Does the base vehicle really matter? (1 Viewer)

[escapecommittee]

we are contemplating buying a motor home. We have looked at many layouts, been to two shows and have narrowed the field down to a Chausson 610. It seems to have the right accommodation, storage and the drop down bed looks better than making up a bed every night. This model is offered with a Fiat base or a Ford base. I drive a Ford Kuga, and the Ford cab in the motor home is very close to the layout in the Kuga. But....it cannot be by chance that 80 % of motor homes are based on Fiat. My only experience of Fiats is hiring cars which appear tinny and not well put together. So can someone guide me as to what difference the base vehicle makes. Also are there other models that come close to the 610? Appreciate the benefits of someone's experience. Thanks.

 

[Peter Sansom]

We got the 610 last year. We were told by the dealer's workshop that the Transit was the better choice. Having said that our previous Chausson was based on the Ducato chassis, which was very good too. Have to say that we're very pleased with the Transit though. Toured the Highlands and went to Holland last year. No probs. Had a peek in the 620 and wasn't overly impressed by the difference though. Got a couple of extras fitted before we picked it up...Reverse/rear view cam and Fiamma canopy. You won't need bike racks, loads of room in the garage. Happy hunting!

 

[MR. FUSION]

FIAT offer an auto gearbox version Ford don't.....should that be a consideration.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Allanm]

It must be just us with a Peugeot based van then!
Although the cab looks exactly the same inside and out to the Fiat, it has a Ford engine. Same engine as fitted to Citroen vans, some Haguars and Land Rovers. 21000 miles so far and never missed a beat

 

[poolie18]

We were also contemplating a 610, until we realised that if one of us had to get up early to walk/feed the dog then on our return there would be nowhere to sit to have a brew etc.
Fortunately an Auto Trail Mohawk caught our eye with a rear transverse bed above a garage and a separate lounge area. This is pulled along by a 3 litre 160 BHP Comfort-Matic Ducato which is a sheer pleasure to drive.

 

[WillH]

It's all about layout. We've done 51k miles in our Fiat based van, drives like a car. I'd buy another (if I could afford it!).

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[MC 55 FUN]

It must be just us with a Peugeot based van then!
Although the cab looks exactly the same inside and out to the Fiat, it has a Ford engine. Same engine as fitted to Citroen vans, some Haguars and Land Rovers. 21000 miles so far and never missed a beat

The Ford engine is a tried & trusted engine as fitted to some Mondeo's too - one reason why we chose a Peugeot base for our MH

 

[Paul an Jane MK]

Our Fiat Ducato 2.2 100 Bhp has the ford engine as well, I think it is the 2.3 130 Bhp Ducato that is a fiat engine.

Due to collect on Tuesday so hopefully powerful enough, but time will tell and it was the nicest layout that suited us with a spacious rear lounge

 

[Allanm]

Our engine is the 2.2litre, 130bhp Puma unit. It easily managed to haul our 3.7 tonnes around the steep climbs into the Pyrenees with no problems at all....., other than just scaring Mrs A at the sheer drops and narrow hairpin bends.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[MichaelT]

Though not entirely about base vehicles this article gives some comparisons of a Fiat v Mercedes.
https://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/m...0-leg-and-rapido-891m-motorhome-review/899689

 

[funflair]

I guess the simple answer is that it matters to some people more than others, I have a liking for big heavy Motorhomes and would not have one on a Front Wheel Drive chassis BUT if I was in the market for a smaller lighter van I would concider a FWD Fiat etc.

It all comes down to personal preference, are you prepared to pay a premium for one chassis over another.

Martin

 

[MitchandJenny]

Another "happy with Fiat" vote here...
Mitch.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Jim]

A few years ago I would have always chosen a Merc if I could, but I got put off with horror stories here about Merc insisting you buy half an engine, rather than the broken part within. Meanwhile the Fiat has proved itself time and time again. No other company works so closely with the motorhome manufacturers as Fiat and countless millions of trouble free miles are travelled in them. Right now I drive a Ford, but only because Fiat don't do a 6L version.

 

[SuperMike]

Ford

Fiat

What else other than a Workhorse chassis, with a gross of 10.5t, fitted with a Chevy Vortec 8.1L, feeding an Alison 1000 six speed transmission. Orgasmic.

But then only the, @old-mo, VeryOldMoIceCreamInternetMan and a few select others might understand.

 

[peterc10]

On our second motorhome, both Fiats. No real problems with them, and the ride quality is good, especially on the latest one which has the Alko chassis. Even better is that I now have the 3 litre engine and comformatic gearbox with cruise control - all making for relaxed driving whether on ordinary roads or motorways.

I have been very impressed with Fiat's camper care department when you contact them direct. They are very good and keep you fully updated with regular call backs. The lady I was dealing with was based in Italy but spoke perfect English (with a south african accent). She has been very helpful.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Minxy]

Our engine is the 2.2litre, 130bhp Puma unit. It easily managed to haul our 3.7 tonnes around the steep climbs into the Pyrenees with no problems at all....., other than just scaring Mrs A at the sheer drops and narrow hairpin bends.

That's interesting, the Euro 4 version 2.2 Puma engine was 120 bhp and the Euro 5 version is now 130 bhp, I didn't know it had been 'upped'.

 

[MR. FUSION]

FIAT offer an auto gearbox version Ford don't.....should that be a consideration.

I just read ford are to offer a 6 speed auto on tranny chassis later this year http://www.practicalmotorhome.com/b...letin (28.4.16)::Read_3_1&utm_source=20160428

 

[PhilG]

About 70% of all European motorhomes on the road today are Fiat based, that is literally millions of both camper vans and motorhomes..

The most important things to consider when deciding on a van are

Layout and Payload...

not the base vehicle ..

What he said..

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Charlie]

For me the base vehicle is important ! I like driving and as we bought our MH for mostly European touring I want something Im happy with.

Coming from business background where we had almost entirely Ford Transits I was a little apprehensive about the drive and quality of the Peugeot we now have. I need not have worried in the slightest ! The van drives very well indeed and I really enjoy the drive. Its to early to comment on reliability as we have only had one European trip but the van was great and never missed a beat.

 

[MC 55 FUN]

Same here, I'm a Ford aficionado, but am pleasantly surprised quite how good the Peugeot base on our MH is to drive & well equipped too.

Thank goodness it's a Ford engine Euro 4 with no D.P.F.

 

[Charlie]

Same here, I'm a Ford aficionado, but am pleasantly surprised quite how good the Peugeot base on our MH is to drive & well equipped too.

Thank goodness it's Euro 4 with no D.P.F.

Aye having no DPF is a real bonus ! We have two diesels in our house and both have those damn things....

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[MC 55 FUN]

That's interesting, the Euro 4 version 2.2 Puma engine was 120 bhp and the Euro 5 version is now 130 bhp, I didn't know it had been 'upped'.

The same engine was rated at 155 bhp as fitted to the Mondeo MK3 ST TDCi

 

[MC 55 FUN]

Aye having no DPF is a real bonus ! We have two diesels in our house and both have those damn things....

Same here Charlie, my 2014 MK4.5 Mondeo Euro 5 2.2 TXS has the dreaded DPF, whereas my old 05 Mondeo MK3 2.2 ST TDCi Euro 3 had a CAT - damn site better engine too

 

[Meki]

Choice is very personnal, we have had one Fiat car from new, it was appalling, eventually the engine died after 80,000 miles, totally worn out - then again, we've had 3 Mercs and all have had brilliant engines so that's what we bought, a MH with a Mercedes engine - it's probably unfair though

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[ojibway]

Choice is very personnal, we have had one Fiat car from new, it was appalling, eventually the engine died after 80,000 miles, totally worn out - then again, we've had 3 Mercs and all have had brilliant engines so that's what we bought, a MH with a Mercedes engine - it's probably unfair though

It's interesting to note that most new MHs are on Fiats, even expensive Hymers and Carthagos. Mercedes used to be the base of choice for these top end vans and I would not have thought price would have been an issue!
I've had two Sprinter 316cdis based motorhomes and loved them. Now moving to a Ford transit base - aaarrgh - but our son says they are pretty good workhorses!

 

[mitzimad]

i think ford are pushing to get a share of the motorhome market ive definitely seen more new transit vans than ever before

 

[Chipster]

Same here Charlie, my 2014 MK4.5 Mondeo Euro 5 2.2 TXS has the dreaded DPF, whereas my old 05 Mondeo MK3 2.2 ST TDCi Euro 3 had a CAT - damn site better engine too

Bit late on this one I know, sorry, but I've run both of these engines. Firstly the 155 in a mondeo st. I had several (7!!) egr valve failures despite high mileage. I'm now running a 2.2 200 txs estate and it's fast approaching 160000 miles (in 4 years) and it's not missed a beat. Superb engine.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[pyro]

We bought a Chausson 515 Welcome on a Ducato 130 two months ago on the basis that we wanted a 6M van, there are only the two of us and we liked the layout/build quality, the service intervals and the fact that Fiat service/spares are especially plentiful on the continent. All those M/H drivers can't be wrong.

Perhaps vanity played a part. You don't get a lot of Fiat Ducato's used by the average white van man.

Family with a 510 on a transit base have had more than just a few problems with their base unit, although I have to admit it is actually quite nice to drive.

I had exactly the same reservations about Fiat as yourself, and I was reassured that the Euro 5+ engine was more Peugeot than anything else (certainly performs very well), and I felt the cab internals were superior. Having said that, it is a commercial vehicle, so it will be a lot more resilient than (say) your average small Fiat motor car. Do bear in mind that Fiat make some pretty serious vehicles, including Jeeps, Maserati, Ram, Dodge, etc

The final decision was based on what was available from stock. Didn't fancy waiting for new stock or special order (the 515 layout is no longer offered in the UK). Happy with the Ducato, good support and performs better than expected

Our biggest problem has been sorting out some of the sources of rattles, which are down to Chausson. Most of it has been unsecured cables running to the underbed (drop down single in ours) lights and rattling blinds. Fairly quiet now

 

[Peter Ashcroft]

I have both base vehicles at the moment, and I prefer the Peugeot (same as the fiat) to the transit. They do both have good and bad bits. The gear change on the transit is better i think, although I find the gear ratios in the Peugeot Boxer much better, even though the transit is 6 speed it feels like it needs 7 when you get going. The driving position is better in the transit also in my opinion, the Peugeot seats are a little too high.

The Boxer is far quieter and far more refined, and more pleasurable to be in for long periods, the transit does feel more van like. Also found the boxer a lot better on fuel, although to be fair its a smaller PVC not a coach built. However my brother runs a fleet of fords as minibuses and he says they are not good on fuel.

I should also add the transit I am referring to is the MK7, I have driven a MK8 minibus and its much better but still not as nice a drive as the Boxer

Find it odd how some people say that layout and payload are more important than base vehicle, I dis agree, most people like me spend a lot of time behind the wheel and if you don't like driving something it can ruin the whole experience, I always insist on a long test drive to include motorways before I would buy any motorhome.

 

[DL42846]

This is our second Fiat Ducato base MH. Had no problems with the first one. Haven't had the second one long enough to comment on but all looks fine.
I worked for a company which ran Merc Sprinters as work vans. I found they are not as good as you would expect. They all needed new rear wheel bearings within a few months, Paintwork Rusting was a big issue, very expensive on parts. and silly things do go wrong with them. The basic engine is good but a lot of the other things don't follow. We had to change things like starter motors, hydraulic steering pipes. Prop shafts ( Nearly two grand)
Engine management sensors. (And there are loads of them) exhaust Catalytic Converter ( another two grand) ,water pump. Turbo ( Four grand) and they are not particularly good on MPG, The engines do achieve very high mileages but at a cost. I'm not convinced they are worth the extra cost or are worthy of the badge.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GeriatricWanderer]

Well in my opinion, THE most important thing to consider when buying a motorhome, or any other vehicle, is the base vehicle - not the badge on the front but the reliability of the whole thing.

Habitation layout and payload, whilst important, do not come before base vehicle reliability.

You can have a super equipped motorhome with all the bells and whistles imaginable, and a cab full of shiny knobs and digi-gizmos but if the front end don't work - you're going nowhere - except perhaps your driveway.