wistle Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Hi. I am looking to buy an auto trail Motorhome and wonder which engine to choose from. Either the mercedes 316 2.7 auto. Or the 2.8 Ducato? Fuel economy/reliability. Any advice wil be appreciated. Many thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 Welcome to the Out&AboutLive forums. If an automatic gearbox were a priority, the Ducato-based Auto-Trail would need to be ruled out as an auto-box was not available (for RHD models) for vehicles having the 2.8litre motor. The Mercedes is rear-wheel drive: the Ducato is front-wheel drive. The Mercedes motor has a cam-chain: the Ducato motor has a cam-belt. Assuming that the Auto-Trail motorhomes involved are roughly the same size and weight, the Mercedes with auto-box is likely to use more fuel than the manual Ducato but, because of the cam-chain (and the company’s reputation) the Mercedes motor MIGHT be more reliable long-term. Conversely, if the Mercedes has a “Sprintshift” auto-box, that transmission had a patchy reliability record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wistle Posted June 4, 2016 Author Share Posted June 4, 2016 Many thanks for the info. I believe the MH I was looking at has the sprint shift gearbox in the 2006 model. So thanks I appreciate you advice. Any advice on front or fear wheel drive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will86 Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 We had a 2006 Mercedes Sprintshift Rapido with rear wheel drive and used it around Europe for 6 years. Never a problem although our mileage was limited, I found it very easy and smooth to drive. We did get stuck a few times in fields, but they were 'field events' so this was unsurprising. Fuel economy ... I was never interested ... all vehicles cost money to drive, they also lose money when idle by depreciation. We parted with it due to age difficulties. Would I buy another similar? yes but for a single person the equation is unbalanced and a VW Nexa is now more suitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 I had a trouble free 2.8 Fiat from 2005 to 2013. Fuel consumption on a 3500kg A-class was just over 28mpg over 48,000 miles but ranged from 25mpg to 32 mpg depending on weather and terrain. I'm an idle driver rather than 'get up and go'. I loved that engine and gearbox. Ride on the Fiat chassis will be firmer, Mercs tend to have spongier suspension from what I hear. I'd be tempted have a test drive. RWD should reduce, but not eliminate, the risk of getting stuck when on grass pitches etc. I'm on my 5th Fiat motorhome in 19 years; all have proved to be reliable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will86 Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 Will86 - 2016-06-04 12:02 PM We parted with it due to age difficulties. The age referred to was us not the Rapido ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Collings Posted June 4, 2016 Share Posted June 4, 2016 By and large when it comes to traction on the slippery stuff its not so much which end is driven that matters it the proportion of weight on the driven wheels that is critical. The other factor on slightly uneven ground is stiffness of the suspension. If there is limited suspension travel there can be large differences in the weight carried by each wheel so the light one spins easily. Which end drives would never be the deciding factor for me when it time to change but I prefer an absorbent ride to sporting handling even if it means a bit more roll.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.