Hawcara Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I have just been reading Jan edition of MMM and the article on the Auto Sleeper Nuevo. On page 114 under the heading Driving Impressions it states ' Reverse gear sis still higher than ideal, so although the Nuevo will reverse uphill, the clutch isn't happy'. There's no problem though, reversing over level, wet grass.' I thought that the clutch problem had been solved now, so is this a one off or is the problem still there? :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Oh dear 8-)....................and if it was a test vehicle its unlikely to of been fully loaded *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Jones Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 And if an MMM tester makes a significant negative comment about a FIAT, and an AUTOSLEEPER at that, there must be something REALLY wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spospe Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 As I understand the judder problem, it is not the clutch per se, it is that the reverse gear is too high for safe, low speed reversing. The 'cure' for the problem has been, as far as I am aware, to make the reverse gear lower than it originally was. This lower gear has helped, but possibly not cured the problem, especially for heavier vehicles. To use a phrase: Caveat Emptor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spospe Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Tony Jones - 2012-12-15 6:56 PM And if an MMM tester makes a significant negative comment about a FIAT, and an AUTOSLEEPER at that, there must be something REALLY wrong! Tony Autosleeper have built the Nuevo on a Peugeot, not a FIAT (you can see the badge on the bonnet in the photographs of the test report). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mel B Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 pelmetman - 2012-12-15 6:44 PM Oh dear 8-)....................and if it was a test vehicle its unlikely to of been fully loaded *-) Even unloaded it is a 3300kg vehicle, with only a 365kg payload before extras are added - I haven't read the article yet but it is possible that the vehicle has a fault as I've not heard of any Euro V versions having clutch problems and ours drives beautifully loaded at nearly 3500kg. :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Mel B - 2012-12-15 10:23 PM pelmetman - 2012-12-15 6:44 PM Oh dear 8-)....................and if it was a test vehicle its unlikely to of been fully loaded *-) Even unloaded it is a 3300kg vehicle, with only a 365kg payload before extras are added - I haven't read the article yet but it is possible that the vehicle has a fault as I've not heard of any Euro V versions having clutch problems and ours drives beautifully loaded at nearly 3500kg. :-S Like myself, you have experiance of driving the Ford and Sevel would you agree with me that reversing either is pretty much the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 colin - 2012-12-15 11:14 PM Mel B - 2012-12-15 10:23 PM pelmetman - 2012-12-15 6:44 PM Oh dear 8-)....................and if it was a test vehicle its unlikely to of been fully loaded *-) Even unloaded it is a 3300kg vehicle, with only a 365kg payload before extras are added - I haven't read the article yet but it is possible that the vehicle has a fault as I've not heard of any Euro V versions having clutch problems and ours drives beautifully loaded at nearly 3500kg. :-S Like myself, you have experiance of driving the Ford and Sevel would you agree with me that reversing either is pretty much the same? My 22 year old Ford Coachbuilt van reverses fine up a very steep slope ;-)....................progress eh? :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mel B Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 colin - 2012-12-15 11:14 PM Mel B - 2012-12-15 10:23 PM pelmetman - 2012-12-15 6:44 PM Oh dear 8-)....................and if it was a test vehicle its unlikely to of been fully loaded *-) Even unloaded it is a 3300kg vehicle, with only a 365kg payload before extras are added - I haven't read the article yet but it is possible that the vehicle has a fault as I've not heard of any Euro V versions having clutch problems and ours drives beautifully loaded at nearly 3500kg. :-S Like myself, you have experiance of driving the Ford and Sevel would you agree with me that reversing either is pretty much the same? Yup - when we were on the Isle of Wight this year in our Chausson on a Ford hubby was driving and had to reverse about 100 yards back down a single track road as a large tractor with trailer came the other way. He's also had to reverse our Fiat up quite a steep slope, again without any problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Jones Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 spospe - 2012-12-15 10:17 PM Tony Jones - 2012-12-15 6:56 PM And if an MMM tester makes a significant negative comment about a FIAT, and an AUTOSLEEPER at that, there must be something REALLY wrong! Tony Autosleeper have built the Nuevo on a Peugeot, not a FIAT (you can see the badge on the bonnet in the photographs of the test report). Ah, silly me - that's COMPLETELY different then, innit? :D :D Never really look at the badge on an X250, can't bear to look that hard at the plug-ugly front end! Not really prejudiced, honest!! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawcara Posted December 16, 2012 Author Share Posted December 16, 2012 Just read the rest of that report, apart from the reversing problem, one of the pics said the rear steadies were too short! Seems a lot of problems for a new van that was tested at a price of £50k. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Leake Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 The rear steadies on our AutoTrail Apachie reached the ground just fine. Shame the winding handle was too short to reach them! To be fair it was one of the first of the new models off the line. Fortunately I have a lath so it was no problem for me to extend it. I understand that after we made them aware of the problem it was fixed for suniquent production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pepe63xnotuse Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Hawcara - 2012-12-15 6:29 PM ...On page 114 under the heading Driving Impressions it states ' Reverse gear sis still higher than ideal, so although the Nuevo will reverse uphill, the clutch isn't happy'. There's no problem though, reversing over level, wet grass.' Yeah...I wonder,just how did vehicle manufactures get themselves in the position where their products ability to reverse on a patch of level grass,let alone up a gradient, is greeted as a major plus point?!.... *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melvin Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Fiat advice is to raise the RPM and slip the clutch, that way you can burn out the clutch which is not covered under the warranty and we then can charge you £949.27 for a new clutch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Hawcara - 2012-12-16 5:42 PM Just read the rest of that report, apart from the reversing problem, one of the pics said the rear steadies were too short! Seems a lot of problems for a new van that was tested at a price of £50k. :-D The particular Nuevo ES in the January MMM report does seem to have been unusually glitchy. Besides the 'short' rear corner steadies and the failed electric entrance-step, there was the amazingly slow (40 minutes) it took to fill the vehicle's fresh-water tank - surely that cannot be normal for a Whale filling system? However, I don't consider Andrew Bromley's observation about reversing (that you quoted in your original posting) qualifies as a "problem". Where currently-produced FWD motorhomes are concerned, none of them has a reverse-gear ratio that could be termed "ideal". To be able to reverse a fully-laden motorhome (3500kg in a Nuevo ES's case) slowly up a steep slope (I seem to recall a 20% slope was suggested as a realistic test during the Juddering Saga) with the vehicle's clutch fully engaged would require very, very low reverse-gearing, way below any ratio used in the manual gearboxes fitted to the FWD light commercial vehicle chassis on which most motorhomes are based. If a motorhome's reverse-gear ratio results in the vehicle travelling at, say, 3mph when the motorhome'e engine is at a 750rpm tick-over speed, and to reverse up a slope requires the motor to turn at 1500rpm to produce the necessary power to climb the slope, then, with the clutch fully engaged, the motorhome will travel at 6mph. If the driver decides that 6mph is too fast for safety, he/she will need to slip the vehicle's clutch to reduce speed but still allow the engine to turn fast enough to provide the necessary power. (This is basic kids' stuff and every driver does it instinctively.) If speed is reduced but the clutch is not slipped, then the motorhome's engine will eventually stall, probably preceded by violent transmission vibration. If the clutch is slipped it will start to heat up and, if it gets hot enough, it will fail - this is a simple fact of life. There's no reason to expect the gear ratios of the Nuevo ES tested by MMM to differ from the ratios used on any other latest-model Peugeot/ Boxer-based coachbullt motorhome having the 2.2HDI 130bhp motor. I don't know if latest-model Ducatos share the Boxer's ratios but, if they do, then Andrew's caveat will also apply to them. As I've said in the past, my FWD Ford Transit-based Hobby has a 5-speed gearbox with a1st-gear ratio that is uncomfortably high for a 3500kg motorhome, The Hobby's reverse-gear ratio is even higher than 1st, so reversing slowly up a steep slope is a recipe for clutch failure if the reversing exercise is prolonged. The Transit 6-speed gearbox used later on FWD coachbuilt motorhomes like Mel B's Chausson had lower 1st and reverse ratios (though reverse was still higher than 1st), making hill-starting and reversing simpler. But it would be extraordinarily naive (and unrealistic) to believe that a motorhome should be capable of climbing any slope (however steep and going either forwards or backwards) with its motor merely ticking over; nor to think that, if a motorhome's clutch is slipped excessively when hill climbing, that the clutch will be 'happy' about such treatment. Pelmetman's comment about his 1990 Autohome's slope-climbing ability is relevant. My previous Herald was built on a 1996 Transit RWD platform somewhat similar to his Autohome's. The Herald had far-lower gearing than my Hobby and a larger-capacity 'softer' motor. Hill-starting and reversing was never a challenge with the Herald, but the other side of the coin was that the Herald's 'truck' low gearing made it wearing to drive on motorways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawki Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I am sure there are good and bad bits to FWD and RWD but when I read a thread like this I am so so glad I have a RWD Merc it is so simple to get it anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Leake Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Our 2011 AutoTrail on a Fait chassis simply reverses with no drama at all to such an extent I never give it a thought. Truth is a it actually reverses better than our previous motorhome on the old five speed Fait chassis when negotiating our rather difficult and up hill curved drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.7f53342869b50f2b8f2190672182e2f3.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.