amesporting Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Hi, Anyone have any advice has to the pro's and con's of the Fiat Ducatto engine versus the Mercedes sprinter. Rgds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Bry Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 amesporting - 2007-06-27 9:41 AM Hi, Anyone have any advice has to the pro's and con's of the Fiat Ducatto engine versus the Mercedes sprinter. Rgds Have only had our Merc sprinter with the sprintshift auto box a couple of months from new. Very happy with it at the mom, but as I say it's still early days. I was very happy with our last two vans were both on a Fiat Ducatto chasis.We had one van for 5 years from new nad the other again from new for about 3 years,and both never missed a beat. Swapped to the Merc as we wanted a heavier base vehicle. Our new Merc is on a 416 base - twin rear wheels.Hope this helpsThaiSo no real complaints with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amesporting Posted June 27, 2007 Author Share Posted June 27, 2007 Thanks for that. Very helpful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enodreven Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 I, have heard that on some of the Mercedes sprinter base motorhomes they use smaller wheels which apprantly give a better performance but the fuel consumption is higher, so it may be worth checking as i think they do 2 wheel sizes, as for our Ducato 2.8 JTD it has the normal UK power output and that on the heaver vehicles can make the 5th gear seem a bit high especially on hills and long inclines, you can get a chip upgrade which does remove this problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JudgeMental Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 why just these two - what about the new ford? Fiat have a reputation for being expensive on parts and poor cab security... Fiat described on another forum as " all fur coat and no knickers" :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icelander Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Yep wish our Knaus had a transit engine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richardoakley Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Hi I would recommend anything that is rear wheel drive be it Ford, Merc or Iveco. The Sprinter 316 has 16inch wheels! regards Richard ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenewellhome Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Both Fiat and Mercedes are generally good, solid reliable power units. The Merc offering gives more power straight from the factory and uses a chain drive for the camshaft so no cam belts to give problems in future. The Fiat unit can be upgraded in terms of power output by a chip upgrade (unless you can get a continental one with the "power" engine giving 146BHP (I think) from the factory. Merc parts can be expensive, Fiat should be cheaper. D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 And Merc is rear wheel drive and a smooth 5 pot motor. Lastly for those who worry should they have a problem, the Merc world wide service organisation is second to none. In the end you get what you pay for. If its your toy then why not spoil yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjmike Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Clive - 2007-06-27 7:05 PM And Merc is rear wheel drive and a smooth 5 pot motor. OK so I'm going to go off topic a bit here(slap wrist). Are all the Merc vans as Clive describes??(new ones that is) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Bry Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 fjmike - 2007-06-27 10:36 PM Clive - 2007-06-27 7:05 PM And Merc is rear wheel drive and a smooth 5 pot motor. OK so I'm going to go off topic a bit here(slap wrist). Are all the Merc vans as Clive describes??(new ones that is) Our new Hymer is on a Merc 416 rear wheel drive with twin rear wheels, and I must say that it's the most stable of vehicles that I've driven as a M/Home owner. I presume this will be the case with ALL twin rear wheeled vehicles, whether it be a Ford or the Iveco. I don't seem to experience as much roll in corners on the smaller roads. Not suggesting that I drive our new bus like Lewis Hamilton minds you!!Thai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 I believe that only the smallest engines were 4 pot. Anything worth having in a motorhome is 5 pot and all Sprinters are rear wheel drive+ABS+AUTO BRAKED DIFFERENTIAL etc. York show for the last 2 years pulling a 2 axle trailer through the slurry proved the worth of that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 I have owned both and whilst I am a Merc fan (car wise) I have found the Fiat more stable. To be fair my Sprinter had a maximum overhang and the converter (Rimor) should have used the longer wheelbase. There is no doubt that rear drive is superior for traction; I experienced wheelspin and uphill judder on our last Bessie760 alko chassis....quite a common fault. We nowhave a new model Peugeot base and they are fabulous but I havnt driven the latest Sprinter. I dont think there is a better/worse just different and its just one more thing to add to the confusion of choice. Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Clive's going to hate me or this! I read recently that the smaller engined new Sprinters have a cambelt and not a chain drive, although the chain drive cam was stated to be retained for the larger engines.It's really all a matter of personal preferences. All these vehicles are tough little trucks, all made for a demanding commercial life being driven to within an inch of their lives day in and day out. Each has it's pros and cons, but used as a motorhome base vehicle their biggest general problems seems to be lack of regular use, and the fact that the suspensions are under a relatively high continual load, due to the weight of motorhome bodies, so a bit prone to "sag" with time. Driving comfort and good visibility are as important for enjoyment as the badge on the front, as is how well the control layout and general driving experience suits you. You can't necessarily get all motorhome layouts on all base vehicle variants. I therefore tend to think that although the base vehicle is a significant factor, unless you anticipate spending hours at a stretch at the wheel, it is at least as important to get the "right" motorhome layout for your needs/preferences, and then prioritise converters/builders with good reputations for quality vans. If that exercise leaves you with a choice of base vehicles, test drive your favourite, and if you can't get comfortable while driving, go on to the next favourite. If there is no choice of base vehicles, go to the nearest acceptable layout on a different base, and try that. However, when all is said and done, if you're only going to drive for 3 to 4 hours per day, is it really worth getting a van you're not enamoured of, simply because it drives a bit a bit better?Is one make that much more reliable that the others? Mercedes would like you to believe theirs suffer less breakdowns/non-starts then the rest but, in the end, they must all have about the same reliability, or there would be one that no-one would buy. They are all mechanical, they all do go wrong but, overall, they are all pretty reliable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richardoakley Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Hi All B-) There was a survey in one of the Motorhome Magazines that discovered, by comparing regular maintenance and parts, the cheapest to run and maintain was the Ford chassis. The Merc came second cheapest while the Sevel breed was the most expensive! It seemed that it was down to the cam belt mostly. I had to replace a front bumper on a 316 sprinter - the whole bumper was £150 whereas the fiat equivelant was in excess of £300! regards Richard :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peter Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 davenewell@home - 2007-06-27 6:40 PM Both Fiat and Mercedes are generally good, solid reliable power units. The Merc offering gives more power straight from the factory and uses a chain drive for the camshaft so no cam belts to give problems in future. The Fiat unit can be upgraded in terms of power output by a chip upgrade (unless you can get a continental one with the "power" engine giving 146BHP (I think) from the factory. Merc parts can be expensive, Fiat should be cheaper. D.Dave, I don't really see the advantage of a chain cam drive over a belt. Ive just changed the belt on my 2.8 Ducato and it took me about 3 hrs and cost about 70 quid odd, dead easy to do as well. Whereas a chain change is a major job and will probably entail removing the engine and dismantling the front end, at least the last one I did I had to. I don't know why people are paranoid about belts. The one in my Toyota Supra is 20 Yrs old and still going strong. It's not an interferance fit so if it breaks it won't destroy the cylinder head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 peter - 2007-06-28 10:49 PM Dave, I don't really see the advantage of a chain cam drive over a belt. Ive just changed the belt on my 2.8 Ducato and it took me about 3 hrs and cost about 70 quid odd, dead easy to do as well. Whereas a chain change is a major job and will probably entail removing the engine and dismantling the front end, at least the last one I did I had to. I don't know why people are paranoid about belts. The one in my Toyota Supra is 20 Yrs old and still going strong. It's not an interferance fit so if it breaks it won't destroy the cylinder head. Simple, you have spent £70 and 3hrs for a job that shouldn't need doing on a chain drive. I to had a engine with a 20year old belt( a pinto in my Phaeton), but also have a Astra which has to have belt, pulley's and water pump changed and its a pig of a job to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peter Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 colin - 2007-06-28 11:08 PM peter - 2007-06-28 10:49 PM Dave, I don't really see the advantage of a chain cam drive over a belt. Ive just changed the belt on my 2.8 Ducato and it took me about 3 hrs and cost about 70 quid odd, dead easy to do as well. Whereas a chain change is a major job and will probably entail removing the engine and dismantling the front end, at least the last one I did I had to. I don't know why people are paranoid about belts. The one in my Toyota Supra is 20 Yrs old and still going strong. It's not an interferance fit so if it breaks it won't destroy the cylinder head. Simple, you have spent £70 and 3hrs for a job that shouldn't need doing on a chain drive. I to had a engine with a 20year old belt( a pinto in my Phaeton), but also have a Astra which has to have belt, pulley's and water pump changed and its a pig of a job to do.Colin, You say I've spent £70 for nothing, but you don't address the issue with changing a chain, and change it you will certainly have to at some time. As they also have a service life and how much would that cost? Also they do break, and as they are probably hydraucally tensioned, you will also lose oil pressure when it wears so much that the tensioner pops out. I'm not decrying the use of chains, but just pointing out that they are not bomb proof or as cheap as a belt to change when they do go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenewellhome Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Peter, chain drive cams are more reliable because the chain rarely, if ever snaps! Your Toyota might be a safe engine but your Fiat lump ain't. I've just had to rebuild the top end of my wife's Fiat Brava because of a broken belt, car off the road for several days and it cost me £300 for parts and having the head skimmed, tested, new valves fitted. If the cam belt snaps on most A class vans (Hymer, Burstner, Rapido, Pilote etc) the engine will almost certainly have to come out and the repair costs will be reaching into four figures. This is why a chain drive is generally considered a better bet. Yes chains do have a finite operational life but the scenario you describe is unlikely to ever occur, wear to the point where the tensioner pops out, not terribly likely. Finite lifespan of a cam belt is generally somewhere between 30,000 and 70,000 miles depending on manufacturer. Finite lifespan for a chain drive 150,000 miles plus. I've not encountered a motorhome with anywhere near 150,000 miles under its belt yet and I've been dealing with motorhomes for over ten years. D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 I have had two failures of belt driven camshafts. One on a Vauxhall Astra diesel and the other on a larger commercial van. With the Astra the belt did not break but the belt tensioner pulley bearing broke up and this had the same terminal effect on the top end. Both were inside the change time/mileage. Hence I don,t trust rubber band cam drive any more. If the later smaller Merc engines have belts I won,t be getting one of them!! The 3 litre Iveco lump is chain cam so is also in the frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peter Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 If a belt's good enough for a highly stressed race engine it's good enough for my van. end of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenewellhome Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 peter - 2007-06-29 9:31 PM If a belt's good enough for a highly stressed race engine it's good enough for my van. end of. That's fine Peter, did anybody say you should change it for a chain driven motor? We have five vehicles in our household; Ford Focus 1.8 diesel, belt driven cam, Rover 420 SDI, belt driven cam, Fiat Brava 1.4 petrol, belt driven cam, Bedford Rascal 970cc petrol, belt driven cam, Talbot Express based autohomes Highwayman, chain driven cam. I never said one was better than the other but there is a reliability aspect to consider and chains outlast belts. As long as the belt is changed early rather than late, and this includes timewise as well as mileage it should give no trouble but they have been known to fail early. Quite a few modern motors use the cam belt to drive the water pump but what happens when the water pump fails? The belt can go slack and wreck the top end. D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Newell Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Also forgot to say that the highly stressed race car engine is stripped down and rebuilt, probably with a new belt, every thousand miles or so. D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spartan3956 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Going away from the chain v belt discussion What about the wheel base dimensions. Mercedes is a fixed axle width Fiat being front wheel drive does not suffer from this restriction and models using the Alko chassis get a wider base thus eliminating body roll. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 spartan3956 - 2007-06-30 9:00 AM Going away from the chain v belt discussion What about the wheel base dimensions. Mercedes is a fixed axle width Fiat being front wheel drive does not suffer from this restriction and models using the Alko chassis get a wider base thus eliminating body roll. Pete Mercedes are now offering wider track rear ends in conjunction with AlKo, or maybe it is AlKo in conjunction with Mercedes. Whichever, the new sprinter can have a wider rear track for motorhomes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.