2.3 Versus 3.0 Fuel Consumption (1 Viewer)

Affiliate links here may earn MHF compensation
Sep 24, 2013
1,341
787
Norwich
Funster No
28,255
MH
Carthago A class
Exp
Since 2014
How much different will the fuel consumption figures be for these engines . 3 litre 160bhp against 2.3 130bhp. All things being equal of course.
 
Jan 24, 2010
2,442
4,859
Funster No
10,065
MH
Adria Twin
Exp
Since 2007
i average 27mpg n a 3.ol fully loaded to 3500kg
and my driving style isnt the most fuel conserving either:D
if that helps...

but...how big a van is the engine pulling along?, what shape etc etc
 

DuxDeluxe

LIFE MEMBER
Jul 10, 2008
14,717
74,004
Planet Zog
Funster No
3,243
MH
A woosh bang van
Exp
since 2008
I had a 3.0 and now a 2.3 and to be quite honest not a lot of difference. Given the choice, I would go for the bigger engine every time
 

Gandhi

Free Member
Sep 9, 2014
170
303
Near Glossop
Funster No
33,267
MH
bessacar E496
Exp
5 years
With my smaller engine in the past I had my foot further down all the time to maintain speed so there was no real saving.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Jan 3, 2008
3,369
5,396
Pakefield, Lowestoft, Suffolk, UK
Funster No
1,118
MH
Looking
Exp
35
My 2.3 seems plenty powerful for my 3.6 tonnes, but of course I don't know how different a bigger engine might be, I might change my mind if I tries one. Anyway I routinely get 27.5 and have sometimes gone to 27.9 but have never gone over.
 

keith

Free Member
Aug 25, 2007
3,421
1,864
Ecclefechan
Funster No
168
MH
Autocruise Starseeker
Exp
Caravaning since 1974 - Motorhoming since 2003
Nothing to do with the size of the engine, but definitely all to do with the weight of the boot on the right foot. :LOL::LOL:
 

Stealaway

Free Member
Jan 8, 2013
8,496
11,541
Dronfield - Derbyshire
Funster No
24,202
MH
Burstner Lyseo 690G
Exp
Happy FLT since 2011
My van is a low profile but I always get around 30MPG @ 50-60 MPH - 2200 rpm
If the route is flat I have seen 34 MPG. I change gear at 2000 rpm and use the maximum torque.
But do like the sound of more power and would love to try one.
 
OP
OP
stevec
Sep 24, 2013
1,341
787
Norwich
Funster No
28,255
MH
Carthago A class
Exp
Since 2014
We've been looking at 2.3L MHs and found a Pilote T680 which makes much better use of it's length than some others we've looked at. But this one has a 3.0L engine. We thought we had decided on a make and model until we saw this one this afternoon. Now we're weighing up the pros and cons of each and engine size (and economy) is one factor. To answer Bungy's question it is a 3500kg chassis in a coachbuilt low profile.
 

keith

Free Member
Aug 25, 2007
3,421
1,864
Ecclefechan
Funster No
168
MH
Autocruise Starseeker
Exp
Caravaning since 1974 - Motorhoming since 2003
We've been looking at 2.3L MHs and found a Pilote T680 which makes much better use of it's length than some others we've looked at. But this one has a 3.0L engine. We thought we had decided on a make and model until we saw this one this afternoon. Now we're weighing up the pros and cons of each and engine size (and economy) is one factor. To answer Bungy's question it is a 3500kg chassis in a coachbuilt low profile.

Don't worry about it the 3 ltr is a much better engine, more like driving a car than a MH. The extra power makes all the difference, I wouldn't change mine now I have felt the difference & I don't see any difference in MPG to our previous MH.
 
Feb 24, 2013
13,332
102,313
Bolsover, Derbyshire
Funster No
24,833
MH
Hymer S800
Exp
not long enough
If cost really matters stick out for a 2.3, we have a 3.0 Mercedes and rarely get over 20 mpg, we don't drive overly fast or accelerate hard but have never had a 2.3 to compare to, but bigger engine must mean lower mpg

I am lucky enough not to have to worry too much about cost of running (for now at least), it is a very comfortable drive and we do weight just over 5000kg (y)

I would imagine that too much power in a FWD will just make the traction control work harder
 
Jan 24, 2010
2,442
4,859
Funster No
10,065
MH
Adria Twin
Exp
Since 2007
We've been looking at 2.3L MHs and found a Pilote T680 which makes much better use of it's length than some others we've looked at. But this one has a 3.0L engine. We thought we had decided on a make and model until we saw this one this afternoon. Now we're weighing up the pros and cons of each and engine size (and economy) is one factor. To answer Bungy's question it is a 3500kg chassis in a coachbuilt low profile.
Ive had a 2.2, 2.3 and now a 3l...3lmis the best by a long shot and next to naff all difference on fuel economy. Best bit is it is a pleasure to drive, loads of oomph when needed and with cruise on in 6th gear it trundles along with no problems at all...especially as its only moving 3500kg

go have a test drive, probably be the icing on the cake for a near perfect van for you....(y)
 
C

Chockswahay

Deleted User
I think it really depends on how many miles you do................. we have the 2.3 and average about 15000 miles per year.

At an average of37 mpg that is a LOT of fuel saved .......... makes me smile at the pumps :D On a motorway run we get around 44 mpg :)

15000/37 = 405 gallons ......... 15000/27 = 555 gallons

I am quite happy to save £800 per year (at least) :)
 

TerryL

LIFE MEMBER
Mar 5, 2010
6,277
8,357
North East
Funster No
10,511
MH
Low Profile
Exp
2009
During our sojourn in Morocco we travelled around with Cherrypirate - they've got a 3.0 Comfortmatic and we're a 2.3 Manual (both low-profile coachbuilts). We found we were filling up at the same time with almost the same amount of fuel. The only comment I'd make is that their 3.00 seemed to cope better with hills and rarely changed down whilst we usually had to drop a cog; didn't seem to make any difference to the fuel consumption though.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Nov 3, 2013
3,190
9,585
Portugal
Funster No
28,868
MH
Fiat Ducato Auto Wildax
Exp
C/van since '73 .M/h.2009
Hi.
Next time you are alongside the spinning wheel nuts of a lorry,look at the area around the bottom right ahnd corner of the door,does it say.."480-500 ?"
Then ask yourself,why would they put sutch a big lump in it,when a smaller unit would do the job more efficiently(Spelling LOL). There is your question answered,as many of the above posts prove. You don't ahve to paint black lines away from traffic lights,but there is no substitute for power/cc/h-power.
Tea Bag
 

colinw

Free Member
Feb 1, 2015
523
306
Bolton , Lancs.
Funster No
34,966
MH
low profile
Exp
Under a year
I wanted the 150bhp engine if I could get one but our stock van was the 130 , I am amazed at how well it pulls . the dash trip Meter is showing 31.9 but I haven't checked with calculating manually yet as the engine is new .
 
Nov 13, 2013
488
431
Bideford, Devon
Funster No
29,004
MH
Benimar Tessora 487
Exp
since 2011
3ltr so much more pull, less gear changing etc. had 150bhp before. Fiat Comfortmatic gear box linked to a 3 ltr is a real pleasure to drive
 

colinw

Free Member
Feb 1, 2015
523
306
Bolton , Lancs.
Funster No
34,966
MH
low profile
Exp
Under a year
Hi.
Next time you are alongside the spinning wheel nuts of a lorry,look at the area around the bottom right ahnd corner of the door,does it say.."480-500 ?"
Then ask yourself,why would they put sutch a big lump in it,when a smaller unit would do the job more efficiently(Spelling LOL). There is your question answered,as many of the above posts prove. You don't ahve to paint black lines away from traffic lights,but there is no substitute for power/cc/h-power.
Tea Bag
500hp is wasted in a restricted truck ! . if you need to get from London to Stranraer to catch a ferry and your restrictor has ' failed ' , then it comes in very handy . (y)
 

musson

Free Member
Dec 25, 2013
487
165
grantham
Funster No
29,456
MH
low profile
Exp
since Jan 2014
130hp, just got 27 trip to norfolk, on motorway can get 30

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Oct 14, 2007
4,145
6,704
Rochester
Funster No
619
MH
Auto-Trail Mohawk
Exp
17 fun filled years
I wanted the 150bhp engine if I could get one but our stock van was the 130 , I am amazed at how well it pulls . the dash trip Meter is showing 31.9 but I haven't checked with calculating manually yet as the engine is new .

Don't trust the on-board computer, my last van said it was doing 29mpg but I kept a log from fill up to fill up and it rarely went over 23mpg and that was on a 2.2 Ltr euro 4 engine with a 3.5 ton van.
 

colinw

Free Member
Feb 1, 2015
523
306
Bolton , Lancs.
Funster No
34,966
MH
low profile
Exp
Under a year
Don't trust the on-board computer, my last van said it was doing 29mpg but I kept a log from fill up to fill up and it rarely went over 23mpg and that was on a 2.2 Ltr euro 4 engine with a 3.5 ton van.
I just use it as a guide , when it goes up , slightly , I'm driving more efficiently . when I go to France for 6 weeks I will do some sums . if the computer is wrong I will mention it on here !
 
C

Chockswahay

Deleted User
Don't trust the on-board computer, my last van said it was doing 29mpg but I kept a log from fill up to fill up and it rarely went over 23mpg and that was on a 2.2 Ltr euro 4 engine with a 3.5 ton van.

Mine is more pessimistic, we actually do better than the computer says :D
 
Feb 9, 2008
8,967
18,769
Corby, Northants
Funster No
1,455
MH
Coach Built
Exp
Since 2007
We have the 2.3 and use the auto cruise at 2000 rpm when on long runs and exceed 30 mpg. We are 3.5 T low profile and never have a problem on hills because we have a gearbox. For the first 20,000 miles we were lucky to average 30mpg but were always close to it, now at 28,000 we get much improved mpg. Our engine is also maintained in accordance with the Fiat service schedule.
 

Hogan7777

Free Member
Sep 28, 2014
76
138
Valencia, Spain
Funster No
33,557
MH
Hymer B 694SL
Exp
Since 1995
We have 3 Ltrs in. 4500 kg Hymer. Loads of power we go over the Pyrenees at least twice a year and it just pulls very rare to have to change down. Plus 26/27 mpg. To save fuel knock off cruise control when pulling up hill or it will just keep at your set speed and use more fuel.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

TerryL

LIFE MEMBER
Mar 5, 2010
6,277
8,357
North East
Funster No
10,511
MH
Low Profile
Exp
2009
To save fuel knock off cruise control when pulling up hill or it will just keep at your set speed and use more fuel.

When I drove coaches I always reckoned I could improve the fuel consumption by NOT using the cruise control, but it was more tiring so almost always was up against the limiter. In the van I don't have the pressures so prefer to drive "manually" although on a long reasonably flat motorway with light traffic the CC has its uses. I get better fuel consumption that way - have averaged 28mpg actual (not computer) over 55000 miles, 2.3 euro 4.
 
OP
OP
stevec
Sep 24, 2013
1,341
787
Norwich
Funster No
28,255
MH
Carthago A class
Exp
Since 2014
This 3l engine is a Peugeot HDi unit. Are they the same as the Fiat lump?
 
Jan 10, 2013
5,958
7,355
Near Uttoxeter and Crete
Funster No
24,227
MH
Warwick XL PVC
Exp
Still trucking and learning
We've been looking at 2.3L MHs and found a Pilote T680 which makes much better use of it's length than some others we've looked at. But this one has a 3.0L engine. We thought we had decided on a make and model until we saw this one this afternoon. Now we're weighing up the pros and cons of each and engine size (and economy) is one factor. To answer Bungy's question it is a 3500kg chassis in a coachbuilt low profile.
We previously had a Autotrail Savannah with a 2.3 L engine - we usually averaged 26/27 mpg unless we were driving into a headwind, and it really seemed to struggle up hills. We now have a A class Pilote G742 with a 3 L engine and get an average of 28/29 mpg. Husband says the Pilote is a pleasure to drive and is much less tiring than the Autotrail.
 
May 8, 2016
1,686
86,238
silver coast, portugal
Funster No
42,972
MH
C Class: 7 years
Exp
Boatie for 20 years
We are running a Chausson 515 (3.55T low profile, using a 2.3 Euro 5, manual box- Peugeot badged by Fiat, I believe) and are returning 31 mpg on short runs, 34 on longer runs

Performance is better than I would have expected, not a great deal more sluggish than our old 300 TDI Discovery. I would have liked a larger engine, and especially comfortmatic, but we liked the discounted stock offer better
 
Oct 2, 2014
585
1,726
West Yorkshire
Funster No
33,675
MH
Rapido 866f
Exp
Since 2014
3ltr consistently 27/28 mpg calculated brim to brim on 3.5 tonnes, and not hanging about on motorways. Try to change up at 2000 rpm only concession to fuel economy. Never driven a 2.3 so can't compare, but this will pull eg big hill (Windy Hill) on M62 back into Yorkshire 6th gear same speed at top as at bottom.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Funsters who are viewing this thread

Back
Top