Fiat/Peugeot/Citroen transmission defect (5)

[Guest Peter James]

colinfrier - 2010-04-06 9:57 AM

 

I find the arguement that FIAT'S are cheap so what do you expect unbelieveable I paid £50,000 for my motorhome is that cheap?

If that were a valid arguement then FIAT should say on the Tin

"Warning this vehicle may be liable to premature clutch/gearbox failure because it is cheap and badly engineered "

Come on get real

 

I was merely trying to make the point that, from what I have seen, the Sevel vans cost less than (for example) a similar sized VW or Mercedes, whether you buy them as commercial vans or motorhomes.

All vehicles have good points and weak points. The clutch and gearbox may not last as long as some more expensive makes, but a court may not consider that makes it unacceptable.

Whitevanman I spoke to knew nothing of any clutch or gearbox problems and had already covered 120,000 miles so Sevel vans can't all be that bad.

[AndyStothert]

Peter,

This thread started on January 17 2008 so can I politely suggest you go back through it and read everything contained in it.

We have all discussed (endlessly it seems) everything from the tyre sizes to diff ratios to different usage of motorhomes to delivery vans, and even I think the mood of the man who designed the gearbox on that fateful day. Probably his personal hygiene too.

You will also be enlightened as to the meaning of life, as according to the Venereal , sorry, Venerable, Fred.

[Rayjsj]

Peter,

Most of us who have been following this thread from the begining, when Andy Stothert first told us of his 'Tale of Woe' would have embraced the new Sevel as the best thing since sliced bread. BUT and it's a BIG BUT there have been far too many genuine cases of Folk spending a large wedge of their hard earned money only to have lots of heartache over their choice of base vehicle with it's faulty Gearbox design/reverse ratio and it's unsuitablity as a Motorhome base. Some do not Judder, but enough do for me (and i suspect many others) not to want to ' Take the chance' If Fiat treated their customers with more understanding and with better service I might have been tempted, but they havn't. So I won't. Ray

 

PS this thread is getting too popular, and getting very SLOWWWWW.

[Brian Kirby]

rupert123 - 2010-04-06 9:38 AM ........Fred is a mock Cornish bloke who thinks he is funny, but rarely is, and never has anything usefull to say.

Nay Rupert, that is unjust.  Look behind Fred's hand-grenade comments and you find true wisdom!  At any rate, he slays me!  I love them.

For a Welshman, (a north Walean at that), you have the direct approach of a Londoner.  Softly, softly, catchee monkey.  :-D

[AndyStothert]

Brian, do you own a cravat by any chance?

[Brian Kirby]

Sorry, no.  Why, did you want to borrow one?  :-D

[bob b]

With regard to commercial Fiat's not suffering problems, my pal is in business as an office equipment supplier. He bought a new 2.2 Fiat in 2006 after having bought Renault's and VW's previously. 

After 4 months light use the clutch was destroyed. The wheels were also 'locked' up and the AA couldn't tow it. The van had to be taken to Fiat on a lowloader. It was replaced under guarantee. 9 months later the clutch was again destroyed and again the wheels locked up. Fiat replaced the second clutch under guarantee.

15 months later the clutch was destroyed a third time. Fiat refused to replace the clutch under guarantee and acknowledge a problem, they blamed abuse by the driver. The clutch wasn't just worn, but destroyed.

He has been in business for some thirty years and has never replaced a clutch in any of his vans and the driver has been with him for many years. Understandably, he will never buy another Fiat.

[The Decorator]

Our fred is one of life’s secrets, he sees through every message with piercing originality. Tis a pity that such folk are disappearing to become politically correct agents.

 

 

[RoyH]

Well at least pj now knows who Fred is, but if he'd looked back a couple of posts he might have seen Fred's missive.

 

Fred claims to live at Penpillick, a small cluster of houses on a very steep hill with an escape lane on the A391 between Lostwithiel and St Austell so he will have lots of experience of the capabilities of vehicles in that terrain.

 

When I lived in Cornwall I could see this hill from my back garden.

 

Keep it up everyone.

[rupert123]

Brian Kirby - 2010-04-06 1:18 PM

rupert123 - 2010-04-06 9:38 AM ........Fred is a mock Cornish bloke who thinks he is funny, but rarely is, and never has anything usefull to say.

Nay Rupert, that is unjust.  Look behind Fred's hand-grenade comments and you find true wisdom!  At any rate, he slays me!  I love them.

For a Welshman, (a north Walean at that), you have the direct approach of a Londoner.  Softly, softly, catchee monkey.  :-D

Welshman, do you mind, but you are not far wrong I am from East Ham but a long time ago. True wisdom I have never, ever seen him try and be helpful but glad some find him funny.

[moyne]

I'm back and with some words of wisdom. A nice company of solicitors have written to my solicitor as representatives of Fiat Ireland. Now this must be taken in the context that my first complaint was two years ago and Fiat have already flew and expert from Fiat all the way from Scotland to drive my vehicle around a small yard in Belfast and to date they have neither accepted that there could be a problem or offered a solution .

 

Well, the nice guys representing Fiat are looking into my case as if they have never heard from me before and are wanting an engineer to look at my vehicle. Also they want a schedule of alleged defects.

 

Now maybe I'm missing something, but the the phrase "Two Neurons and no Synaps comes to mind".

 

Two years have passed and Fiat have yet to smell the coffee burning !

 

Maybe we could arrange the engineer who will look at my vehicle again ! to look at everyone else's at the same time and save everybody sometime! I am willing to travel as long as I don't have to reverse.

 

 

B-)

[Symbol Owner]

Welcome back Gerard,

This (very) new boy's (seemingly) innocent question on April 3rd has kept this thread hummingly warm when it seemed to be in danger of going to sleep!

It also seems to have launched Fred on his political career -- or at least on to the hustings!

And set Brian thinking about the future management of this forum, perhaps.

Not bad for starters,eh?

 

Very best wishes with your continuing campaign -- surely justice must prevail eventually.

 

cheers,

 

Colin

[colin weston]

Time for an update regarding my 2007 Autocruise Starburst (Peugeot 2.2l 120hp 6-speed gearbox). I had my gearbox reworked in May 2009 with a lower reverse gear and although it improved the reversing situation regarding judder it did not solve the problem.

As my 3-year warranty runs out this June I recently contacted Peugeot Customer Care to say that I still wasn't happy with the situation. This time I had a very polite and helpful lady who said I would have to go to the dealer who carried out the gearbox rework for them to assess the problem. At the dealership I demonstrated the problem on a slope in their yard and the mechanic said 'What you need is the lower reverse gear fitted'. Having informed him that this had already been done he said he would need to contact Peugeot Technical. The outcome was that Peugeot Technical stated that a new gearbox, clutch and flywheel would be fitted. These parts were available within several days at the dealership. (Do they keep a stock of these parts now?)

Following the work I was unable to carry out a test at the dealership but driving home on the Motorway at a steady 60mph I definately had the impression that the engine revs were higher than before. (Prior to having the new gearbox fitted I tried to find out what the technical differences were but neither the dealership nor Customer Care receive any technical information, only 'Fit parts no. XYZ'). Whereas before, I believe that the van did approx. 60mph at 2000rpm in 6th gear, now it does 56mph at 2000rpm in 6th gear (28mph/1000rpm) which will no doubt adversely affect my fuel economy. Has it cured the judder? Not entirely, but I can reverse up a reasonable gradient, clutch fully engaged, at about 10mph using about 1100 engine rpm with no judder, albeit in an unladen condition. I am going to perform a few more checks on a level road to compare the mph/1000rpm in first and reverse gear to ascertain just how low the reverse gear is relative to first.

Before Peugeot Technical came up with their recommendation they asked the dealership for the unladen weight which I supplied from my Autocruise handbook. They didn't seem to be interested in the maximum weight, which is 3500kg. They also wanted the gearbox number which is inscribed on the differential housing, near the rear engine mount. The number on my housing was 206P05 6085755. (I had to get this information by putting the van on chocks as they didn't check it at the dealers!) Does anyone know the relevance of these numbers?

My belief is that I may now have a gearbox and final drive ratio designed for a heavier chassis.

Can any owner of a similar Peugeot based 2.2l confirm the mph/1000rpm in 6th gear and maybe the comparison between first and reverse?

I'm off to Scotland in a weeks time so I will no doubt have some further observations by the time I return.

The saga continues!

[moyne]

Since the Saga of my plight with Fait has gone on two years I was thinking of perhaps getting my vehicle detailed with some nice slogans which would make other road users aware of the difficulties of buying a 9m motor home which burns in reverse. I would then park the afore mentioned motorhome in places where it would be seen. the vehicle has no rear windows so perhaps a large display on the rear.

 

Suggestions for slogans appreciated . I can think of a few myself, but one does not want to be rude !

 

 

[Guest pelmetman]

moyne - 2010-04-10 11:00 PM

 

Since the Saga of my plight with Fait has gone on two years I was thinking of perhaps getting my vehicle detailed with some nice slogans which would make other road users aware of the difficulties of buying a 9m motor home which burns in reverse. I would then park the afore mentioned motorhome in places where it would be seen. the vehicle has no rear windows so perhaps a large display on the rear.

 

Suggestions for slogans appreciated . I can think of a few myself, but one does not want to be rude !

 

 

Its worth a try but write to your Fiat dealer first telling them what you intend doing before you spend money on the signs. As I did something similiar a few years ago. I have a Transit based camper with which I have been very pleased with, so when it came to buy a new van for the business I bought a new Transit in 1999 fully loaded with a semi auto box, and it turned out a complete heap of cr*p, needed a new clutch after 30,000 miles new prop shaft at 40,000

which was the final straw after a long list of complaints >:-(

So I sent Ford a letter telling them what I intended having written on the back >:-) and low and behold I had the managing director of my dealership on the phone ;-)

I still have the van it runs well now as I use a independant chap who knows Transits inside out, I don't bother with main dealers anymore (lol)

I was thinking of getting a new van for work but the chap who services it says he has more problems with the new Transits especially the electrics, he reckons I should keep it B-)

[tonyg3nwl]

.....

Before Peugeot Technical came up with their recommendation they asked the dealership for the unladen weight which I supplied from my Autocruise handbook. They didn't seem to be interested in the maximum weight, which is 3500kg. They also wanted the gearbox number which is inscribed on the differential housing, near the rear engine mount. The number on my housing was 206P05 6085755. (I had to get this information by putting the van on chocks as they didn't check it at the dealers!) Does anyone know the relevance of these numbers?

My belief is that I may now have a gearbox and final drive ratio designed for a heavier chassis.

Can any owner of a similar Peugeot based 2.2l confirm the mph/1000rpm in 6th gear and maybe the comparison between first and reverse?

I'm off to Scotland in a weeks time so I will no doubt have some further observations by the time I return.

The saga continues!

 

Hi , I cant exactly confirm the rpm per mph figures, but have the distinct impression that rpm is higher for the same mph than it used to be before the mods same as you were done. Peugeot also asked the same question re unladen weight, and I took mine to a local weighbridge with result that it weighed in at 2950 with full tank of diesel, otherwise unladen

 

Mine has had innards of box changed first attempt, then new box, dual mass flywheel and clutch replaced second attempt, then after inspection by Coventry "expert", they replaced EGR valve, and replaced engine mounts. As you find, Mine has had slight improvement at just above tickover speed, but to get back up a decent gradient, it is advised by expert to use 1300 rpm or greater to quell the "torque vibration". This is worryingly too fast for safe reversing

 

Mine is Autocruise Stargazer 2.2ltr 6 speed model plated rating 3500kg on 58 plate so getting close to end of warranty.

 

I will check next time out to assess rpm versus mph. I have kept all email exchanges and warned customer services that in event of problems I will persue them for a satisfactory solution even if after warranty. Their response was to draw my attention to "warranty doesnt cover clutch" exclusion.. So far,(5800 miles) I have successfully avoided uphill reversing other than turning on level drive at home. Test will come on holiday starting end May en route to Southern Germany/Austria.

 

I have previously posted invoiced details of changes, so if search engine works you could find previous posts looking for my posts relating to the judder issues, starting around March last year till around October last year.

 

tonyg3nwl

[colin weston]

Thanks for your reply Tony,

Presumably you purchased your van in the UK, therefore you should get 3 years warranty. My van is an '07 registered in June 2007 and hence is still in warranty. Did you notice any improvement after they replaced the engine mounts and EGR valve?

[tonyg3nwl]

colin weston - 2010-04-12 10:15 AM

 

Thanks for your reply Tony,

Presumably you purchased your van in the UK, therefore you should get 3 years warranty. My van is an '07 registered in June 2007 and hence is still in warranty. Did you notice any improvement after they replaced the engine mounts and EGR valve?

 

Hi again, Re query regarding engine mounts, no, .. if anything it shows a slight judder effect pulling away forwards up an incline, not previously noticed.

 

Today I made careful note of RPM versus MPH going forwards, and at 2000 rpm 6th gear on the level, the speedo read 55mph. I know the speedo is optimistic by about 3 mph at 60 (ie reads 60 when satnav says 57)

I dont have any figures prior to the changes. I also know from today, that at 800 rpm tickover speed, first gear creeping along in traffic, speedo read 4 mph

 

Not sure if this info helps you.

 

sorry missed a response re Warranty. Yes van was purchased through Webbs at Warminster new, so should have 3 years, but book just been returned showing 2 years( previously showing only 1 year.) Must chase them up again.

 

edit to add final comment

 

tony g3nwl

 

tonyg3nwl

[jhorsf]

moyne - 2010-04-10 11:00 PM

 

Since the Saga of my plight with Fait has gone on two years I was thinking of perhaps getting my vehicle detailed with some nice slogans which would make other road users aware of the difficulties of buying a 9m motor home which burns in reverse. I would then park the afore mentioned motorhome in places where it would be seen. the vehicle has no rear windows so perhaps a large display on the rear.

 

Suggestions for slogans appreciated . I can think of a few myself, but one does not want to be rude !

 

 

 

 

 

 

How about THE ONLY IRISHMAN NOT STUCK IN REVERSE

[colin weston]

Hi Tony,

Thanks for the info. Assuming your satnav is more accurate than your speedo, that would mean the gearing in 6th gear is approx. 26 mph/1000 rpm. I believe my speedo is accurate at 60 mph as I have checked it several times against the emergency phones on the Motorway but I will do another check on my way to Scotland next weekend.

I wouldn't think that the speedo is particularly accurate at 4 mph. However, it would be useful to compare the speedo readings in first and reverse gears using the same engine speed. This is something I intend to do next time I take the van out. Presumably you are on 15 inch wheels. My tyres are Michelin 225/70 R15C but all 15 inch tyres should have the same nominal rolling radius.

What we need is another Autocruiser with a similar powertrain and with the original gearbox to record his true road speed in 6th gear at 2000 rpm engine speed.

IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE WHO CAN SUPPLY THIS INFORMATION OR ARE YOU ALL ON HOLIDAY?

 

Colin

[AndyStothert]

Colin,

For those who still aren't happy with the reversing ability of their Boxer I think that Peugeot may be fitting the gearbox intended for the Maxi version (with 16ins wheels) to these vehicles. It has a slightly lower ratio differential to adjust the overall gearing back to normal with the bigger wheels, and thus on the vans equipped with 15 in wheels when the maxi box is used there is a lowering of the ratio in all gears - including reverse.

In effect they are using a very blunt instrument which hits everything rather than just the specific nail of the reverse gear ratio.

So it seems that Peugeot customers who are unhappy with the reverse gear ratio are being offered another slight improvement (a lower ratio reverse gear) at the expense of a lower ratio in all the forward gears too.

Fiat, meanwhile are offering nothing, as it would in effect confirm that the modfied gearbox isn't everything it really should be. As in fact Peugeot have admitted all along.

That said, I'm not convinced Peugeot's latest attempts are appropriate on the 3.3 ton and 3.5 ton vehicles, as it will mean slightly less relaxed cruising on the motorway, and possibly a small increase in fuel consumption.

This is a decision each owner will have to weigh up for themselves.

[tonyg3nwl]

Hi again. Just to confirm for Colin's benefit that tyres are Duravis 225/70 R15

 

There seems to be sufficient space around wheel to suggest that 16 in wheels could be fitted, if required. I shudder to think of likely cost including tyres so will just be satisfied with arriving when we do, not bothering about actual speed.

Also remember that drag is proportional to square of speed, and the faster you go, the greater fuel consumption, whatever gear ratio changes are installed

eg 50 mph 30 mpg, would theoretically translate to 60 mph and 30mpg divided by((6/5)*(6/5)) ( that works out to 60 mph at 21 mpg approx)

Please note that this is theoritical calculation ignoring all other variables, but does give an indication of consumption differences as a result of a very heavy right foot.

 

Thanks to Andy for offering the suggestion that the gearbox might be the type fitted to the Maxi van. I wonder if that is in fact the case. peugeot are very reluctant to give any technical details of any changes they make,.

 

Tonyg3nwl

[colin weston]

Hi Andy,

Yes, I think you are probably correct. Assuming that Peugeot geared the two variants to have the same mph/1000 rpm in 6th gear if one works on the ratio of rolling radii, i.e. 16/15 x 56 mph = 59.7 mph, this supports my observation that the mph/1000 rpm has reduced from 60 mph to 56 mph. It would seem that Peugeot still do not understand how to fix this problem. Is it your current understanding that the latest Peugeot (or Fiat) vehicles now incorporate a lower reverse gear? If so, one would have expected them to fit the latest spec. gearbox to problem vehicles unless it cannot be retro-fitted. I don't believe Fiat and Peugeot share the same gearbox.

[colin]

I wonder if I might get a job as a fortune teller? ;-)

[Mel B]

Ruddy server!!!!! >:-(