rowley Posted December 4, 2009 Share Posted December 4, 2009 Tracker wrote--Many thanks Nick - your ongoing interest and support is much appreciated - but I still ain't gonna buy one yet! ----- I mentioned on the Fiat Forum that there are people holding off buying. The Moderator informs that they are selling plenty!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rupert123 Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 Except for a few people with 3 litre engines and some like me with nothing really to report the complaints from 2.3 owners seem to have completely dried up. Does this mean that Fiat have now resolved the problem with these and it is now safe to venture into the market again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike88 Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 Yesterday they closed the thread on judder on the Fiat forum. Seemingly it was my fault because I dared to publicise Fiat's address, e mail and telephone number. My post is still there but they deleted the contact details. Is that forum sponsored by Fiat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyg3nwl Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 Hi all. The Last Post from me on the judder subject. I received an email reply from Peugeot customer services, which acknowledges my continued unhappiness with the fixes to date. They confirm that in the event that I should suffer from premature gearbox,clutch or flywheel failure " within a reasonable timescale" even though warranty has expired, they will agree to treat my case sympathetically "if the failure is directly due to the judder issue." They further agreed that should any future modifications be developed relevant to the judder issue, that my vehicle would have such action as was relevant by way of recall. They maintained that they saw no reason to beleive that in "normal use", there would be any failures,but were unable to extend any warranty "per se", as a failure might have been provoked deliberately etc All the case history is being kept with the vehicle details for future reference. For the record, the gearbox etc has been changed twice, and the engine mounts replaced on the third visit. A specialist has reveiwed the vehicle and expressed the view that the vehicle suffers from "torque vibration" not Judder, and as such no further remedial work is required. I am now advised by Customer Services to use the vehicle normally and enjoy it. The vehicle is Autocruise Stargazer on boxer chassis 2.2ltr engine THE LAST POST. Dont anyone dare suggest playing Reveille tony g3nwl ps now planning a trip to Austria and Switzerland for next summer. I hope that constitutes "normal use". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike 202 Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 rupert123 - 2009-12-05 12:11 PM Except for a few people with 3 litre engines and some like me with nothing really to report the complaints from 2.3 owners seem to have completely dried up. Does this mean that Fiat have now resolved the problem with these and it is now safe to venture into the market again.. NO it is a bit like the Irish referendem re Europe, if the polititions do not get the answer they want, they keep on until the people get fed up an agree to what they want. Same with Fiat, do the minimum possible, deny as much as possible, make minimum comments and then the owners will eventually give up. Take all of the posts here, Fiat have not bothered to comment, so we are talking amongst ourselves and apart from mutual support have not got very far. Vehicle charateristics, driver error etc. Obviously without the forum many more of us would have bought Fiat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Collings Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 99.99 % of the automotive clutches I have seen in the last 50 years have incorporated elements capable of damping out transmission vibration. It must cost a fortune to train people how to diagnose the difference between torque vibration and cluth judder with just a test drive. H & S thought, Does bull poo spreading need a hard hat ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rowley Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 Mike 88, that is the second time they have pulled a judder thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mel B Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 Perhaps they didn't pull it ... it might just have got too much judder ending up on it and self-destructed! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raindrop Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 I hear on the radio this week that FIAT are recalling a certain model of car for faults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 I haven't followed the juddering threads closely, but my understanding is that a primary criticism of the complete X/250 range is that the reverse-gear ratio is too high for 'normal use'. Has it ever been satisfactorily established what the original transmission ratios were for X/250 models and, when gearbox modifications have been made, or a revised gearbox introduced, exactly what effect this has on those ratios? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolandrat Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Torque vibration is just another name for clutch judder caused because the reverse gear ratio is far to high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 rolandrat - 2009-12-07 11:31 AM Torque vibration is just another name for clutch judder caused because the reverse gear ratio is far to high. Somehow, I doubt this is correct. A judder is an observable fact, and we all know what it feels like. The difference between torque vibration (judder), and what is commonly called clutch judder, is surely in the actual cause of the judder?Conventional clutch judder is caused when the clutch cannot be engaged smoothly because of faults within the clutch itself - uneven wear, poor alignment, corroded surfaces, contaminated plate, damaged thrust etc etc. "Torque vibration" would appear to suggest that the cause of the judder lies in the engine, and not in the clutch. That when the engine is operated off the bottom of its torque curve, (say, somewhere below 1,500rpm?), in trying not to allow the engine to "bog down", the electronics induce a pulse into the torque delivery that then becomes exacerbated by the anti-snatch springs within the clutch, and anything else that can be induced to vibrate at that frequency. In other words, although the result is a judder, it does not originate within the clutch itself, so is not clutch judder.In fact, I think it sounds more and more like a harmonic problem, which I have suspected for some time. This, in part, explains the messing around with engine mountings and dampers, which are trying to prevent the harmonics building up so badly as to cause judder.Neither is the high reverse gear the actual cause of the problem, it is merely the factor that reveals it. If you will, it is the messenger.Lowering the reverse gear ratio will prevent the judder, but not by fixing the torque vibration. It will work, because it will be possible to fully engage the clutch a lower road speed than hitherto, meaning that drivers will cease riding the clutch at that critical engine speed. In other words, it will not prevent the torque vibration that causes the judder, it will merely prevent it appearing at the critical moment by moving it out of normal operating range.Er, I think! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyg3nwl Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Thanks for the "torque judder" explanation, Brian. That theory has been with me during my troubles, and i have been wondering if a "cure" could be by adding weight to the drive shafts, making them resonate at different frequencies, ( lower by adding weight) or conceivably by redesigning them to be tapered which would alter their resonant frequencies.. I wonder if anyone has the resources and courage to experiment. ( or even if the chassis maker would take up the idea. I wont claim royalties !!!) I dont ,so have to accept the compromises offered "to be sympathetic to any claim resulting from a premature failure." tonyg3nwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 tonyg3nwl - 2009-12-07 7:38 PM i have been wondering if a "cure" could be by adding weight to the drive shafts, making them resonate at different frequencies,... ( or even if the chassis maker would take up the idea. I wont claim royalties !!!) A Cavalier I had 25years ago had these fitted to the 'long' drive shaft so you might not get many royalties ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 If I tried to start and reverse my Transit-based Hobby slowly on a steep hill two things would happen - an immediate violent hammering noise from beneath the vehicle followed shortly after by a pungent smell from the clutch. The noise would be due to the exhaust system banging against the underside of the motorhome's chassis and the smell would be due to the clutch over-heating. Neither phenomenon shocks me as I would anticipate a transverse motor to try to twist about under torsional load and I know that my Hobby's high reverse-gear ratio will complicate reversing. It's easy to imagine a situation where I might be compelled to reverse slowly on an extreme incline and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Hobby's clutch burnt out during such a manoeuvre. You can theorise as much as you like about the X/250 'judder', but, if a vehicle has an over-high reverse-gear ratio and a power-plant insufficiently firmly mounted to deal adequately with reversing torsional forces, then the technical consequences (including clutch destruction) are completely predictable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 Andy has subsequently explained to me that the judder arises when the clutch is fully engaged and not, as I had hitherto understood, while it is being engaged.The reason being that, in order to keep road speed down to something reasonably safe with the clutch fully engaged, it is necessary to keep the engine revs down to barely above tick-over speed. At these low revs the engine develops insufficient torque to propel the vehicle uphill, or over rough or uneven ground, with its torque delivery becoming rough as it flirts with stalling (the "torque vibration" referred to), provoking a violent drive train juddering motion as everything on compliant mountings resonates in response.In the absence of lower gearing, the only alternatives to the judder are higher road speeds in reverse, which with such vehicles is clearly unsafe, or continually slipping the clutch, which is ultimately extremely expensive! Blows my theory, though! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolandrat Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 Brian, I can see where you are coming from but a judder caused by whatever reason needs investigating and in a hands on sitution at that. Theorem is all well and good in a lecture hall situation but on this web we need down to earth common reasoning that everyone can understand. I have seen Hardy Spicers twisted beyond recognition through sheer torque but we shouldn't get away from the fact that the X250 has caused many a sleepless night for owners of these chassis. It seems to me that Fiat are trying to change the terminology of the Juddergate problem but at the end of the day owners will only be happy when it is finally made public that the gearbox has been the source of all the transmission trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rupert123 Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 rolandrat - 2009-12-08 1:06 PM Brian, I can see where you are coming from but a judder caused by whatever reason needs investigating and in a hands on sitution at that. Theorem is all well and good in a lecture hall situation but on this web we need down to earth common reasoning that everyone can understand. I have seen Hardy Spicers twisted beyond recognition through sheer torque but we shouldn't get away from the fact that the X250 has caused many a sleepless night for owners of these chassis. It seems to me that Fiat are trying to change the terminology of the Juddergate problem but at the end of the day owners will only be happy when it is finally made public that the gearbox has been the source of all the transmission trouble. I am losing the will to live here. I thought it was admitted long ago what the problem with the reverse judder was. Andy has been shouting from the rooftops about the reason and has posted several times on this. Why are people still going on about alternative theories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webbocj Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 Not the thing to do on this forum, but I agree! CAUSE: reverse too high. SOLUTION: (if not satisfied after mod. 1&2) NEW GEARBOX chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 rupert123 - 2009-12-08 8:40 PM ,,,,,,,, I am losing the will to live here. I thought it was admitted long ago what the problem with the reverse judder was. Andy has been shouting from the rooftops about the reason and has posted several times on this. Why are people still going on about alternative theories. Just to keep the string alive Rupert, and to annoy you, of course! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolandrat Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Rupert123, there is only one THEORY on this matter and it revolves round the gearbox, we can come up with every reason under the sun but we will always return to the main problem. It is very important to listen to people who are employed in a hands on situation ie fitters who work on these vehicles on a daily basis. What they tell you is FACTUAL not an ASSUMPTION. What I would like to see is a photographic copy of the offending reverse gear and one of the replacement, that should then put this matter to bed once and for all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Good picture of new gearbox shaft complete with gears here, Roland: http://tinyurl.com/yjafeof, flick to page 8, posted by libby. Goodness knows what you'll be able to tell from that, though!This problem is not a fitter's error, it stems from a bit of complicated engineering that has gone wrong. Fiat has all the mechanical engineering skills it needs to solve the problem (and has presumably done so), but is reluctant to put the solution into production. Presumably, because the cost of the "proper" job is deemed prohibitive.It has therefore come up with a succession of "work around" part solutions that it deems affordable. As each fails to gain customer satisfaction, it has come up with another. So, first modified engine mountings, then clutch release mods, then replacement gear shaft with lower reverse gear, now replace the gearbox shaft and clutch, plus I believe, install different engine mountings and a damper. The customer has become the experimental guinea pig for a series of trial and error halfway houses. His time has been wasted, his expectations repeatedly dashed, and he can't get a bean in compensation. This nonsense must be stopped. We can't have this happen again. Those affected really do need to lobby for a change to the law. It probably won't be Fiat next time, and it probably won't be them next time. But the lessons on how a piece of faulty design engineering can be foisted onto Joe Public if you just keep messing him around long enough must, by now, have been studied and learnt right across the motor industry. On this basis, there will most certainly be a next time. Watch your backs!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rupert123 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 rolandrat - 2009-12-09 12:59 PM Rupert123, there is only one THEORY on this matter and it revolves round the gearbox, we can come up with every reason under the sun but we will always return to the main problem. It is very important to listen to people who are employed in a hands on situation ie fitters who work on these vehicles on a daily basis. What they tell you is FACTUAL not an ASSUMPTION. What I would like to see is a photographic copy of the offending reverse gear and one of the replacement, that should then put this matter to bed once and for all. What theory? Their is nothing to theorize about, it is a fact that reverse gear is to high. I do not need to see it just stick a van in reverse, you will soon see. Listen to fitters, well ok in case you missed it a bloke who has a fleet of these has posted on here quite a lot and been very helpfull on the subject in the past. he agrees about the reverse gear. What have these 'fitters' you are on about told you, I for one would like to know or is this just another urban myth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 rupert123 - 2009-12-09 4:44 PM rolandrat - 2009-12-09 12:59 PM Rupert123, there is only one THEORY on this matter and it revolves round the gearbox, we can come up with every reason under the sun but we will always return to the main problem. It is very important to listen to people who are employed in a hands on situation ie fitters who work on these vehicles on a daily basis. What they tell you is FACTUAL not an ASSUMPTION. What I would like to see is a photographic copy of the offending reverse gear and one of the replacement, that should then put this matter to bed once and for all. What theory? Their is nothing to theorize about, it is a fact that reverse gear is to high. I do not need to see it just stick a van in reverse, you will soon see. Listen to fitters, well ok in case you missed it a bloke who has a fleet of these has posted on here quite a lot and been very helpfull on the subject in the past. he agrees about the reverse gear. What have these 'fitters' you are on about told you, I for one would like to know or is this just another urban myth. rupert123 I don't understand this. I was under the impression that you had absolutely no complaints about your Fiat-based motorhome's reversing performance. Now it seems that you are criticising its gearbox for having a too high reverse-gear ratio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moyne Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 It's good to be back, I took a break from the much hypothesis of what, how and how much for a few weeks. But I now have my motorhome back at the side of my house where it has sat for some time. Well, it's back because after almost two years finally a representative came over from the UK to Belfast (which is a two hour drive from my home on a good day) to look at my vehicle. The guy was very pleasant he took it on a test drive and returned it to me and we parted with ( I will get the report in due course) this all happened just this week ! As I said to him if you called a plumber and he showed up two years later would you find that acceptabel. So all you Fiat bods reading this, (NO TWO YEARS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE) so shudder, judder, vibration oscillation shake whatever you want to call it and what ever the reason is, it is like a rash I still have it and all I want for christmas is never, ever to see another Fiat vehicle of any size shape or colour again. So where do we go from here. I shall contnue on the path I have chosen to take and if nothing esle it will highlight that Fiat customer care is wanting in the extreme and if you have an issue with a Fiat vehicle I hope your a betting man/woman because it would be a good bet in a bookies as to the level of attention you will get. The ultimate shame is that Fiat appear not to really care that much. I look forward to 2110 and if anyone wants a 2008 vehicle that shakes and smells of burning in reverese, well what more can I say ! Well, actualy I have allot more that I could say but that will have to wait for the fat lady. Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.