fred grant Posted April 27, 2010 Share Posted April 27, 2010 denzil as also heard that fiat is replacinn its 2.3 with a 2.4 ford unit. so there must be summat truth innit my luvvers. parently they is goin to call it the Transit. watt a strange name for a van my biddies???? fordsonfred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flicka Posted April 27, 2010 Share Posted April 27, 2010 fred grant - 2010-04-27 7:37 PM denzil as also heard that fiat is replacinn its 2.3 with a 2.4 ford unit. so there must be summat truth innit my luvvers. parently they is goin to call it the Transit. watt a strange name for a van my biddies???? fordsonfred Nearly right Fred It going to be called "Transit-ion" :D :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euroserv Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 Hello again, To understand and predict what is going to happen with Fiat you have to consider the 'family'. By that I mean FPT or Fiat Powertrain Technologies. They are a division of Fiat Auto and make engines for Fiat Commercials and Iveco. Although Fiat have still not publicly announced their euro5 offerings, Iveco have and they are available now. The 2.3 and 3.0 engines that share the majority of components when used in FWD and RWD variants are fully compatible with euro5 and beyond, more so the Fiat application because FWD is more efficient anyway. The only reason that a non FPT engine is used in the Ducato is because of the joint venture with PSA and the engine used is a 2.2 'Puma' engine that is a joint venture between Ford and PSA. This engine is doubtful for euro5 without additives so I don't know which way it will go. I have been told to expect 2 different FPT 2.3 engines to be offered next year at 110 and 140hp, and no 2.2 The FPT factory is confirmed producing FWD application 2.3 and 3.0 engines at euro5 and euro5 eev for at least 3 years. PSA offer the FPT 3.0 engine in the Boxer and Relay, and will continue to do so but I have heard a rumour that they may offer the FPT 2.3 in the future if the 2.2 cannot meet emissions regs and in typical motor industry fashion they will probably call it a 2.2 or 2.4......... Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rapidoman Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 phoned essanjay poole on fri 23/4 08.30 to ask if they could tell if my 08 rapido had been or needed modifying, they said it needed doing. phoned fiat at 08.40 to give details and they said they would pass on to fiat italy for approval. 09.10 same day fiat came back and said new engine mounts, hydraulic parts, clutch and reverse gear would be despatched to essanjay. 10.00 wed 28/4 phonecall from essanjay parts arrived motorhome goes in when we return from france on 10/5. and here i was expecting all sorts of grief,at the moment nothing but praise for the way it was all dealt with. needless to say dealer ( one of the largest ) was not even considerate enougth to return e mail! :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 rapidoman - 2010-04-28 4:20 PM needless to say dealer ( one of the largest ) was not even considerate enougth to return e mail! :-S This is why I maintain that motorhome salesmen/dealers are those thrown out of dodgey back street car garages for being too underhand >:-( As the dealer/sellor is who you have contract with, if you should be not happy with fix then you have no comeback in law, as you have had unautherised work done on vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSHORT Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 Has anyone noticed the latest on Out and About Live forum related to 3litre vans, I quote Fiat have admitted a problem exists. Am I reading this wrong or can we expect some action for the forgotten 3litre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyg3nwl Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 Hi, Just got back from Peugeot garage having had to take my 406 estate in for topping up diesel fuel additive, 2 litres at a total cost of 194 pounds inc labour and vat, and whilst there had a chat with the spares man. \he kindly looked up my van on their system and confirmed that My engine is the Ford Puma engine variety 2.2 litre, and the gearbox after the mods ia referred to as second line manual gearbox 08/03/10 23B10A. 6 speed forward box. he printed out a drawing of the gear shaft system from the parts manual, and the parts list which identifies the gear ratios. Driven Pinion for 1st 11*41, second 21*41, 3rd 31*40, 4th 40*35, 5th 49*33, 6th 53*31. Final drive 13*68 He could not find information about reverse ratio on the system In conversation with him, he said that in his contacts with other trade garages, there is a view that motorhome which are likely to suffer judder, also seem to have a significant overhang at the rear, which was thought likely to adversly affect the judder issue in reverse, taking too much weight off the front transmission. He said this view had been expressed by a significant number of his trade contacts and other garages who had been dealing with affected vans. I should point out that was his view and not an official Peugeot view, gained over a last couple of years as a result of inter garage discussions re the judder problems. Could there be any significance in this observation, Do low line vans on alko extended chassis long wheelbases perform any better that short wheelbase vehicles of similar weights. Do vans with rear garages carrying heavier loads suffer worse than any others, Do bike carriers on the rear cause problems when loaded as opposed to empty., could these differences explain why some vans suffer, while others dont? Anyone any comments or other theories (apart from the reverse ratio arguments). Does it mean that the base vehicle "specifically designed for motorhomes" didnt allow for motorhome coach builts to overhang at rear, The spares man was not trying to defend the base vehicle, rather suggesting that the problem was well known, but solutions were still not 100 % Tonyg3nwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 tonyg3nwl - 2010-04-28 8:00 PM In conversation with him, he said that in his contacts with other trade garages, there is a view that motorhome which are likely to suffer judder, also seem to have a significant overhang at the rear, which was thought likely to adversly affect the judder issue in reverse, taking too much weight off the front transmission. Andy's van is MWB PVC, I've driven WVM and PVC's that have judder, so I think we can rule that theory out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teflon2 Posted April 28, 2010 Share Posted April 28, 2010 Just a thought and it may have been mentioned before might it not be an out of balance differential problem rather like torque steer but in reverse no doubt the experts have taken this into considration but it seems to me to be caused by more than just a high reverse gear to wreck gearboxes as has been mentioned. My motorhome is 12years old so this is not a problem for me. OAP who knows little. John *-) *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin weston Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Tony, I don't think that rear overhang is the main problem as my Autocruise Starburst is a medium wheelbase and the rear overhang is minimal. Also, when one is reversing uphill there will be a weight shift towards the front driving wheels. I did have this overhang theory suggested to me by a guy in Peugeot Customer Care some time ago but I think they were 'clutching at straws'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin weston Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 Tony, I know this is a bit 'off message' but does the diesel additive you refer to only apply to certain Peugeot diesel cars or does it apply to some Peugeot commercials also? Does this additive contain gold dust? Another rip-off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazooka Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 DEISEL ADDITIVE??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brambles Posted April 30, 2010 Share Posted April 30, 2010 bazooka - 2010-04-30 5:17 PM DEISEL ADDITIVE??? see this pdf file should explain everything for you bazooka. http://www.autodiagnos.com/fileadmin/assets/en/downloads/pdf/technical_bulletins/psa/psa_307_addgo2_fap.4.pdf Jon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyg3nwl Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 colin weston - 2010-04-30 4:23 PM Tony, I know this is a bit 'off message' but does the diesel additive you refer to only apply to certain Peugeot diesel cars or does it apply to some Peugeot commercials also? Does this additive contain gold dust? Another rip-off! I was advised that my Boxer based motorhome will require the same treatment at around 60000 miles. It is not a job that can be done by myself apparently, so ripoff prices apply as usual. Either have it done, or replace the whole exhaust system to get it back to emission standards. Regarding overhang/judder relationship, I was only reporting the comments from the spares man who offered the comments without prompting. It would need a proper survey to determine whether there is any mileage in the claims. however, there may be some hope , as local news again reported that Ford's new chassis cab has been designed for motorhome use, among other things. Did they read the Fiat ads ???? tonyg3nwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bazooka Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 Brambles thanks for the information about particulate filters.The more i read about certain modern vehicles it makes want to hang on to what i've got.(transit high top 2004 tdci) Baz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brambles Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 It is not all bad news. You might find this from the AA interesting. Basically yu need to drive the engine hard for a period of time so the filter emperatre rises and the soot is burned off. With lots of shot trips this does not happen so particulate filter cleaning sytems are added and automative regeneration happens by use of an additive to raise the temperature in the exhaust. I am a bit dismayed the original poster was charged so much for topping up the additive by 2 litres when 5 litres I believe is the total is 5 lires - so 3 litres left. It is quite possible a good belt down a motorway in a lower gear could have cleared the filter reading the AA site. Maybe some one with more practical knowedge than my academic know how will enlighten us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
747 Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 Newer Volvo`s have a double Cat system, fine and normal particulate boxes. They cost £800 each to change if they are faulty. :'( Every 1500miles, the engine automatically starts running lean to heat them up to burn off particulates. So that is Volvo, as well as Fiat scratched off the list of potential new vehicles. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 The whole Euro V issue is best avoided for now until reliability of all this new technology is better established in my view. Particulate filters, lean burn engines, dual mass flywheels, new fangled catalytic converters et al are all very well in theory and under warranty when it is simply inconvenient when they fail but after three years best go out and buy a Kia with a seven year warranty! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyg3nwl Posted May 1, 2010 Share Posted May 1, 2010 Hi, to get thread back to judder issues, please see new thread in response to particulate filter issues. Apologies for going off thread in my original thread and mixing the 2 issues. tonyg3nwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted May 3, 2010 Share Posted May 3, 2010 Considering the thread started by Kay I feel this needs to continue to be 'bumped' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted May 4, 2010 Share Posted May 4, 2010 Quite right fellow Colin, let's bump it again -- particularly as Rupert 123 has 'stuck his oar in' again! Perhaps we need some more words of wisdom from Fred? Cheers, Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted May 4, 2010 Share Posted May 4, 2010 Quite right fellow Colin, let's bump it again -- particularly as Rupert 123 has 'stuck his oar in' again! Perhaps we need some more words of wisdom from Fred? Cheers, Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rupert123 Posted May 5, 2010 Share Posted May 5, 2010 Symbol Owner - 2010-05-04 11:25 PM Quite right fellow Colin, let's bump it again -- particularly as Rupert 123 has 'stuck his oar in' again! Perhaps we need some more words of wisdom from Fred? Cheers, Colin. You are repeating yourself Colin, perhaps it is because you have nothing usefull to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyH Posted May 5, 2010 Share Posted May 5, 2010 Better Colin repeats himself than some poor soul spends the kid's inheritance on one of these base vehicles without due consideration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Tuckley Posted May 8, 2010 Share Posted May 8, 2010 Hya, Folks, Have contributed to this thread (page 1) and I am still so discusted and disheartened that I have not yet written to FIAT. Tried phoning again and they said "There is nothing wrong with the 2.2". Just sitting here watching Top Gear on TV and wondering if anyone has tried using them for publicity or would this be counter productive? I apologise if someone has tried and I have missed it but you will all appreciate how long these threads have been going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.