Guest starspirit Posted March 16, 2007 Posted March 16, 2007 Howie, The beds in our 2005 Starspirit are - singles 6' 1" long by 2' 4" wide or as a double it's 6'11" long by 6' 1" wide which gives plenty of romping room should you be so inclined. The wardrobe is reasonable and has been made more user friendly by leaving the bl##dy great heavy table at home and storing a smaller lighter version adequate for the two of us behind the drivers seat on the loo wall. The rear lounge is great for lounging. Leaning back with feet up and TV on the flip up shelf is luxury indeed. So many vans these days have poor 'dinette' style lounging areas that are so uncomfortable and we do spend a lot of time lounging - even on a short mid journey stop it's nice to put your feet up and stretch out up for a while without impeding the chef. Ours has the 85bhp 2.0 hdi which is adequate rather than exhilarating and does about 28mpg overall. I did think of 'chipping' the engine but it's adequate most of the time and I'm rarely in any great rush. That said I am not a slow driver and I do tend to push on at 65 - 70 where the road allows but when touring on by roads am very happy to potter at 35 - 45 taking good care to let anyone behind me to get by as soon as it is safe. I would like a 2.2 or 2.3 but I can live with the 2.0. We did debate changing for a larger van with two lounge areas so that the bed could be left made up and that still might be an option as might a fixed bed. I am not generally keen on the fixed bed idea as they tend to be narrow (about 4' generally) and often come with a silly cut away foot end as well as making the van longer. Whilst size is important it also makes parking a pain in the bum at times with the worry about overhanging parking bays etc - assuming you can find a bay big enough to overhang that is? Gotta go dinners ready - but I will return!
Randonneur Posted March 16, 2007 Posted March 16, 2007 Just had a look at the new Starspirit on their website and it looks really nice. I would probably have gone for this layout if we had been in the UK but as you can imagine most continental vans haven't got this layout. We were caravanners so this model would have been the next logical step and given the opportunity I think I would change, finances allowing.
michele Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 oh very nice tried the link sylvia thanks . very posh rich . loads a money if it were just him & me great for us.
Guest starspirit Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Not really loadsa money - two years old and around £30k? If Autocruise had just given a bit more thought to the design they could have pinched an inch or two from the loo and an inch or two from the lounge and made the whole thing just under rather than just over 6 metres which would have given them a bigger potential market without noticeably altering the nature or practicalities of the van. I am also not too keen on the gas locker and water heater being behind the rear wheels as I always like to see heavy things contained within the wheelbase because it helps with handling and ride comfort. It would be nice to have front seats that both swivelled easily so that a separate dining or short term seating area could be gained without dismantling the bed but with the loo where it is that is not possible. However my experience of swivelling drivers seats is that not only are they then too high for comfortable driving they are a real pain in the bum to turn and turn back due to the steering wheel and handbrake issues and are more trouble than they are worth. All vans are a compromise and this one works better than a lot for us but fortunately we are all different and we all use our vans in differing ways so what works for us won't necessarily work for others.
howie Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Thanks for your comprehensive and unbiased opinion Richard and the Starspirit remains on our shortlist but with the 2.2 engine. Another Autocruise thats caught my eye is the St****eker which was featured in last months (March) MMM. Fixed transverse bed with reasonably spacious front lounge, and only 19ft 9in in length. Nice setup for a small van.
howie Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Thats Star seeker. Paranoid with that bleeper or what.
Guest starspirit Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Our problem with the Star-seeker (?) is that you can't both lounge feet up with a comfortable back rest. Had Autocruise built the Starspirit in the Star-seeker body then that would have been a better solution!
howie Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 You already have a made up bed in the Star seeker for lounging Richard. Another new one to me is the way the hand basin is recessed into the shower wall. This opens up the shower room, giving you a decent sized fixed basin and causes no problems as far as I can see where it intrudes over the fixed bed. Nifty that one.
Mel B Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Sink over the bed - okay until you hit your shins on it in the night! This isn't a new idea though, we once looked at a very old coachbuilt motorhome, of about 1960s vintage, can't remember what it was now, but it had a similar thing where to have 2 single beds, the nearside occupant had to stick their legs in the bottom of the wardrobe - there was a flap that flopped down and you popped the cusion on top of it. Didn't try it out though.
Guest starspirit Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Better a short overlap into the bed space at the foot end than a longer van or a shorter loo?
Mel B Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 I suppose it depends on how you 'use' your bed space Richie! 8-) (lol)
Guest starspirit Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Aw go on then - how do you use yours Mel? I'll tell you my secrets if you'll tell me yours!
flicka Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 starspirit - 2007-03-16 1:19 PM Ours has the 85bhp 2.0 hdi which is adequate rather than exhilarating and does about 28mpg overall. I did think of 'chipping' the engine but it's adequate most of the time and I'm rarely in any great rush. That said I am not a slow driver and I do tend to push on at 65 - 70 where the road allows but when touring on by roads am very happy to potter at 35 - 45 taking good care to let anyone behind me to get by as soon as it is safe. I would like a 2.2 or 2.3 but I can live with the 2.0. Richard your MPG seems quite reasonable, my Fiat SWB 2.0 JTD is only returning around 22/23 MPG, but only has 1200 miles on it so far. Do you know how many miles these engines need to be run in before I can get to around your figures. A 20/25% improvement in MPG is appealing. Flicka
Guest starspirit Posted March 18, 2007 Posted March 18, 2007 John, We bought ours a year old with 4000 miles showing and although I don't keep detailed records my perception is that having now covered 12000 miles in total it does seem to pull better and I think is a mile or two to the gallon better. It did about 25 on the first tankful and now does around 28 on the same M5/M4/A48 run home which, given that it is now well loaded and was empty at first, I am content with. Are the risk of preaching to the converted, it does very much depend on the weight of your right foot and if one drives the van like a car it will be thirsty. That said even a 5 mpg difference over 8000 miles is only about £300 / £400 which, as a proportion of the overall cost of owning and running the thing, is not a lot if everything else about the van is right for you.
flicka Posted March 18, 2007 Posted March 18, 2007 starspirit - 2007-03-18 9:43 AM John, That said even a 5 mpg difference over 8000 miles is only about £300 / £400 which, as a proportion of the overall cost of owning and running the thing, is not a lot if everything else about the van is right for you. Hi Richard Heed what you say about Right foot, especially when daily use car has plenty of power, it's easy to underestimate how much loud pedal you use. But the thought of 5mpg improvement, would roughly cover cost of a couple of extra weekend fuel & site fees each year. Flicka
Guest starspirit Posted March 18, 2007 Posted March 18, 2007 It's only monet John as one artist said to the other. It's good to able to poke two fingers at the do gooders and green brigade by making the darned thing burn as much fuel and produce as much CO2 as you can whilst you still have the chance!
howie Posted March 18, 2007 Posted March 18, 2007 Mel B - 2007-03-17 4:15 PM Sink over the bed - okay until you hit your shins on it in the night! This isn't a new idea though, we once looked at a very old coachbuilt motorhome, of about 1960s vintage, can't remember what it was now, but it had a similar thing where to have 2 single beds, the nearside occupant had to stick their legs in the bottom of the wardrobe - there was a flap that flopped down and you popped the cusion on top of it. Didn't try it out though. Different set up here Mel. Looking at the picture there,s ample room for your feet and other nocturnal activities, and what an improvement in the bathroom for elbow room. Won,t buy it but I like it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.