jockinafrock Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Hi All - my first post in this forum - we're looking to replace our current campervan (Talbot Express Camelot) with an Auto Sleepers Symbol which has the layout similar to the Camelot. Unfortunately I can't seem to find either the specifications nor any reviews for a 2003/4 model. All reviews seem to be on the later LWB 2008 model! Any help would be greatly appreciated. Many Thanks in advance. Jock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulmold Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Here is a review from an owner - http://www.motorhomefacts.com/modules.php?name=MReviews&op=show&rid=124 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jockinafrock Posted May 12, 2011 Author Share Posted May 12, 2011 Many thanks for that useful info - although I should have said that we were looking at the 2.0 or 2.2 Litre HDi engine versions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 When I bought my (2002 1.9 litre diesel) Symbol last year, one of the most useful articles that I read was: the 'Motorhome & Away' website written by Steve & Sheila Pyke -- which I have just accessed by googling: "Our Autosleepers Symbol." Hope that is helpful, Cheers, Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinhood Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 A 2 litre petrol version was the subject of the main test in the January 2000 issue of MMM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest machra Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 I bought a 2.2 HDI Symbol new in 2005 and am more than willing to speak to you about our experiences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwendolyn Posted May 16, 2011 Share Posted May 16, 2011 machra - 2011-05-16 5:49 PM I bought a 2.2 HDI Symbol new in 2005 and am more than willing to speak to you about our experiences. We too have the same model, bought second hand last August, and also will be happy to add our experiences - we are new to motorhomes after years of camping / caravanning and are quite delighted with it. Any specific queries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jockinafrock Posted May 22, 2011 Author Share Posted May 22, 2011 Thanks everyone for all the useful replies - only question I have at the moment is the fuel consumption/performance difference between the 2.0 and 2.2 Litre HDi engines. Having had a test drive in the 2.0 litre version I found it quite lively. I question whether it is worth going for the larger engine? We don't plan going over the Alps or any other extreme mountains - but don't want to struggle on steep roads in the UK either! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 jockinafrock - 2011-05-22 9:19 AM Thanks everyone for all the useful replies - only question I have at the moment is the fuel consumption/performance difference between the 2.0 and 2.2 Litre HDi engines. Having had a test drive in the 2.0 litre version I found it quite lively. I question whether it is worth going for the larger engine? We don't plan going over the Alps or any other extreme mountains - but don't want to struggle on steep roads in the UK either! I believe the 2.0litre motor was a Peugeot-badged Fiat JTD powerplant with 85bhp, whereas the 2.2litre HDI engine was a 'genuine' Peugeot unit with 100bhp. I haven't got a Symbol test report, but a Which Motorcaravan 2005 article comparing an Auto-Sleepers Inca with the 2.0litre motor and a Marquis Majestic Starspirit with the 2.2litre engine quoted an estimated average fuel comsumption of 20-27mpg for the Inca and 22-27mpg for the Starspirit. For the smaller, lighter Symbol I'd expect around 30mpg average for both motors. You need to remember that you will (almost certainly) have test-driven the 2.0litre Symbol empty and, although you found it "quite lively" then, when the vehicle is fully loaded with water, gas, and clutter you should expect that liveliness to be significantly blunted. Against strong headwinds and on long inclines you'll need to change down more often than with a 2.2litre version, and you'll need to be more careful when overtaking. It's your decision - I'd go for the 2.2litre engine myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwendolyn Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 Derek Uzzell - 2011-05-22 7:03 PM jockinafrock - 2011-05-22 9:19 AM Thanks everyone for all the useful replies - only question I have at the moment is the fuel consumption/performance difference between the 2.0 and 2.2 Litre HDi engines. Having had a test drive in the 2.0 litre version I found it quite lively. I question whether it is worth going for the larger engine? We don't plan going over the Alps or any other extreme mountains - but don't want to struggle on steep roads in the UK either! I believe the 2.0litre motor was a Peugeot-badged Fiat JTD powerplant with 85bhp, whereas the 2.2litre HDI engine was a 'genuine' Peugeot unit with 100bhp. I haven't got a Symbol test report, but a Which Motorcaravan 2005 article comparing an Auto-Sleepers Inca with the 2.0litre motor and a Marquis Majestic Starspirit with the 2.2litre engine quoted an estimated average fuel comsumption of 20-27mpg for the Inca and 22-27mpg for the Starspirit. For the smaller, lighter Symbol I'd expect around 30mpg average for both motors. You need to remember that you will (almost certainly) have test-driven the 2.0litre Symbol empty and, although you found it "quite lively" then, when the vehicle is fully loaded with water, gas, and clutter you should expect that liveliness to be significantly blunted. Against strong headwinds and on long inclines you'll need to change down more often than with a 2.2litre version, and you'll need to be more careful when overtaking. It's your decision - I'd go for the 2.2litre engine myself. Totally agree. We have a 2005 2.2 litre Symbol and we are travelling in the Alps atm!! Great performance and gratifyingly good fuel consumption. Go for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest machra Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 From what I remember I bought the 2.2 as is was 120 BHP as opposed to the 2.0 which was 100BHP. I travelled some 8000 miles, fast motorway, slow narrow B roads, in the UK and Europe and averaged 32 MPG. I remember the worst being about 25, travelling down the payage in France and the best being 35 pootling round the Loire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jockinafrock Posted May 24, 2011 Author Share Posted May 24, 2011 Thanks once again for all the very useful advice from this forum - I think that we're both quite clear that we will go for the larger (2.2L HDi) engine, it's now just a question of finding one at the right price and in the condition that we would like - wish me luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest machra Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 I wish you luck, as we had no issue trading ours in and the dealer had no problem selling it. In fact I wonder if it was the fastest sale ever. We traded ours in (at a large dealer near Newark!!) one Sat morning. They were very busy and so asked us to go for a complimentary drink in their cafe while the salesman was finishing dealing with another customer, about 15 mins he said. My van was then driven round to their display area. While having my tea we saw our van being driven up the road and when we returned to see the salesman we found they had sold it. 20 mins from driving in to sale!!! Mind you the salesmans face was a picture when I joked that we had changed our mind and wanted OUR van back :-D :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 machra - 2011-05-23 5:30 PM From what I remember I bought the 2.2 as is was 120 BHP as opposed to the 2.0 which was 100BHP. I travelled some 8000 miles, fast motorway, slow narrow B roads, in the UK and Europe and averaged 32 MPG. I remember the worst being about 25, travelling down the payage in France and the best being 35 pootling round the Loire. I think your memory deceives you... There's a November 2003 MMM report of an A-S Nuevo on: http://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/userfiles/file/MMM%20historic%20road%20tests/lores%20Auto-Sleeper%20Nuevo%20ES%20on%20SWB%202.0HDI%20Peugeot%20Boxer%20.pdf and I refer you to the section beginning "A Boxer with punch?" on the 2nd page and to the SPECIFICATION listing at the end of the report. In 2005 Hobby was marketing quite large and heavy Fiat-based motorhomes with the 2.0litre JTD 85bhp motor as standard. I recall seeing a couple being sold new at a German dealership and noticed that they were being advertised as having 100bhp. The dealer told me he'd acquired them at a bargain price from Hobby and had the motors 'chipped' by a reputable tuning company. So, even if the smaller motor's power output proved to be uninspiring, it should be possible to improve matters quite cheaply. Long-standing forum members may also remember an A-S Nuevo being reported on by several magazines with some saying it had the 2.0litre motor and others that it had the 2.2 version. I'm near certain that the vehicle in the MMM report is the Nuevo in question. It was eventually confirmed by Auto-Sleepers that the vehicle on test had the larger capacity powerplant albeit (based on journalists' comments about a noisy turbo) one that wasn't in the best of health. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest machra Posted May 25, 2011 Share Posted May 25, 2011 Derek is right, my memory is playing up. The following is from Parkers guide: The Peugeot Boxer shares its bodies and engines with the Citroen Relay and Fiat Ducato. There are small differences in specification, warranty and price between the three but essentially they are the same. Engines offered in 1994 were a 1.9-litre diesel offering 70bhp, a 2.5-litre diesel offering 86bhp and a 2.5-litre turbodiesel with 100bhp. In 2002, all engines became HDi common rail versions – a 2.0-litre with 86bhp, a 2.2-litre with 104bhp and a 2.8-litre with 127bhp. There are 140 variants all told, with three wheelbases and four gross vehicle weights of 2.5, 2.9, 3.3 and 3.5 tonnes. I know we bought the Peugeot 2.2 so must have got the 104 BHP as opposed to the 2.0 with 86 BHP. I stand corrected Derek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.