New 2.3 Multijet Deisel Engine

[donnkim]

Thinkin of buying a Burstner A class with the above engine. Has it enough grunt to move a big motorhome and more importantly with a toad?
thanks

 

[DuxDeluxe]

Better to go for the 3 litre if towing. No substitute for cubic inches as the yanks say......

 

[MikeD]

I have a 2012 2.3 Fiat multi jet. with a 3650kg max all up weight.

I also tow a motorcycle with around a total weight of trailer and bike of 400kg.

It pulls well and really digs in going up the hills. Not to many gear changes

But for a toad I suspect bigger is better

 

[DuxDeluxe]

We are 3850 with 150 MJ remapped. Really miss the 3 litre for torque.

 

[Jaws]

Our Chieftain ( 5.25 tonnes ) has a 2.3 ltr in it.. AND we tow to the absolute max the chassis will allow of 1 tonne. ( Smart Car on a trailer )
When we are not towing it will cruise along quite happily at 70 if we wanted to ( tend to set the cruise control to an indicated 55 giving a true speed of 52 mph.. we have found that the best for economy.
The only time I have to chase gears is up looonnnggg steep inclines..

Previous van was a 4.1 tonne Miller fitted with the 2.8 engine.. Gotta say we can detect very little difference ( there is a difference but nowt worth writing home about )

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

 

[DuxDeluxe]

Our Chieftain ( 5.25 tonnes ) has a 2.3 ltr in it.. AND we tow to the absolute max the chassis will allow of 1 tonne. ( Smart Car on a trailer )
When we are not towing it will cruise along quite happily at 70 if we wanted to ( tend to set the cruise control to an indicated 55 giving a true speed of 52 mph.. we have found that the best for economy.
The only time I have to chase gears is up looonnnggg steep inclines..

Previous van was a 4.1 tonne Miller fitted with the 2.8 engine.. Gotta say we can detect very little difference ( there is a difference but nowt worth writing home about )

John, just assumed that it had the 3 litre..... We just like more power and more power..... Megalomania rules!

 

[Jaws]

I must admit I was extremely worried when I found out it was a 2.3, but was assured by just about everyone I spoke to it would be fine.. Glad I took the advice

 

[Masman]

Im thinking of changing van .At the moment have 2.8jtd .great drive .but thinking long term .2.8 cambelt .Am i right in thinking 2.3 is a camchain .Had this van 10years from new .Hopefully next van will last same .

 

[donnkim]

thanks everyone - great advice as usual.

 

[joncris]

We have a 2.3 multi jet chucking out 150hp (required for auto gearbox) & I wouldn't recommend it for towing. Before that we had a 3 ltr in our 1999 Hymer & we did use that to tow a Fiat Punto which I hardly noticed was there. So as previously advised I'd go for the 3ltr

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

 

[BreweryDave]

I was going to ask this question next year - but happy to see it here!
Am going to get a new 5000kg tag axle van - never going to tow - and tossing up between the 2.3 150bhp or the 3 l.
Fairly sure I'll stick with the manual box - again cost and weight!

3l is a lot of extra dosh and more weight. But I worry about the 2.3 being sufficient! Will be doing a lot of driving so mpg also in the equation - it's still my biggest question - apart from what colour leather to have!!!

 

[joncris]

I was going to ask this question next year - but happy to see it here!
Am going to get a new 5000kg tag axle van - never going to tow - and tossing up between the 2.3 150bhp or the 3 l.
Fairly sure I'll stick with the manual box - again cost and weight!

3l is a lot of extra dosh and more weight. But I worry about the 2.3 being sufficient! Will be doing a lot of driving so mpg also in the equation - it's still my biggest question - apart from what colour leather to have!!!

If you aren't towing the 2.3 is great and will cruise all day at 70mph. It'll also go a lot faster if need be (some prats don't like being overtaken by a motorhome)

 

[joncris]

Also on board 'puter says we are averaging 24.9 MPG but then I do tend to move on a bit

 

[DuxDeluxe]

I was going to ask this question next year - but happy to see it here!
Am going to get a new 5000kg tag axle van - never going to tow - and tossing up between the 2.3 150bhp or the 3 l.
Fairly sure I'll stick with the manual box - again cost and weight!

3l is a lot of extra dosh and more weight. But I worry about the 2.3 being sufficient! Will be doing a lot of driving so mpg also in the equation - it's still my biggest question - apart from what colour leather to have!!!

Last van was 3 litre, this one is 2.3 150 and both about the same weight. Fuel consumption is not a lot different at about 26mpg. Don't have a heavy right foot though

 

[Jaws]

Im thinking of changing van .At the moment have 2.8jtd .great drive .but thinking long term .2.8 cambelt .Am i right in thinking 2.3 is a camchain .Had this van 10years from new .Hopefully next van will last same .

No mate.. the 2.3 has a cam belt.. Recommended change at 7 years

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

 

[Abacist]

I've not done any research to confirm this but I suspect that the latest 2.3 has as much grunt as some of the more than 10/15 year old 2.8/3litres as they seem to get much more power out of modern engines. However I have a 4.5 ton 2010 AutoTrail Savannah and I'm glad I have the 3 litre. It goes really well.

 

[DuxDeluxe]

Given the choice in the current van, would have gone for the 3 litre (it's a man thing - bigger is better) but it would have meant a long wait and being built to order plus a lot more dosh. The alternative was a brand new van, in stock and ready to be delivered very shortly after ordering.

The 2.3 150 is OK, though I have had it remapped. The big difference was the comparative lack of torque compared with the (also remapped) 3 litre lump.

 

[Popeye]

I have the 3.0 litre in my 4 tonne Geist Spirit and I'm really pleased with it.

It obviously has more torque than all the 2.3's I've driven, I find no need to change down at all at inclines.

 

[Techno]

Torque is the key

 

[DuxDeluxe]

Torque is the key

Yep. Spot on, Andy

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

 

[musson]

Hi i have a 130multijet on maxi chassis (Swift Voyager),just come back from Longleat/Bath coped ok with all hills 12/14% in third gear,around 25 to 29 to gallon.

 

[DanielFord]

Hi i have a 130multijet on maxi chassis (Swift Voyager),just come back from Longleat/Bath coped ok with all hills 12/14% in third gear,around 25 to 29 to gallon.

We have the same engine, Swift Sundance 630L, drove it up the Swiss Alps with no problems. We got about 22-24 mpg, my right boot must be heavier

 

[Gaston aires]

You dont need top speed. Go for " grunt" every time. The bigger engines are better for towing.
Phil

 

[rolandrat]

The 3ltr Fiat engine is in a class of its own, the low down torque makes cruising so effortless. The 2.3 from ownership experience seemed like a souped up highly stressed lawnmower engine. If you have never owned a 3ltr then you cannot begin compare the many benefits. The guys in any marketing department can edit so much spin to try and convince people that the 2.3ltr 150bhp is the way to go but the owner feed back that I've had differs. Disappointment the word being mentioned by owners that had previously had a 3ltr.

 

[dave newell]

More is always better in terms of grunt and towing but in reality it is not as big a deal as some make out. Our motorhome is on a 4.2 tonne 1996 Iveco Daily with 2.8 turbo (no intercooler) and 100BHP and I tow a trailer most of the time, either the exhibition box trailer (around 1000KGs) or the race car on trailer (around 1350KGs) and it copes pretty well in general. Yes big hills and long inclines need some cog swapping but in general it will buzz along quite happily at 50mph (or more) all day long.

D.

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