# Fiat vs Ford.?



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Just wondering. It seems 90% of vans are on the Fiat (Peugeot, Citroen) base. And only about 10% are on the Ford base.

Ford used to be the ubiquitous base vehicle for years but now it's Fiat. 
Any ideas as to the reasons behind this as looking around at vans this week it seems the Ford is the cheaper option. 
Oddly most of the Fiats are 130hp and the Ford says 140hp.

Ray.


----------



## emjaiuk (Jun 3, 2005)

Fiat made a conscious decision to target the motorhome market some years ago,one of the most dramatic aspects of that is the supply of pairs of cabs bolted back to back for convertors who use Alko chassis. They also have a retail orientated support/backup/warrenty department, which appears to be quite effective, although there are always exceptions. Why Fords are cheaper I don't know. FWIW ours is a 2012 Hymer A class on a Transit chassis, and one of the main dislikes is the fact that the two front seats are so close together it make passing through and rotating difficult compared to our previous Fiat. Hymer only used the Transit for a couple of years AFAIK. Ours is a 140 and seems fine.




Malcolm


----------



## mgdavid (Nov 27, 2014)

What about Merc chassis?


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

mgdavid said:


> What about Merc chassis?


Hardly big numbers David.

Ray.


----------



## drcotts (Feb 23, 2006)

I understand that the main reason is that Fiat would supply the chassis and the converter would not have to pay for it until they sold the actual converted motorhome thereby solving any cash flow issues.


----------



## mgdavid (Nov 27, 2014)

raynipper said:


> Hardly big numbers David.
> 
> Ray.


Thanks, you'll know far more than me, I was just thinking out loud. 
A pity as I might be looking at Merc for the next one (see my recent Ducato experience on the Gearbox thread!).


----------



## emjaiuk (Jun 3, 2005)

drcotts said:


> I understand that the main reason is that Fiat would supply the chassis and the converter would not have to pay for it until they sold the actual converted motorhome thereby solving any cash flow issues.


That would explain it!

Malcolm


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Yes David, I always felt the Merc chassis was better and stronger but reading of a few peoples experiences on here again about gear boxes and electronics, I'm not so sure.
Do a search on Merc problems. I would always prefer a rear wheel drive config.

Ray.


----------



## ob1 (Sep 25, 2007)

Couldn't wait to get rid of our previous Merc Sprinter based Auto Sleeper. It wallowed like a ship in a gale and the auto gearbox was useless.


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Just test driven the Ford after the Fiat and felt that the Fiat was more responsive. But the Ford is on 16" and the Fiat on 15" wheels.

Ray.


----------



## kabundi (Feb 14, 2011)

raynipper said:


> Just test driven the Ford after the Fiat and felt that the Fiat was more responsive. But the Ford is on 16" and the Fiat on 15" wheels.
> 
> Ray.


I understand the X290 up to 3850kg is available with both 15" and 16" wheels which are interchangeable and different fitment to the 16" fitted to the heavier chassis.


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Not sure of what you mean Kabundi.
Is the X290 the Ford? This one had the 16" wheels so I guess for the 3,500kg. chassis.

Ray.


----------



## mgdavid (Nov 27, 2014)

X290 is the latest Fiat chassis. Mine came with 15" wheels, the supplying dealer upgraded it from 3495 to 3850kg, this was just a paper exercise, it wasn't necessary to change the wheels.


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

We are totally confused with our van choices at the moment and when I find myself in this situation I do nothing. "When in doubt leave it out".

The older 2011 Fiat at €39k has more stuff and better space and tyres.
But the 2014 Ford at €36k has less stuff but is like new engine and chassis.

We like the extra little bits on the Fiat like two 12v tv's, batteries and more drawers and cupboards. The cab is more spacious between the seats and better dash.
The Ford has no oven, no sat dish, no extra battery, no spare wheel, drawers in bed, cramped cab. 
But three years younger and three thousand cheaper and like new in the engine compartment and underneath seems the better value.

Yours confused.
Ray.


----------



## emjaiuk (Jun 3, 2005)

I must admit I'm always influenced by toys added to cars or vans. Although I would have probably bought our previous Chausson anyway, I'm sure the fact that it had an electric awning was in the back of my mind. Leaving aside the cab, which to us is an irritaton rather than a deal breaker, how much would it cost to install those accessories you really need and will use to the Ford? Just out of curiosity Ray, would you have the same trouble registering in France a MH from Belgium or Germany as you would a UK van? There appear to be some good buys on mobile.de.



Malcolm


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

I guess Malcolm I am more influenced with value for money and resale value later.
Like our last one bought in UK and registered in France only lost €3k in 9 years.

But the Fiat (older) van had roof auto sat with 2 x 12v TVs. Various 12v sockets, 2 leisure batts, microwave, spare wheel and new tyres but would you believe only 1 x 220v outlet. Difficult to retro fit all that on the Ford.
Yes Malcolm the French would put you through the same hoops to re register any 'foreign' van. I guess I'm trying to take the easy option but best value.

Ray.


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

raynipper said:


> Hardly big numbers David.
> 
> Ray.


Plenty on Renault chassis, certainly as many as on Ford.


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

kabundi said:


> I understand the X290 up to 3850kg is available with both 15" and 16" wheels which are interchangeable and different fitment to the 16" fitted to the heavier chassis.


All Ducatos on alloy wheels (very very common now) are 16"


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

I'm still torn between the later Ford and older Fiat for similar money.
But keep hearing adverse comments about the Ford but nothing specific.
I guess I will just keep hesitating until something really grabs me.

Ray.


----------



## chilly (Apr 20, 2007)

A big difference between a Fiat and a Ford is that the Fiat has a far bigger chance of still being where you left it when you return! > (have you seen the number of Transit based MoHo's that are getting nicked?)


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

I assume you mean in UK Chilly.
As I am unlikely to bring it to UK it's not high on the priority list........................... yet.

Ray.


----------



## wug (May 19, 2011)

Our first van, a Hymer, was a Transit base and it was a disaster. Maybe it was a Friday afternoon job, although it was made in Germany. Just as the Ford guarantee ran out we had problems. First, going round a roundabout the pulley on the power steering drive fell off. I managed to wrestle it to the ground and fortuitously there was a Ford garage a couple of minutes away. This happened again a year or two later. 

The next problem, which we never really solved before we traded it in, was the engine or perhaps the ECU. The dreaded limp mode which would suddenly appear. Turned out it was the EGR valve, something to do with exhaust gas recirculation. But that wasn't the end of it. One day, 300 miles from home it wouldn't start. Green Flag came and drained the fuel filter of water and off she went - for about 3 miles and on a slip road went kaput again. Green Flag took us home on a low loader. Got something fixed, but it still behaved erratically from time to time, mainly limp mode. So we got rid after 3 years.

Next van, 5 years ago was a Wildax on a Citroen base, never a problem, then 2 years ago a bespoke pvc on a Fiat Ducato with comformatic gearbox. So far so good.

I don't know if our experience with Ford is typical, because they sell millions, so they can't all be bad. But once bitten as they say.

Rgds, Graham


----------



## JanHank (Mar 29, 2015)

Ray, when you drove the Ford, was the gear change notably easier than the fiat?


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Nope Jan. About the same.
But I did feel the cab was smaller and the dash was not so convenient.
But where I thought the Ford based van was an incredible bargain compared to the fiat, I'm not so sure now as there are many fords much cheaper than comparable Fiats.

I have just seen an add for a new Ford van and one of the 'extras' is listed as "TV télé+ 3G montée sur mat".
Does this mean the ariel is a dish capable of receiving 3G and maybe internet TV.?

Ray.


----------



## JanHank (Mar 29, 2015)

The reason I asked about gear change Ray was because years ago we had a Ford Cortina estate, it had the sweatest gear change I have ever used.
After that came the Volvo 240 estate, no comparison for gear change although a nice car to drive.
I´m having left shoulder problems at the moment, to get the Navajo (Fiat) into reverse is a bit of a pain.


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Both the Ford and Fiat seem to have the same gear stick and configuration. I guess being front wheel drive and transverse engine and box the linkage must be very similar.
Unlike the old Cortina which was rear wheel drive and the gear stick went straight into the box not needing complicated linkage.

I have blown out the Ford even though it's like new and cheaper than the Fiat mainly due to the cramped cab and ugly front. Now back to looking for a late Fiat with all the bells and whistles included. Although most come with an auto sat dish our needs might be a larger manual dish to try to get Sky when further south.

Ray.


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

JanHank said:


> The reason I asked about gear change Ray was because years ago we had a Ford Cortina estate, it had the sweatest gear change I have ever used.
> After that came the Volvo 240 estate, no comparison for gear change although a nice car to drive.
> I´m having left shoulder problems at the moment, to get the Navajo (Fiat) into reverse is a bit of a pain.





> sweatest


Sounds hard work to me:surprise:

You don't get many "direct to the box" gear changes any more.


----------



## JanHank (Mar 29, 2015)

Stanner said:


> Sounds hard work to me:surprise:
> 
> You don't get many "direct to the box" gear changes any more.


Ha, ha, took you three days to pick that up sweetie.


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

JanHank said:


> Ha, ha, took you three days to pick that up sweetie.


Been busy with my new property purchase so first time on here for days - but at least you didn't call me sweatie :wink2:


----------



## JanHank (Mar 29, 2015)

Stanner said:


> Been busy with my new property purchase so first time on here for days - but at least you didn't call me sweatie :wink2:


I would have spelt it sweaty >

What property is this, have we been informed?


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

JanHank said:


> I would have spelt it sweaty >
> 
> What property is this, have we been informed?


No.:grin2:


----------



## DJMotorhomer (Apr 15, 2010)

Dont know if it has been mentioned but my Peugeot Boxer has a ford engine :grin2:

DJM


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

DJMotorhomer said:


> Dont know if it has been mentioned but my Peugeot Boxer has a ford engine :grin2:
> DJM


Oooww Errrr.

Ray.


----------



## greygit (Apr 15, 2007)

That was always my understanding in that the Merc suspension was too soft so not very stable but I suppose you could beef it up.

Edit. Sorry this was from a comment on the first page.


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

DJMotorhomer said:


> Dont know if it has been mentioned but my Peugeot Boxer has a ford engine :grin2:
> 
> DJM


Or you might find that it is the Fords that have Peugeot designed engines?

You might even find that the Mini has a Peugeot diesel engine.

If you check Ford have rarely, if ever, produced a half decent engine of any kind without outside help - Cosworth - Lotus - Yamaha - Peugeot - etc. etc. etc.

And you might find out that your Ford Ka is actually a Fiat 500.


----------



## DJMotorhomer (Apr 15, 2010)

I had been told by a french garage and an english one that my engine is the Ford diesel, that's good enough for me lol


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSA_HDi_engine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Duratorq_engine#2005_TDCi_(PSA_DW_Based)

And what would they know about a french named van produced on a Fiat production line in Southern Italy - Sevel Sud?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sevel

Peugeot use their own diesel engines and lots of other makes use versions/developments of it that may or may not be made by Peugeot such as the Ford version made by Ford for Ford in Dagenham.

However it looks like the later engines might be standardised on the Ford Puma development of the original Peugeot engine if that is what they mean - the same engine as developed by Ford rather than a "Ford" engine.

The Boxer and it's Citroen sibling used to use some of the same Iveco engines as the Ducato, but do not any longer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_Ducato


----------



## DJMotorhomer (Apr 15, 2010)

Mine's a Ford


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Stanner said:


> Or you might find that it is the Fords that have Peugeot designed engines?
> You might even find that the Mini has a Peugeot diesel engine.
> If you check Ford have rarely, if ever, produced a half decent engine of any kind without outside help - Cosworth - Lotus - Yamaha - Peugeot - etc. etc. etc.
> And you might find out that your Ford Ka is actually a Fiat 500.


Yep, back in the 70's Ford Diesel Transits had what was laughingly called a York engine in them. It was Fords attempt to build one and it failed miserably.
It spent more time being patched up than actually working. Even the Ford main agents used to laugh when I asked for parts.!

Ray.


----------



## trek (May 1, 2005)

I have a Merc sprinter based motorhome , had it almost 10 years 

If i ever changed it my first choice chassis would be another sprinter 

Second choice iveco or RWD Renault 


Previous motorhomes i have owned were built on Ducato’s (x2) and an Iveco


----------



## trek (May 1, 2005)

greygit said:


> That was always my understanding in that the Merc suspension was too soft so not very stable but I suppose you could beef it up.
> 
> Edit. Sorry this was from a comment on the first page.


My sprinter is very stable when on the road even at 70 mph over taking lorries

Though i must admit it doesnt like pot holed fields as it can rock and roll when driving slowly across fileds

I put this down to the high body and the twin rear wheels on 5 ton chassis so springs and shock absorbers are closer together
To alleviate this i have Dunlop air rides that i only use when driving off road inflating via onboard compressor and reservoir , as soon as i return to tarmac i deflat air rides to minimum pressure and controlled from dashboard


----------



## GMJ (Jun 24, 2014)

Haven't some members reported problems with insurance with Ford based vehicles? The need to have a tracker fitted?

Maybe that has affected sales?

Also no-one has mentioned Iveco as a base vehicle. Don't they have rear wheel drive? Would that be an advantage in a MH?

Graham :smile2:


----------



## rayc (Jun 3, 2008)

GMJ said:


> Also no-one has mentioned Iveco as a base vehicle. Don't they have rear wheel drive? Would that be an advantage in a MH?
> 
> Graham :smile2:


The prop shaft often leads to a high floor level. Depending on the step arrangement this can lead to a fair drop when exiting especially after a few drinks. They usually have better traction on a wet rally field.


----------



## trek (May 1, 2005)

I had an Iveco based motorhome for 7 years and almost 70k miles 

Drove as though on rails 


Loved it it was basically a lorry underneath


----------

