150hp Fiat Comfortmatic

[bolero boy]

I dont have the 'comfortmatic issue' as we have a manual :-)

However, there are lots of drivers out there who would not know if they are experiencing Brian's 'quirks' or not.

Witness the driver who blissfully ignores the incline coming towards him at 50mph, the car/van slows, the gas pedal gets pressed further to the floor as the poor underpowered thing slows to a crawl until suddenly dawn arrives and second is selected, lurching occurs and the progress continues with pistons almost coming out of the bonnet.

The driver behind, who snicked the gear early out of top to give himself and the vehicle a chance at maintaing progress up,the hill, cant believe whats going on ahead.

For the same driver with the Comfortmatic, no doubt the down change will happen a little sooner and progress will seem a lot smoother. (Non) Understanding of gears and load all taken care of, up to a point.

It seems to me that Brian obviously enjoys driving and is struggling to come to grips with what would be natural for a driver in a manual to do, that is change down early for an incline ahead, hold on to the gear if the incline/bends persist, and also to allow a speedy exit from a junction by holding low gears a little longer.

These are obviously quirks that drivers will hate, embrace or just live with, depending on their viewpoint.

I watch this space as this 'box was on my shopping list.......might just be the 150 manual...

 

[Will86]

Brian, you should really make an effort to move into the 21st century regarding hill climbing. Nothing in life is perfect, like satnav a map is convenient, similarly a gearbox with auto and manual control should be used to suit a given situation.

 

You have not yet accepted that the gearbox cannot read the road like its operator. I remarked earlier that topping a hill or slope can be frightening if left in auto, at the brow of the hill the gearbox has no knowledge that its about to go downwards and will charge forward whereas 'the driver' having already assessed the situation will have eased off to suit the gradient he sees before him.

 

Keep everything simple Brian, use it as best it can be used and not too technical, just drive the thing!

[Brian Kirby]

Colin Leake - 2013-11-11 4:09 PM

 

Thanks for the post Brian, most informative. Have you tried getting it up on levelling blocks yet I have been told that can be a bit tricky. I must say that whilst I have an automatic car I have always had reservations about automated manual boxes. Merc had one which I seem to remember was called Sprint shift but have now given up on it and gone back to a conventional old fashioned auto......................

Hi Colin. Yes, I have tried it on ramps, and it was fine. I used the same approach as with our Hobby. Put ramps just a bit in front of the wheels, and then give the accelerator a firm prod to take the van straight to the top in one hit. (Helps having someone to say STOP, as even on the Hobby I couldn't see the wheel/ramp from the driving seat. :-)) Then, level the van while rolling gently back off the ramp using the brake. I watch countless folk frying their clutches trying to inch up a ramp until level. Far easier, and kinder to the clutch, to just go straight up, and then level while rolling back.

 

Re the Merc auto, I think this is no longer a "conventional old fashioned" version. I met Mike Jago a few months back at Malvern, and his van is an auto Sprinter. He said they were now on torque converters and no longer "Sprint Shift", so I asked about the fuel consumption penalty these usually impose. He said it was virtually nil as the torque converter incorporates a lock up above a ceratin speed. Didn't get the full details but it sounded as though there may be a wet plate clutch somewhere in there, that prevents the engine endlessly travelling faster than the van in any given gear. He was very pleased with the economy overall. Mind, the Sprinter was taller than our Exsis, which surprised me!

[Brian Kirby]

Mike88 - 2013-11-11 5:34 PM

 

armstrongpiper - 2013-11-11 6:07 PM

 

I have owned our 3ltrs Comfortmatic Autotrail Tracker for over 5 years, have travelled widely in France, Germany, Austria and Italy and the only times it has not been left to look after its own gearchanging is when I fancied a 'play' to remind myself how to do the manual thing. It has coped with mountain passes, both up and down without any of the dramas described above.

Would I have another if changing the 'van? Certainly!!

 

Neil B

 

Precisely. The gearbox on my 3 litre is fantastic and there are very few Comfortmatic owners who would disagree. I have only ever put mine in auto mode and have driven throughout Europe in the last 3.5 years. Of course some people are worriers - and tend to over analyse things - but most people stick the thing into Auto and get on with their holiday.

 

As to the query in an earlier post about leveling blocks I put mine on blocks on my steep drive with absolutely no problem as well as occasionally when on site.

To which I would only say that mine is not, as the string title states, the three litre 180hp engine, but the 2.3 litre 150hp version. So, possibly the greater torque of those 180 horses just plasters over the cracks in the gearbox programming that the 150 horses reveal. Please believe that I am not attacking your vans, but stating, as accurately as I can, my experiences with mine. I can, however, assure you that no refined analysis was required to detect the characteristics I recounted above. They were quite starkly obvious and I was interested, as stated in my original post, to note that much the same comments were made by three other testers in two magazines, one Belgian, one German. My conclusion is that performance of the box in the 150hp (and possibly the 130 also) is not as it is in the 180. To that end, I think you may be reassuring folk that the apples are fine, when what they actually have are pears. :-D But thank you for your comments.

[Brian Kirby]

Will85 - 2013-11-11 6:28 PM

 

Brian, you should really make an effort to move into the 21st century regarding hill climbing. Nothing in life is perfect, like satnav a map is convenient, similarly a gearbox with auto and manual control should be used to suit a given situation.

 

You have not yet accepted that the gearbox cannot read the road like its operator. I remarked earlier that topping a hill or slope can be frightening if left in auto, at the brow of the hill the gearbox has no knowledge that its about to go downwards and will charge forward whereas 'the driver' having already assessed the situation will have eased off to suit the gradient he sees before him.

Thank you Will. However, I have not experienced any surges over the tops of hills when using cruise control. It is not a characteristic that this van shows. Does yours do this?

 

But please tell, is it then the case that all automatics have a manual mode? I had understood that most have only P N R and D available? And do they all have to be nursed up hills? My daughter's auto Merc seems happy enough according to her, and she can't begin to understand why any auto can't simply be driven in auto. Might it be that this Fiat Comfortmatic isn't quite so 21C as you imply? Do you have one, I wonder?

[Colin Leake]

Brian Kirby - 2013-11-11 6:30 PM

 

Colin Leake - 2013-11-11 4:09 PM

 

Thanks for the post Brian, most informative. Have you tried getting it up on levelling blocks yet I have been told that can be a bit tricky. I must say that whilst I have an automatic car I have always had reservations about automated manual boxes. Merc had one which I seem to remember was called Sprint shift but have now given up on it and gone back to a conventional old fashioned auto......................

Hi Colin. Yes, I have tried it on ramps, and it was fine. I used the same approach as with our Hobby. Put ramps just a bit in front of the wheels, and then give the accelerator a firm prod to take the van straight to the top in one hit. (Helps having someone to say STOP, as even on the Hobby I couldn't see the wheel/ramp from the driving seat. :-)) Then, level the van while rolling gently back off the ramp using the brake. I watch countless folk frying their clutches trying to inch up a ramp until level. Far easier, and kinder to the clutch, to just go straight up, and then level while rolling back.

 

Re the Merc auto, I think this is no longer a "conventional old fashioned" version. I met Mike Jago a few months back at Malvern, and his van is an auto Sprinter. He said they were now on torque converters and no longer "Sprint Shift", so I asked about the fuel consumption penalty these usually impose. He said it was virtually nil as the torque converter incorporates a lock up above a ceratin speed. Didn't get the full details but it sounded as though there may be a wet plate clutch somewhere in there, that prevents the engine endlessly travelling faster than the van in any given gear. He was very pleased with the economy overall. Mind, the Sprinter was taller than our Exsis, which surprised me!

 

I think most torque convert autos now have a lock up built in. Perhaps I should not have referred to it as an old fashioned auto.

[colin]

The A4LD gearbox I have in one vehicle locks up in 3rd and 4th, and this was introduced by ford in 1985, so hardly new technology.

[Will86]

Apologies I answered the phone and lost the reply ... start again Later.

[grahamw]

JudgeMental - 2013-11-11 3:47 PM

 

have you ever weighed your front axle at a weighbridge....as depending on layouts (tank location etc...) overloading needs to be watched carefully on vans with 3L auto

 

Good point. The auto box does add to your front axle loading but interestingly its additional weight does not seem to be evenly distributed across the front axle. I find that the nearside front wheel takes the greater part of the additional loading. This will not be apparent by a visit to the weighbridge.

[Will86]

I should explain here Brian that I'm practical and make things not technical and very simply just drive and therefore adjust to whatever is presented.

 

I have been caught out by charging over a hill top with the cruise on when the gear box didn't realise we had reached the top, it was frightening but now I adjust by switching off before reaching the high point.

 

Regarding all automatics I have no idea, having only driven a 987M Rapido and a dozen or so automatic VW's. Similarly I have no knowledge of the Comfortmatic.

 

My jibe was that life is not perfect, we use the Satnav but also a standard map as an aid, similarly an automatic gear box can be assisted in awkward situations by selecting a manual gear.

 

A bit of a dumb answer perhaps but I take life very simply and just get on with whatever I'm presented with. We now have a 2 week old VW Nexa which will enable me to comment on that as time passes.

[Brock]

I have the 130bhp with Comfort-matic and Cruise Control on a Hymer and driven just under 3,000 miles [only about 100 miles in manual] in the UK, mainly on our undulating cross country roads including several journeys into the Dales of Yorkshire and Derbyshire.

 

I agree with what Brian has said because I have experienced similar. However, these quirks have not detracted from my journeys. Overall, I've found driving in the UK easier. Also, I find manoeuvring easier, including clambering up levelling blocks.

 

Some will think about having a test drive before buying. However, my early experience of the Comfort-Matic was discouraging. When I downloaded the manual in English to improve my understanding and put a few more miles on the clock, I was getting to know the Comfort-Matic and liking it. It's taken me time and adjustment to my driving habits but I'm beginning to appreciate the best of the Comfort-Matic.

 

I found to my cost when travelling the M62 using the Cruise Control and Comfort-Matic that it holds on to a higher gear longer than necessary and then stumbles down through the gears to find the right one whilst everyone else overtakes you. It supped some fuel that day - 25mpg on the M62.

 

On the motorway at c56mph, the dashboard indicates an average of 27 mpg over 60 miles or more [excluding the M62 trip] within 0.1 variance either side. On a cross country route using just the Comfort-Matic, not the cruise control, and running at a lower average speed, I'm getting an indicated 29 mph with a best of 30.2 on a cross country run from the Wirral to Peterborough. I'm assuming the dashboard calculations are consistent even if the figures are over stated.

 

If the Comfort-Matic proves as reliable as my past manual boxes, then it will get my thumbs up. In the meantime, I recommend taking on board what Brian says and considering your driving style before deciding whether the Comfort-Matic is for you. My driving style has been described as 'what is the rush'.

 

I appreciate Brian compiling his impressions and other advice he's given me recently. It's a welcome reminder of what this forum is about.

 

 

[armstrongpiper]

Brian makes references to hill-climbing problems while using cruise control. I wouldn't expect 'normal' behaviour of the gear selection in these circumstances, as the system is then trying to maintain a set speed, which is obviously not possible on a steep or twisty road.

To clarify - my vehicle is the 160 Multijet, not the later 180, so isn't so much different in BHP to the 150 Brian is using. Don't know offhand how the torque figures match.

 

Neil B

[bigal55]

First, exiting a side road into traffic, or entering a roundabout from a standstill, when you need to move forward briskly. First is pre-selected at standstill, and the drive away in first is flawless. You then anticipate a quick snick up to second, and away. No such luck! Second is eventually selected, but only after what seems an interminable pause. This is odd, because under leisurely acceleration the change into second is quick and almost imperceptible. If acceleration is maintained, the remaining changes up are admirably quick and smooth. It is just that change from first into second under acceleration that drags, which inevitably confuses following drivers as the van suddenly loses momentum.

 

Brian, good post as a lot of people will be interested in the auto box, my auto car has a overdrive, under acceleration it won,t engage below 50mph but with a split 2nd lift it will engage at 40mph, youcould try this

i think some of the problems are caused by it not being a true auto box but a manuel box with a auto add on as my car does not have any of the problems posted in this thread. Keep us informed as the auto box is on my wishlist.

[Brian Kirby]

armstrongpiper - 2013-11-12 5:28 PM

 

Brian makes references to hill-climbing problems while using cruise control. I wouldn't expect 'normal' behaviour of the gear selection in these circumstances, as the system is then trying to maintain a set speed, which is obviously not possible on a steep or twisty road.

To clarify - my vehicle is the 160 Multijet, not the later 180, so isn't so much different in BHP to the 150 Brian is using. Don't know offhand how the torque figures match.

 

Neil B

No Neil, I'm not using cruise on the steep twisty roads (I'm not suicidal!), only on roads with good forward visibility: mostly autoroute or dual carriageway, where maintaining a set speed is entirely practical.

 

In fact, it doesnt really matter whether the cruise is on or off, if the box is in auto mode it just hangs on to sixth gear way too long and doesn't respond to its labouring engine, and the fact that it is losing speed, until far too late.

 

My comparison is our Transit based manual van. With the cruise set on that I could hear the turbo spinning up before I could detect any loss of motion on a hill. The Fiat cruise doesn't begin to respond by opening the throttle until speed has already been lost. It just doesn't seem to get the message at all. By comparison, the Ford system is far subtler and faster.

 

Re torque, I don't know either, but would imagine the 2.8 has a flatter curve that is generally higher. Those extra 500cc must have some effect! :-)

[euroserv]

Since I have a few minutes to spare this morning I thought I would bung in some torque data......

 

2.3JTD E3 110hp 270NM

2.8JTD E3 127hp 300NM @1800rpm

2.8JTD E3 146hp 310NM @1500rpm

2.2JTD E4 100hp 250NM

2.3JTD E4 120hp 320NM @2000rpm

2.3JTD E4 130hp 320NM @2000rpm

3.0JTD E4 160hp 400NM @1700rpm

2.3JTD E5 110hp 300NM @1800rpm

2.3JTD E5 130hp 320NM @1800rpm

2.3JTD E5 150hp 350NM @1500rpm

3.0JTD E5 180hp 400NM @1400rpm

 

Brian,

 

I think I can see the problem.

While my 3.0JTD 160 is not exhibiting quite the same laggy response in 6th gear while on cruise control; I understand what you mean because mine does it to a lesser extent.

If you study the figures above, you can kind of see why this is.

The original auto was only available on the 3.0JTD where it had lots of power and lots of torque from fairly low revs to play with and would pull from lower speeds in higher gears happily enough.

The later E5 2.3JTD 150 has almost the same peak torque rpm as the E5 3.0JTD but is lacking 50NM of said torque and if the software designers have been lazy and used the same programming for both engines; yours will be labouring a bit more than it should be. If the programming is the same as for the E4 3.0 then the difference is harder to explain other than by the amount of torque available.

 

The reality is though that your engine will not yet be giving it's maximum torque and will probably only do so after about 15 to 20,000 miles, so the problem may become less of an issue with time. There may be an update for the software though; so it would be wise to have a chat with a knowledgeable member of staff at a Fiat Professional dealer.

 

The figures also go some way towards explaining the improved fuel economy of the E5 engines. With their peak torque arriving at lower revs and with higher gear ratios fitted it seems entirely reasonable to predict at least 5% improvement and on the road we are seeing this.

 

Anyway; just some stats for the people who love stats.

 

Nick

[Brian Kirby]

Many thanks Nick, interesting inded! Also shows how the outputs from these engines have been improved, presumably largely by tweaking the programs. HP rises, torque rises at lower revs and, in general terms, economy also goes up a bit into the bargain. Quite an achievement.

 

I don't know if they've used the same program on both engines, but since I assume most of the torque/hp improvements come from changes in the ECU program, I would think the engine, at least, must have new software. Whether the auto software has been modified to match, might possibly be another matter. I hope they do bring out an upgrade as the system seems to have much to offer but, in its present incarnation, at least in a perpeptually heavy motorhome, it really doesn't shine.

 

While they're at it, it would be nice if they also had another look at the cruise control software, to sharpen its responses. It doesn't begin to turn on the power until the van is perceptably losing speed, and even then it seems not to attempt to regain what has been lost until it is back on the flat. With the Transit, if I got to a rise the following traffic would begin to fall behind as it powered up while others were still reacting to the hill. With the Fiat, the cruise is so slow reacting to loss of speed they're up our chuff before the power comes on, and stay there because the speed just stays low. It may only be 5kph, but continental drivers kill for driving 5kph below the limit! :-)

 

I know I'm being bloody minded with the auto functions, but I've been interested to just let it do its thing, and see how it fares on its own. Ditto the cruise. The result, at least until some mods are available, are that I shall first try keeping it in the "Up" mode, to see if that compensates, and if it doesn't, I shall use it in manual mode except in traffic etc. The cruise, I think, I shall more or less ignore. If I increase the set speed to keep up with traffic on hills, I'll just get ticketed on the flat for speeding!

 

As you say, it will probably improve with more miles. It has only done 3.5K miles so far, so it's still a baby. I agree with your 15-20K miles before they come on song, and about 25K before they are getting to their performance peak. I've noted the fuel consumption is gradually imroving, and is now just over 26.5mpg overall (total miles/total gallons, not from the silly trip - which isn't too bad considering how many snaking uphill roads we travelled, mainly in second and third gears). It's also smoothing off and becoming less gruff, so it's getting there. Time will tell.

[bolero boy]

Brian, a Fiat press release with reference to different driving styles/conditions and the 'programs' available to the driver.

http://www.fiatprofessionalpress.co.uk/press/article/5053

[Brian Kirby]

bolero boy - 2013-11-13 9:27 PM

 

Brian, a Fiat press release with reference to different driving styles/conditions and the 'programs' available to the driver.

http://www.fiatprofessionalpress.co.uk/press/article/5053

Thanks for that Chris. I think I will e-mail the Public Relations Director my observations, and ask him if what I am experienceing is what he would expect, or whether he thinks there is a fault somewhere. One never knows! :-)

[Brock]

Chris, thanks from me for the press release.

[lennyhb]

Brian Kirby - 2013-11-13 8:30 PM

 

While they're at it, it would be nice if they also had another look at the cruise control software, to sharpen its responses. It doesn't begin to turn on the power until the van is perceptably losing speed, and even then it seems not to attempt to regain what has been lost until it is back on the flat. With the Transit, if I got to a rise the following traffic would begin to fall behind as it powered up while others were still reacting to the hill. With the Fiat, the cruise is so slow reacting to loss of speed they're up our chuff before the power comes on, and stay there because the speed just stays low. It may only be 5kph, but continental drivers kill for driving 5kph below the limit! :-)

 

 

That does not sound right Brian unless they have reprogrammed that as well. The cruise on our 130 manual is one of the best I've used very responsive, a completely different beast to the one you describe. My mate with the same van agrees reckons its more responsive than the one on his expensive Merc.

[onecal]

Thanks Brian for that very informative piece which a lot of Motorhomers will find very interesting, There is of course only so much that is programmed (mapped) in to give correct torque curves over many driving and load conditions. I think a  program modification may be necessary to satisfy both your needs and many more of us that have our idea of the way it should feel and operate . Sometimes we as humans also have to make adjustments to a new (to us) operating medium. It is a well known little glitch in the system. Again thanks for the update,many happy years of Motorhoming in yours

Regards,

Brendan

[bolero boy]

lennyhb - 2013-11-14 9:25 AM

 

Brian Kirby - 2013-11-13 8:30 PM

 

While they're at it, it would be nice if they also had another look at the cruise control software, to sharpen its responses. It doesn't begin to turn on the power until the van is perceptably losing speed, and even then it seems not to attempt to regain what has been lost until it is back on the flat. With the Transit, if I got to a rise the following traffic would begin to fall behind as it powered up while others were still reacting to the hill. With the Fiat, the cruise is so slow reacting to loss of speed they're up our chuff before the power comes on, and stay there because the speed just stays low. It may only be 5kph, but continental drivers kill for driving 5kph below the limit! :-)

 

 

That does not sound right Brian unless they have reprogrammed that as well. The cruise on our 130 manual is one of the best I've used very responsive, a completely different beast to the one you describe. My mate with the same van agrees reckons its more responsive than the one on his expensive Merc.

I agree with Lenny. Although I'm not a huge fan of cruise control, i have learnt to make use of it when the conditions dictate, long motorway or A road journeys.

Along with the fact that I'm also not a great auto transmission aficionado, I've always reverted to manual control where i think i can do a better job ;-)

Yes, i support Lenny' point re moderately swift reaction to uphill stretches, i still like to give the throttle a squeeze prior to the start of the hill to add a little momentum, as i would in a manual vehicle. This seems to make for an overall smoother ascent. Leaving the device to its own workings, just allows a small drop in speed before the throttle starts to move on its own.

As has been said earlier in the thread, we, as drivers, have longer range eyesight than these electronic devices and our ability to anticipate and react to hills/bends/descents etc make us better drivers than autos.

As tools, they are great, I've grown to love the cruise but only in the right conditions and even my Dad's Peugeot can make town driving simple.

However, with the amount of torque available to us all in our motorhomes, town driving can mostly be negotiated in third gear driven, virtually as an auto.

Interested to hear the result of any communication, Brian.

[rolandrat]

As a matter of interest what sort of mileages are being achieved with the Auto boxes. Has any owner had to have a clutch change during ownership, if so at what mileage. Is it true that the 3ltr has to have the engine removed to change the clutch or can it be done in situ?

[Dave225]

I have never driven the Fiat Comfortmatic so cannot add any other comments to those already presented. I do recall early test reports suggested similar lag issues.

 

However I would comment that the Fiat 'auto' is what I could describe as an 'amalgam'. It is basically the manual gearbox with a computerised control system. Throughout the years it has usually been the case that genuine auto boxes have different gear ratios to manuals, invariably slightly lower, and this has been one of the reason poorer fuel consumption has been seen. Sometimes they have even had one less gear to use for the reasons of getting the best performance out of the system. The other comment I would make is that Fiat designed the Comfortmatic for their range of vans and although they allowed for the weights, I doubt if they took so much account of the wind drag with a big overcab on top. They also probably expected sales to be low compared to manuals as their main market ifs the commercial sector.

 

It is interesting that Mercedes have remained loyal to the torque converter system, or true auto box if you wish, but have engineered that to get almost the same output as the manual. I note the latest models have a 7 speed gearbox so having the right ratio should no longer be an issue.

 

I have always had auto vehicles for personal reasons and do like them, but have shied away from adaptations of manual gearboxes as i have felt they are a bit of a 'fudge'. I have also felt that as they have a clutch, then there are areas of potential weakness as compared to a torque converter. I accept the latter can overheat but new ones are unlikely to have that problem. My own auto box hauls my 1.5 tonne 'shed' happily over the Pyrenees in 30 plus degrees of heat and acceleration 'lag' never happens.

 

Unfortunately my purse does not allow a new Mercedes, but if I did have the cash, then that is the way I would go.

[rolandrat]

I had a drive in a 3ltr Comfort-matic today for the very first time, I was very impressed with the performance and response. Would I buy one? You bet I would. If I'd have had more time I would have learn't it to sing. Brilliant.

Brian, persevere, you won't regret it.