Bulletguy Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Considering changing my van and been looking at used low profile coachbuilt models. So far i've narrowed it down to a couple of models. Chausson Flash 02......and Hymer. Both on Ford Transit chassis which is what i prefer, both with fixed end bed which is another 'essential' i'm looking for. From what i can see the main differences between the two model types is the Hymer has a sizeable garage with large doors either side, where the Chausson Flash only has what seems to be limited storage with access by way of a smaller flap door at the rear. This means the bed in the Chausson is at a lower level than the Hymer. Has anyone owned either of this model type of van? I'd be interested in hearing experiences and any pros/cons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 It might be useful to know roughly what year year of vehicle you’ll be looking at. I think Chausson first marketed the Flash 02 model in 2005 (Transit Mk 6 - 2.0litre motor) before moving on to the Mk 7 (2.2litre motor) and I’m pretty sure Hymer did the same with their Ford Transit-based “Van” models. Plenty of Continental-European manufacturers were building shortish (around 6.0m) low-profile models on the Transit from 2004-onwards when Ford made available a front-wheel-drive chassis-cab platform for motorhome conversion. Benimar, Burstner (RWD), Carado, Chausson, CI, Dethleffs (FWD & RWD), Eriba, Eura Mobil, Fendt, Hobby, Hymer, Laika, Roller Team, Sunlight, TEC and Westfalia all made them, though how many made it to the UK in RHD is anybody’s guess. The Chausson Flash 02 is significantly wider than the Hymer “Van” and the latter’s construction methodology is more sophisticated and its build-quality is superior. The Flash range targeted the budget end of the market and (dare I say it?) this was apparent. So expect the Hymer to command a good deal higher asking-price. Regarding the FWD Ford Transit, I advise you to look for a Mk 7 with 140PS motor and 6-speed transmission (the gear ratios of the 5-speed gearbox were ‘wrong’ in my opinion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 For us an important part of fixed beds is being able to sit up to read or watch TV, sometimes can't do this on some of those with large storage underneath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Access to the transverse raised rear bed is a bit rudimentary in some, with just a loose aluminium ladder. The Hobby and the Hymer both offered the option of lower set beds, at the loss to "garage" volume. From experience, I think Hymer's body construction is/was superior to Hobby's, and the habitation shell presents fewer potentially leak prone joints. The Mk7 Transits need some checking for rust on the cylinder head around the injectors, as the scuttle drain doesn't reliably direct all rainwater away from the engine bay. The one thing I suspect both (definitely the Hobby) suffer from is a liability to grounding at the rear. The rear overhang is significant and air assistance is a very worthwhile addition, IMO, if not already installed. It also reduces body roll on bends and roundabouts, which can otherwise get a bit reminiscent of a 2CV! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted January 25, 2018 Author Share Posted January 25, 2018 Derek Uzzell - 2018-01-25 6:47 PM It might be useful to know roughly what year year of vehicle you’ll be looking at. I think Chausson first marketed the Flash 02 model in 2005 (Transit Mk 6 - 2.0litre motor) before moving on to the Mk 7 (2.2litre motor) and I’m pretty sure Hymer did the same with their Ford Transit-based “Van” models. Plenty of Continental-European manufacturers were building shortish (around 6.0m) low-profile models on the Transit from 2004-onwards when Ford made available a front-wheel-drive chassis-cab platform for motorhome conversion. Benimar, Burstner (RWD), Carado, Chausson, CI, Dethleffs (FWD & RWD), Eriba, Eura Mobil, Fendt, Hobby, Hymer, Laika, Roller Team, Sunlight, TEC and Westfalia all made them, though how many made it to the UK in RHD is anybody’s guess. The Chausson Flash 02 is significantly wider than the Hymer “Van” and the latter’s construction methodology is more sophisticated and its build-quality is superior. The Flash range targeted the budget end of the market and (dare I say it?) this was apparent. So expect the Hymer to command a good deal higher asking-price. Regarding the FWD Ford Transit, I advise you to look for a Mk 7 with 140PS motor and 6-speed transmission (the gear ratios of the 5-speed gearbox were ‘wrong’ in my opinion). 06 - 08 year. Couple i've seen on the internet both give same body width dimension of 2.3mtr. I knew about the Ford 6 speed (140) which unfortunately tend to be less common than the 5 speed. The advantage is obvious....just a shame more were not built with that spec engine though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 The 140PS motor with 6-speed transmission did not become available until late-2007. It’s the combination to go for though, as the 5-speed gearbox’s 1st and reverse ratios are high (Goodbye clutch!) and there’s a big gap between 4th and 5th ratios. The width of a Chausson Flash 02 would have been 2.30m, but Hymer “Van” models were 2.14m wide (advert here) http://motorhomesltd.com/product/hymer-van-522-ford-transit/ FWD Transit-based Hobby “Vans” and their Fendt-Mobil ‘clones’ were also narrow. https://www.practicalmotorhome.com/reviews/motorhome/30134-hobby-van The Burstner Prismo and Westfalia WestVan were essentially the same vehicle and built on a RWD Transit with twinned-wheel rear axle. Worth considering if you can find one. https://www.practicalmotorhome.com/reviews/motorhome/30061-westfalia-westvan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted January 26, 2018 Author Share Posted January 26, 2018 Derek Uzzell - 2018-01-26 9:45 AM The 140PS motor with 6-speed transmission did not become available until late-2007. It’s the combination to go for though, as the 5-speed gearbox’s 1st and reverse ratios are high (Goodbye clutch!) and there’s a big gap between 4th and 5th ratios. The width of a Chausson Flash 02 would have been 2.30m, but Hymer “Van” models were 2.14m wide (advert here) http://motorhomesltd.com/product/hymer-van-522-ford-transit/ FWD Transit-based Hobby “Vans” and their Fendt-Mobil ‘clones’ were also narrow. https://www.practicalmotorhome.com/reviews/motorhome/30134-hobby-van The Burstner Prismo and Westfalia WestVan were essentially the same vehicle and built on a RWD Transit with twinned-wheel rear axle. Worth considering if you can find one. https://www.practicalmotorhome.com/reviews/motorhome/30061-westfalia-westvan Thanks Derek......Ford do some odd things at times (not just mechanical) and as those engines would also have been used in commercial vans, it makes it all the more strange why they'd use such weird ratios (on the 5 speed). I suppose they thought the majority of commercial sold would be company owned and spotted a chance to flog more clutches! Regards the widths, looks like lazy advertising on the traders behalf as the two i looked at both say the same width! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EMS Posted January 29, 2018 Share Posted January 29, 2018 We have just this month sold our Hymer 572, it was a good van for us with two single beds over the garage. I agree with the analysis of the 5 speed box as we had trouble when reversing up a steep hill, not good for the clutch as more revs were required to prevent stalling. Strange going forwards up the same hill was no problem! We fitted air springs(inflatable to adjust height) at the rear as the van bottomed noisely when going over bumps and this provided a comfortable ride. The narrow body was a blessing when visiting a friends house in Berlin as required both mirrors to be folded to enter their drive, our new van would not be able to enter as it is 2.3m wide. Fuel consumption overall was just below 30 mpg, this was probably due to driving on Autobahns at 70 to 80 mph. The engine performance is so much better than our new van(only 4000 miles so new) a Fiat X290 Euro 6. The tall wardrobe provided a lot of hanging space. We fitted a microwave oven that had a grill and conventional oven so we did not miss not having a gas oven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted January 29, 2018 Author Share Posted January 29, 2018 EMS - 2018-01-29 6:09 PM We have just this month sold our Hymer 572, it was a good van for us with two single beds over the garage. I agree with the analysis of the 5 speed box as we had trouble when reversing up a steep hill, not good for the clutch as more revs were required to prevent stalling. Strange going forwards up the same hill was no problem! We fitted air springs(inflatable to adjust height) at the rear as the van bottomed noisely when going over bumps and this provided a comfortable ride. The narrow body was a blessing when visiting a friends house in Berlin as required both mirrors to be folded to enter their drive, our new van would not be able to enter as it is 2.3m wide. Fuel consumption overall was just below 30 mpg, this was probably due to driving on Autobahns at 70 to 80 mph. The engine performance is so much better than our new van(only 4000 miles so new) a Fiat X290 Euro 6. The tall wardrobe provided a lot of hanging space. We fitted a microwave oven that had a grill and conventional oven so we did not miss not having a gas oven. That's the model i've been looking at. Out of interest what year model was it and how much did it sell at? I agree with Derek about the 140PS 6-speed box engine though unfortunately they seem fairly thin on the ground. Most are 5 speed boxes. I've only used the oven in my van twice so wouldn't miss that at all. It's still like brand new so don't think any of the previous owners used it either. I would use a micro though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Presumably you’ve rejected the Auto-Sleepers “Eton” model? That was Transit-based but - like all A-S Ford conversions - was RWD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted January 30, 2018 Author Share Posted January 30, 2018 Derek Uzzell - 2018-01-30 9:09 AM Presumably you’ve rejected the Auto-Sleepers “Eton” model? That was Transit-based but - like all A-S Ford conversions - was RWD. Have seen them Derek but all seem end kitchen and i'm looking for fixed end bed as my days of 'bed making and folding' are as good as done! I'm getting old!! Size (length/width) is good though storage seems some what limited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hallii Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 The 5 speed Ford box isn't all that bad, it took me a while to get used to it but now I drive just like any other vehicle. I have found that high revs are not really needed, the engine will pull at lower revs and the anti stall software prevents stalling. The high drivers seat would be a problem for a tall driver, and there is no way to adjust it, I am shrinking as I get older so I manage well. The fixed bed in my Hymer Van allows me to watch the TV whilst I am in bed, also "relaxing" during the day is easy. The garage is a good size for a smallish van. I have looked at the Flash range and I did like the one with the wind up bed. 30 mpg and plenty of power, 70k and no clutch replacement yet! H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted January 30, 2018 Author Share Posted January 30, 2018 hallii - 2018-01-30 4:53 PM The 5 speed Ford box isn't all that bad, it took me a while to get used to it but now I drive just like any other vehicle. I have found that high revs are not really needed, the engine will pull at lower revs and the anti stall software prevents stalling. The high drivers seat would be a problem for a tall driver, and there is no way to adjust it, I am shrinking as I get older so I manage well. The fixed bed in my Hymer Van allows me to watch the TV whilst I am in bed, also "relaxing" during the day is easy. The garage is a good size for a smallish van. I have looked at the Flash range and I did like the one with the wind up bed. 30 mpg and plenty of power, 70k and no clutch replacement yet! H Cheers Halli.....which Hymer model is yours? I've seen two variation on the end bed, some with separate singles either side, the more common with double across the rear. The garage on Hymer is certainly sizeable whereas the Chausson Flash 2 has less (though no idea by how much) due to the lower bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-01-26 4:23 PM..........................Regards the widths, looks like lazy advertising on the traders behalf as the two i looked at both say the same width! The Hobby van as featured in Derek's link should be narrower than is stated. Ours was of that vintage (2007 model), and was claimed by Hobby to be 2070 wide. I never measured it to check, but the coachbuilt body is only marginally wider then the Transit cab, as can be seen in the photo, and the Mk 7 Transit is a narrower van than the X250 Fiat. There was a later option of a version with Hobby's trademark curved sides, which increased the width (and the price) to no great internal advantage. The Fendt version also had curved flanks that were terminated at the forward end with GRP or similar mouldings attached to the Transit cab doors to aid the transition from slab sided cab to curved sided coachbuilt. Matter of taste whether that was worth the cost and effort. It was possible to get a remap from Ford for the 5 speed 130ps version to help counter the rather "tall" gearing in first and reverse. The remap included an anti-stall feature developed by Land Rover for use on Discos that used the same engine. This worked well, and greatly reduced the tendency to stall. FWIW, these were not true stalls, but if the revs weren't quite adequate to develop what the EMS thought sufficient power to pull away, it just shut down the engine! After the remap, if the clutch was used gently enough, the revs came up automatically in first or reverse as the engine was loaded without need to depress the accelerator. This enabled very smooth take off on anything other than steep hills. It's only downside was a tendency to shut down again if accelerator wasn't applied as soon as the clutch was fully engaged. It was still a little "brittle", but a huge improvement over its performance before the remap, and once the knack was acquired it came quite naturally. I don't know whether ours was an exception, but I found the engine lively and responsive, and the cruise control was excellent, often responding to hills with extra power before I had noticed them. Our previous van had been Fiat X240 based, with the 2.8 JTD "Power" engine claimed to develop 146hp. Compared to the Transit, it was a sluggish slogger, and a long way short of what the French nicknamed the Ducato TGV! In comparison, the 130ps Transit impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monique.hubrechtsgm Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 One point to make clear on airride on motorhomes, not Audi which want get lower. Is that we like to go up whit our chassis in some circumstances. Not on the road , there it can be low and comfort and low gravity point. I am a alko freak which is super light weight and a low point of gravity when driving. They have much more wheel bases than fiat and overhangs at 60 percent of thieir wheelbase. Mine is 2.35 mtr on a 4035 Wb. Always check your factory dry standard ride height and loaded and check out your low points. When taking a far away side picture on your fiat. Air will be calibrated on that. And can be 5 cm up at low speed, which is a lot on a chassis. But it will be never an off road vehicle even whit a dangel 4wd fiat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Hymer and Hobby “Van” models were both built on a Ford Transit FWD platform-cab chassis (essentially a panel-van with its metal roof, sides and rear doors removed). In both instances two different wheelbases were used - a 3.30m ‘medium' wheelbase for models around 6.0m in length and a 3.75m ‘long’ wheelbase for models around 6.6m to 6.75m in length. The curved-sides Hobby “Van Exclusive” models Brian mentions were 2.18m wide, but I’m reasonably sure that flat-sided Hobby “Van Classic” models had the same 2.14m width as Hymer “Vans”. https://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/motorhomes/reviews/motorhomes/details/hobby-van-classic-t-500-fsc-2010-motorhome-review/898891 My Transit Mk 6-based 2005 Hobby T-600FC (6.39m long, 2.0litre 125PS motor, 5-speed gearbox, 3.75m wheelbase) had twin-leaf rear springs and was fairly firm at the rear. I believe “Vans” built on the Transit Mk 7 had single-leaf rear springs which would have made a difference. EMS mentions adding air bellows to the rear suspension of his Hymer 572 (6.58m long) and I recall that Brian did the same for his Hobby Van. I never felt this to be necessary for my Hobby, but this had a relatively short rear overhang and no rear garage to cram with ‘stuff’. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Derek Uzzell - 2018-01-31 1:46 PM.................. The curved-sides Hobby “Van Exclusive” models Brian mentions were 2.18m wide, but I’m reasonably sure that flat-sided Hobby “Van Classic” models had the same 2.14m width as Hymer “Vans”. https://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/motorhomes/reviews/motorhomes/details/hobby-van-classic-t-500-fsc-2010-motorhome-review/898891........................... I think this must relate to the way in which the width was being measured. The catalogue details for ours definitely stated the width as 2.07M and the length as 6.07M. However, although that width definitely excluded the wing mirrors, it may have been taken over the body shell only, with the 2.14M figure being taken overall the rear wing mouldings. After all, the difference between the two is only about 2 3/4" Interestingly, the Practical Motorhomes link you provided in your 26 Jan post shows the version with the high bed and aly. access ladder, whereas the 3M link you posted today shows the low bed version which reduces garage space. AFAIK, apart from the longer twin bedded version that Robinhood (I think) had, no further variants were produced. We looked at a number of vans in 2006/7, including Hymer, Hobby, and a couple of the Dethleffs offerings. Overall, for our purposes, the Hymer and Hobby seemed better equipped and had more practical kitchens and washrooms. Where we thought the Hobby Van scored was with the small side facing seat opposite the dining table, which was a) useful and b) lightened the "lounge" area compared to the contemporary Hymer Van which had a wardrobe in that position which closed in the lounge somewhat oppressively. All subjective, of course. However, if Paul can find a Hymer Van with a layout he likes, I think it would prove the more practical and durable option. The Hobby Vans are, to my eye, aesthetically more appealing, but I don't think the build quality and coachbuilt technical design are as good as with the Hymer Vans. Hymer came out with variations on that initial layout over the next few years, so Paul should not assume that all Hymer vans will look the same inside. The earlier Adria Compacts (though a bit wider and Fiat based), also seemed well thought out, with some usefully innovative touches and, if I remember correctly, proper steps up to the bed. They didn't sell them into the UK market for long, though they remained available (LHD) on the continent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.