Maubern Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Have any one had an independant engineres report done on the reverse gear we did query it the cost was £275. then we saw the Auto trail on the mercedes and decided to go for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Maubern - 2008-01-20 9:37 PM Have any one had an independant engineres report done on the reverse gear we did query it the cost was £275. then we saw the Auto trail on the mercedes and decided to go for that You say you are changing at considerable cost to yourselves due to the reverse problem WHY? you say Fiat local agent, motorhome agent and swift's agree there is a problem, but only one Fiat person disagrees. Take it back to whomever you brought it from and ask for a full refund, or do you mean the new van costs more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted January 20, 2008 Share Posted January 20, 2008 Our Autotrail on a Merc has been with us over 10 years now. Cannot knock it. To me its just as good as when it was new, silky and relaxing to drive, Pokey heater and being as it had stronger rear springs from the outset we have never suffered the "wallowing on corners" that some refer to when comparing it to the wider tracked Fiat/Alko. It will WELL exceeeeeed the speed limit. I lifted offf once on the M1 having passed a string of lorries when the wife pointed out that the dial said 90. oops! Only a powerful musslebike passed me at the same time. And is a pre-common rail 2.9 litre 5 pot. Normally I am much more sedate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maubern Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 The dealer told us that as the Fiat rep/engineer actually reversed up the hill on the third attempt with revs of 3000 the fiat would actually reverse so he wasn't prepared to suppliment Fiats warranty and also said how far do you reverse anyway. The Auto Trail did cost more but we still lost mony on the ACE. Maureen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike P Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Bet that gets exciting if they forget to chock the wheels of the plane! Mike P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike P Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 colin - 2008-01-20 9:14 PM Not that it has any relavence to this thread, but, a T going up or down long inclines has problems with either oil starvation or over oiling of engine due to it being splash oil feed, I wouldn't be overly woried about a gearbox failure as we have 2 spare boxes at work, but a Ton Truck T can travel a damn sight slower in reverse than the 13mph recommended by Fiat. Here's one I made earlier on a car chassis, also built one on a Ton Truck chassis http://www.skysportengineering.co.uk/hucks_video.html Bet that gets exciting if the forget to chock the plane wheels! Mike P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Maubern - 2008-01-21 2:27 PM The dealer told us that as the Fiat rep/engineer actually reversed up the hill on the third attempt with revs of 3000 the fiat would actually reverse so he wasn't prepared to suppliment Fiats warranty and also said how far do you reverse anyway. The Auto Trail did cost more but we still lost mony on the ACE. Maureen If I caught someone using 3000 rpm to reverse my van up a slope I would have more than a few harsh words to say to them - mainly regarding clutch longevity. I was taught, many years ago admittedly, never to 'race' an engine as it tends to shorten their longevity as engines are designed to only pull higher revs when under load. These teachings may be considered rubbish in today's throw away world, but in 47 years of driving I have NEVER burnt out a clutch or damaged an engine or gearbox. It works for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred grant Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 tracker is rite me ansums. But the whole point of the original thread is gearboxes and clutches/ and or final drives. so the fact that 2.2 fiat engins are the same as 2.2 ford engines (allegidly) as nowt to do with it as ford and fiat will most likely be using their own gearboxes and clutch final drives. cast yer minds back to the mid nineties my biddies when renault masters had fiat 2.8 engines. the reason that renots had no gearbox fifth gear problems was that renots used their own gearbox, clutch and final drive (probably made of metal). bloodthirstyfred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tp002c784tp002c784tp Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 I went to the York Motorhome show in September armed with the insurance money of my much loved Renault Master Lunar Telstar dearley hoping to buy another Renault, But I could not find anything that suited us both on a Renault. I ended up buying a Fiat Ducato Lunar Roadstar, this vehicle is new but the much tried and tested previous Fiat, we did see a few new models on the new Fiat and with a little bit of scrimping could have bought one of these vehicles. But there is no way that I would have even considered buying any of these vehicles until Fiat have sorted all the problems out. Three dealers that I spoke to said they had never heard of water ingress in the engine compartments what a load of twaddle Terry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyishuk Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Am I worring to much or are the prices on new motorhomes of the current vintage going to crash due to the lack of support from Fiat/Peugot once the warrenty runs out ? I have definately got a feeling that Mercedes may be a vehicle of choice when we change. Rgds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike H Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 I have, today, sent a recorded letter to MD of Fiat UK. Telling him of the problems, myself and others are having with our new Ducatos, whilst trying to reverse especially when going up an incline. I asked when and what Fiat were going to do to rectify this problem, so that we can get on with enjoying our motorcaravans, as they were intended, and not having to worry about where we go in case we might have to reverse, which I found impossible on one ocassion. I said that one of his representatives had tested a faulty van, and said it was OK if it was reversed at 3000 revs, I said that I rarely get to 3000 revs going forward, and thought that it was'nt a proper solution to the problem. I will keep you updated when I receive his reply. Mike H. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maubern Posted January 21, 2008 Share Posted January 21, 2008 Please keep us informed although we are changing ours on Saturday for a Merc engine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 Just to add a little extra doom and gloom to this debate, if the only realistic way to overcome the juddering-in-reverse phenomenon turns out to be to use plenty of engine-revs and 'ride' the clutch, then there's likely to be a significant bill to pay in the not too distant future. In recent years diesel-engine designers have increasingly begun to choose a dual-mass flywheel (DMF) instead of the traditional single-mass flywheel (SMF). A DMF acts as an effective vibration damper at low engine revolutions and is one of the reasons why modern diesel motors are so much more civilised than their predecessors, particularly at tick-over. The downside of a DMF is its complexity and consequential cost, and the fact that it is (to all intents and purposes) irreparable. With a SMF, if a clutch failed or wore out, even if the flywheel's face had received minor damage, it was sometimes possible to rectify this and, should repair of a SMF flywheel prove impossible, replacement was normally not prohibitively expensive. Conversely, if a DMF becomes damaged it will need to be replaced and the cost will be considerably dearer. My understanding is that all motors used in current-model SEVEL vehicles employ a DMF. From what has already been said, I suspect that much of the difficulty being experienced is down to owner-drivers' attitude to 'abuse'. There's plenty of evidence that fairly heavy modern motorhomes with fairly small-capacity (but powerful) diesel engines and fairly high gearing demand a dose of revs to ensure that they move off cleanly forwards when stopped on an incline. Logically, this will also be true when reversing from a standing-start up a hill. The snag is that, when reversing, the driver usually wants to do it slowly and with finesse, and this is very hard to achieve if the vehicle can't be driven in that manner without revving the motor hard and using the clutch as a torque-converter. It's doubtful that any experienced driver with an ounce of mechanical sympathy will wish to use this technique with their own vehicle (or, as Tracker says, be happy for someone else to use it), but it may well be the only realistic way to get the vehicle moving without causing the engine/gearbox unit to jump about. Personally, I don't think there's an acceptable solution to this, but it will intriguing to see what Fiat say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted January 22, 2008 Share Posted January 22, 2008 Mike H - 2008-01-21 10:17 PM ............... I said that one of his representatives had tested a faulty van, and said it was OK if it was reversed at 3000 revs, I said that I rarely get to 3000 revs going forward, and thought that it was'nt a proper solution to the problem. ....... Mike H. MikePurely on the point of using the engine revs, and without reference to which way you are travelling at the time (though hopefully forward!), I think it is better to use the revs than not. It is dangerous to generalise but, many, if not most, of these engines develop their maximum torque between, roughly, 2,000 and 4,000 rpm. That is quite a narrow band. Generally speaking, it is only within this rev range that they are at their most efficient, so giving best mpg. Changing up before you hit 3,000 rpm, is likely to result in the next gear being engaged at somewhat below 2,000, leading to the engine labouring as it tries to get back to the top of its torque curve. Once the engine has covered a few thousand miles, therefore, but especially if going uphill, it is generally better to let the revs build before the upshift rather than to snatch an early change. It is also better to keep the revs higher under a light throttle than to keep them down, and then have to use more throttle to maintain road-speed. The main reason is that with electronic control of injection, the torque curves rather resemble a cliff below 2,000 rpm, and all power falls away very sharply. I do not mean to imply that racing around everywhere at 4,000 rpm is good; just that those revs are all very much there to be used. After all, 4,000 rpm is hardly high revving: the engine will happily run to much higher revs than that and you're nowhere near flirting with the governed maximum permissible revs. There is a danger that in trying to be kind, one is actually being cruel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
euroserv Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 As a vehicle rental firm in Leicester that only buys Fiat and Iveco vehicles, we have so far purchased about 20 2006 Ducato vans, mostly 2.3 engines and a couple of 3.0 We have noticed the vibration and judder of which you speak on the 2.3 but not the 3.0 probably due to the larger clutch and flywheel used. Some of the early vans have now covered 35 to 40000 miles and there have been no cases of failure or complaints of worsening symptoms. This is an unfortunate characteristic of the Dual Mass Flywheel that is more pronounced on front wheel drive vehicles than rear. DMF's have been an absolute nightmare for ALL makes of commercial vehicles. I believe it was Mercedes that started the ball rolling with Ford quickly following. While they do improve comfort and refinement they also cause headaches. When DMF's start to fail, they deposit metal filings in starter motors and this can contaminate gearboxes as well. This is a well documented problem with RWD Ford Transits, but I must stress that across the very wide variety of customer vehicles that we have repaired in our workshops, all manufacturers have suffered similar problems and while I wish that our new Fiats were arriving with solid flywheels, I do not expect our experiences with these vehicles to be any worse than we have seen on others; quite the reverse in fact as there should be progress being made with the design of DMF's on each successive new vehicle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 For the record, I understand that the DMF on Ford Transits can be replaced with a 'solid' flywheel. (I'm guessing that this is practicable because the motors of Mk 6 Transits initially had a SMF before subsequently moving to a DMF.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike H Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 Brian. Following what you said about using the revs, I agree it is better to keep the revs up in a lower gear than throttle down, in a higher one. I took my van out for a run yesterday and I get up to about 2800 revs in third and fourth, and that is enough to get into the fifties and then changed into fifth and sixth without any labouring, then settled down to 60, which I normally travel at. Mind you that was on a straight level road, on hills, would probably need to go over 3000 to get to the same speed. After reading euroserv and Derek's postings about the DMF flywheel, (don't they mean MDF), does this mean that this is the cause of the juddering in reverse? and if Fiat change the flywheel to a solid metal one, it will cure this problem? Some owners have had the starter motor replaced already, is this because of the water ingress dripping onto it or is it the metal particles coming off the DMF flywheel already? Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 MikeSorry - wasn't trying to teach Granddad to suck eggs! It was just that some folk do seem still to think diesels shouldn't be revved, and from your comment I'd thought you may be one of they.I gather that with a "normal" clutch and a solid flywheel, there are springs in the clutch plate, near its centre, that transmit the power from the engine to the gearbox input shaft. The springs allow sufficient "give" in the driveline to absorb harshness and snatches. With a dual-mass flywheel these springs are omitted from the clutch plate but are now installed in the flywheel, near its periphery. The springs still have the same functionality but, being sited on the larger radius of the flywheel periphery, I suspect will be much "softer", and so will tend to have longer travel, than could be accommodated near the centre of the clutch plate.I'm no mechanical engineer, but it seems to me that these longer, softer, springs probably have more harmonics to play with than the short, tough, springs they have replaced. From the comments already made re DMFs, I think there will need to be more attention paid to damping so that the bounce - rebound tendency of the springs is better controlled than with the present generation. Since several people have commented on strange smells coming from their clutches when manoeuvring at the recommended high revs, you may well be right about medium density fibreboard clutches.On your other points, I don't know, but maybe someone else does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyStothert Posted January 24, 2008 Author Share Posted January 24, 2008 From Andy Stothert, email address - andystothert@blueyonder.co.uk Mike, At last, someone monitoring this 'forum' who has a relevant interest in it. all the rest just seem to be just sounding of for the sake of it. I will be very interested to know what response you get from Fiat as I 'm struggling to get any. I do have a letter in my posession which almost (but only almost) admits they have problem and that theyr are attempting to find a solution. But it could all be purely bulls**t. After having had a gerabox fail immediately after reversing up a steep hill we KNOW they have a problem, but have now adopted a stratagey of not driving the place wherte thsi may occur. I am contemplating distributing a couple of thousand leaflets at the NEC show warning potential buyers of the fault and doing it very publicly too. I would welcome your thoughts on this. Anyway keep me posted how you are going on and if you can give me your email address I wil let you know if anything develops here. Cheers Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob b Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 Andy, Very gracious !! Please don't forget all the people "sounding off" are actually on your side !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flicka Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 I think all this talk regarding the problems with the new Sevel breed of Van highlights the old addage, regarding not buying the new model too soon. This is particularly relevant when there was so much pressue applied to ensure the new model was "on the market" to meet the Euro IV deadline. It has to be remembered that the new model was totally new, body, engine, drivetrain, etc.. From what I can determine there are only minor or peripheral item carried over from the previous model. It is often better to let the manufacturers' get their new model in actual operation with Commercial users, who will generally give it a hard life and effectively do the "Road" testing for them. Strange though, that there seems a lack of comment regarding the new Ford Transit, Mercedes, VW Grafter, etc., Or have I spoken too soon ? :$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 AndyStothert - 2008-01-24 8:25 PM From Andy Stothert, email address - andystothert@blueyonder.co.uk At last, someone monitoring this 'forum' who has a relevant interest in it. all the rest just seem to be just sounding of for the sake of it. Andy How to make friends and influence people! I would sugest you reread the posts and then engage your brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clive Posted January 24, 2008 Share Posted January 24, 2008 Come on Colin, The poor bloke is at his wits end. Don,t brissle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Uzzell Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 I agree with bob b's and colin's opinions of Andy Stothert's dismissive comment. Anyone posting to a forum and not wishing a general conversation to develop should say so in the first place, otherwise it's inevitable that focus will shift. The following 'reversing' observation appears on page 168 of MMM February 2008 in the test report of an East Neuk panel-van conversion based on a new SWB Fiat Ducato with 2.2-litre 100PS motor: "My wife Rona also found that the Ducato would reverse quite happily up the steep hill from Crail harbour, unlike our long wheelbase old model, which is a pig in such situations." Make of it what you will - I've lost interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tracker Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 AndyStothert - 2008-01-24 8:25 PM From Andy Stothert, email address - andystothert@blueyonder.co.uk At last, someone monitoring this 'forum' who has a relevant interest in it. all the rest just seem to be just sounding of for the sake of it. Andy Hardly the kind of comment to aim at the very people who help pay your wages is it Andy? I accept that you are probably pissed off but don't take it out on us please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.