that hire contract very carefully!  On the face of it, I can just about understand the withholding of the hire deposit where there may be a dispute over responsibility for mechanical damage.  However, I cannot understand the withholding of an insurance deposit where there is, presumably, no outstanding third party claim, and no physical damage to the bodywork.  The exception would be where they hold you liable for costs that exceed the combined value of the deposits and, under the contract, have a right to hold those monies until their full losses have been assessed.

Do look very closely at how they treat the cost of lost hire time.  It is not unusual for the consequential loss of earnings on future hires, while the claimed damage is being repaired, to far exceed the cost of repair.

Beyond that, do you have a record of the mileage actually covered by the vehicle before you hired it?  If you were the first hirer, and the vehicle had covered only a nominal mileage, then it seems clear the clutch was faulty.  If it had covered several thousand miles, and it failed within 1.5 miles of your hire, it seems the cause must lie elsewhere.

Has the hirer confirmed to you what the fault actually was, that they have had it repaired, and the full costs they are claiming?  After all, a detached hydraulic pipe or a broken cable would cause a clutch to cease working, but would not be a clutch failure.  Such a breakdown could be repaired at the roadside so the loss of earnings would be minimal.  On the other hand, recovery back to a suitably equipped workshop to remove and replace a failed clutch assembly, with additional charges for lost hire earnings, could run to several thousand pounds.  At present, from what you have said, you have only the hirer's word for the nature of the failure.

Has your wife her own vehicle?  Has she driven that far, and has she ever had the clutch replaced?  The answers to these questions should help establish her profile as a driver vis-a-vis clutch use/abuse.

I don't think I'd get involved in claims about judderers etc, as I think they would just cloud the main issue, which is that you lost your intended use of the van because their clutch failed, and they are now withholding your deposit apparently without due cause.  A counter-claim for your losses seems to me reasonable under the circumstances.  Don't forget to add in all your incidental costs, including the cost of issuing the summons.

Final thought.  Scan all your bank account conditions, credit card conditions, and household, and vehicle, insurances, and AA/RAC memberships etc, to see if any offer no-cost legal assistance.  It would be a bit unusual if none did these days, and in some cases the cover extends to court representation.  However, don't delay, and if you strike lucky do not pursue the matter any further on your own, anything you say or do may limit what a solicitor can say or do on your behalf.  If you have a dog, don't do the barking!! :-)

Final, final, thought.  If you draw a blank with the insurances, go to see your Trading Standards department, with the hire contract, and see what they advise you to do next.  Good luck!

[dshague]

mike202 yes i did buy a new fiat.

[Usinmyknaus]

Defyn, good luck with your claim. From the details you quoted it sounds like it could be more profitable for all the hirer's vehicles to breakdown on day one than than to have a succesful hire period! Do please post the name of the company involved, I for one would like to avoid them if my van is off the road in the future.

 

Bob

[moyne]

Having now spent 18 months in conversations of various sorts we are now proceeding with action against Dethleff Fiat and all others associated with the failures in my 3 litre Dethleff Advantage. Fiat recently had my vehicle delivered for examination to a garage in Belfast on arrival Fiat in Turin decided in their wisdom to refuse the garage to inspect the vehicle as they said that the gearbox shudder was acceptable to Fiat. Grrrrrr! So if anyone wishes to support me with evidence of difficulties they are haveing please feel free to do so as all evidence would be welcome. I have had the vehicle inspected by an independent engineer and he was shocked at what he found and will report same in his evidence.

 

Fiat have acted like the an Ostrich in this matter and the MD of Fiat Ireland actually told me that they knew of no defects in the Ducato range. Guess he is like a mushroom kept like me in the dark.

 

[moyne]

Oh yes Did I say that my vehicle is not compliant with the sale of goods Act.

Fit for the purpose for which it is intended. Whilst one is annoyed with the vibration and the stink of hot clutch plate in reverse the rear overhang of 2.5metres does catch the eye. Especially because I have been force to put jockey wheels on the tow bar to stop the vehicle catching on the road. With only 7.5 inches clearance unladen the vehicle can NOT ! go on any cross channel ferry without the assistance of planks or my new invention. Costing € 600 did not know when I bought the vehicle that I would have to do modifications to drive it.

If anyone has doubts of my driving experince in relation to the gearbox shudder I have been driving HGV 1 and LGV vehicles since 1979 with no accidents or incidents to date (touch wood) !

I have tried to trade the vehicle with the dealer whom I bought it of and he does not want it as it has a manufacturers fault, WOW ! didn't tell me that on in the sales pitch !

[Usinmyknaus]

Moyne, your last sentence caught my eye as it could be really important for current and future purchasers of the X250. To clarify - did the dealer (a franchised dealer or an independent?) sell you your current vehicle, but when you tried to part exchange it for another, refused to accept it because of the generally well-known Fiat gearbox/clutch fault? If that is the case, that contrasts sharply with other people's expressed experience on this forum that the fault has neither depressed trade in values nor hampered part-exchange deals.

 

Bob