We are THE friendliest motorhome forum, please register to join in the fun, and have access to all areas.


Introduce yourself

Sign up Latest Topics Donate
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
GMJ

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 111
Reply with quote  #1 

Hi

 

We recently changed our 2012 Comanche to a newer 2017 model and are very happy with it however there is a distinct and noticeable lack of oomph from the newer engine. This is especially noticeable on hills or even slight gradients where the speed drops and the dashboard screen advises me to change down. Both MH's are manual and both weigh the same. The older engine claimed 180bhp and the newer one 177 (now PS), I believe. NB the difference between BHP and PS is negligible.

 

On top of this on our recent trip away we only managed 23.7mpg against a minimum of 27mpg I would have expected with the older 3 litre.

 

The new one has only just done 5500 miles from new.

 

So my questions are...

 

Has anyone else moved from the older 3 litre to the newer 2.3 litre? If so I would welcome your thoughts on the performance you have noticed.

 

Can I expect better mpg as the engine 'loosens up'? Again, if any folks have had the 2.3 for a while, have you noticed any improvements?

 

Thanks

 

Graham

__________________
My wife and I like to SKI....


...that's Spending the Kids Inheritance [biggrin]
0
BurtSner

Avatar / Picture

Administrator. Executive member, Forum supporter x 2
Registered:
Posts: 4,319
Reply with quote  #2 
Firstly no to your question.

What sort of weight are you dragging around?

My 2.3 low profile, is plated at 4100kg but tends to actually be 3600 or so. Although it is really a 130 it has been remapped to 160 and drives like a car and achieves a true 29+ mpg

I’ve kept a record of fuel economy (anal sod me) and it hasn’t varied in the 30000 miles I’ve put on it from when I got it at 4K . And that includes all the miles since remap when there was no discernible difference.

__________________
Burstner Nexxo T660 - family fun
1999 Suzuki Hayabusa
2000 Honda Blackbird
Molly - Chocolate Labrador 
only a biker understands why a dog hangs its head out of the window
Exeter, East Devon

Simon
0
peejay

Avatar / Picture

Executive member, Forum Supporter. x 2
Registered:
Posts: 1,687
Reply with quote  #3 
Can't help with original question but did you know that PS is German for Pferde Starke which roughly translates to Horse Strength, ie Horsepower.

Full of useless info I am. [smile]

Pete

__________________
Location - Narfook. Vehicle - 2006 Hymer B504/Ducato 2.8JTD 

Kilometres are shorter than miles. Save fuel, take your next trip in kilometres. George Carlin

My Greece stopover map
0
GMJ

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 111
Reply with quote  #4 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BurtSner
Firstly no to your question.

What sort of weight are you dragging around?

My 2.3 low profile, is plated at 4100kg but tends to actually be 3600 or so. Although it is really a 130 it has been remapped to 160 and drives like a car and achieves a true 29+ mpg

I’ve kept a record of fuel economy (anal sod me) and it hasn’t varied in the 30000 miles I’ve put on it from when I got it at 4K . And that includes all the miles since remap when there was no discernible difference.


The weight is the same as the older model. In fact all the variables are constant across the 2 models: weight; dimensions; driving style etc. Also my investigations appear to show that the torque is the same too...

The MH is 5t fully loaded and 4.15t unloaded. We are around 4.7t I would estimate.

Graham

__________________
My wife and I like to SKI....


...that's Spending the Kids Inheritance [biggrin]
0
BurtSner

Avatar / Picture

Administrator. Executive member, Forum supporter x 2
Registered:
Posts: 4,319
Reply with quote  #5 
That’s a fair old lump to battle through the wind.

I’d imagine the engine will loosen up to a degree, but I can’t see it making anything other than marginally better consumption.

Although both engines are the same advertised numbers as near as dammit, perhaps the 3.0 simply accesses its useable power differently and consequently drives better and more economically. I’d imagine the newer engine is also saddled with more in the way of emissions controls that may also sap your useful power.





Also, how do you work out your mpg?

Mine is always, fill to the brim, use it, fill to the brim. Then I log the date, mileage and litres used in a small Excel spreadsheet. From this i get an accurate measure of what’s what and I don’t rely on a fuel computer. I have to assume the odometer is correct, but all of the other details will be accurate.

__________________
Burstner Nexxo T660 - family fun
1999 Suzuki Hayabusa
2000 Honda Blackbird
Molly - Chocolate Labrador 
only a biker understands why a dog hangs its head out of the window
Exeter, East Devon

Simon
0
Pudsey Bear

Avatar / Picture

Super duper bear type peep.
Registered:
Posts: 10,199
Reply with quote  #6 
Sounds like the power and torque come in at different revs requiring modified driving habit, changing diwn much soine being one of them it seems.
__________________
Kev [comp] 

Warning, might contain an opinion [nono]  

If you're not the lead dog, your view never changes.

Don't force it, use a bigger hammer. Semper ubi, Sub ubi. 

Link to self build pictures 


http://tinyurl.com/nzyry9n

2002 Bessacarr E745 Ducato
0
eurajohn

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member, Forum Supporter.
Registered:
Posts: 253
Reply with quote  #7 
With reference to your mention of odometer accuracy Simon, have you or others checked via a gps the displayed speed on the speedo and how much that differs to the gps.
Apparently the inaccuracy of the speedometer can by law be up to 4% inaccurate on distance recording.

__________________
John.
0
Bigcol

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 437
Reply with quote  #8 
Had to change down to the 2.3 from the 3.0ltr.when we changed van. Don't really worry what the mpg is ,if we have done what we want . When it needs fuel it needs fuel. Did need a few more gear changes,but it is now getting bedded in and a lot more flexible.Colin
0
GMJ

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 111
Reply with quote  #9 
Thanks all

I don't accurately measure the mpg by brimming etc, rather I go by the trip computer but unless they have radically changed that, then at least it is a constant from one vehicle to the next so whilst both may not accurately measure mpg at least they are both doing it the same way.

Graham

__________________
My wife and I like to SKI....


...that's Spending the Kids Inheritance [biggrin]
0
BurtSner

Avatar / Picture

Administrator. Executive member, Forum supporter x 2
Registered:
Posts: 4,319
Reply with quote  #10 
Quote:
Originally Posted by eurajohn
With reference to your mention of odometer accuracy Simon, have you or others checked via a gps the displayed speed on the speedo and how much that differs to the gps.
Apparently the inaccuracy of the speedometer can by law be up to 4% inaccurate on distance recording.


Yes I have done so John, we always used a GPS to assist backing up our top speed runs and so I’m keen to see on all my vehicles how accurate they actually read

My Hayabusa with raised gearing is now extremely accurate, as was the Kawasaki ZZr1400. My new VW Sharon is also within a couple of mph of true.

My Fiat MH reads 60 and is doing 55 by GPS. That makes it nice and safe to drive within limits.

I’ve not found a way to verify the actual odometer itself to check the miles, but I’m happy it’s near enough for my records.

(My turbo road bike ran very radical gearing and would read 70 and be doing nearly 90 - a GPS was an absolute necessity on the road 😂 )

__________________
Burstner Nexxo T660 - family fun
1999 Suzuki Hayabusa
2000 Honda Blackbird
Molly - Chocolate Labrador 
only a biker understands why a dog hangs its head out of the window
Exeter, East Devon

Simon
0
HARLEYBOB

New Member
Registered:
Posts: 1
Reply with quote  #11 
Hi Graham.
I had a DUCATO 2.3. Chosen because it had the cam chain and not the cam belt.
I NEVER saw mpg above 24 ,motorway or urban.
I was told that a chip and remap is the way forward with this engine.
Regards.
Bob.
0
coppo

Avatar / Picture

Executive member, Forum Supporter.
Registered:
Posts: 2,059
Reply with quote  #12 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HARLEYBOB
Hi Graham.
I had a DUCATO 2.3. Chosen because it had the cam chain and not the cam belt.
I NEVER saw mpg above 24 ,motorway or urban.
I was told that a chip and remap is the way forward with this engine.
Regards.
Bob.



I thought all 2.3 Ducatos were cam belts, only the 3 litre ones were chain driven
0
GMJ

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 111
Reply with quote  #13 
Good point Paul

Something else I hadnt considered.

The 3litre definitely had a chain but the Fiat handbook with my new one only has references to belts and my Google search hasn't thrown up anything to help..

Graham

__________________
My wife and I like to SKI....


...that's Spending the Kids Inheritance [biggrin]
0
BurtSner

Avatar / Picture

Administrator. Executive member, Forum supporter x 2
Registered:
Posts: 4,319
Reply with quote  #14 
I always thought the 3.0 was chain.

Perhaps the newest iteration has gone to belt? I’ve googled and can’t find anything, apart from that 20my now has a 9 speed auto option

__________________
Burstner Nexxo T660 - family fun
1999 Suzuki Hayabusa
2000 Honda Blackbird
Molly - Chocolate Labrador 
only a biker understands why a dog hangs its head out of the window
Exeter, East Devon

Simon
0
coppo

Avatar / Picture

Executive member, Forum Supporter.
Registered:
Posts: 2,059
Reply with quote  #15 
Yes the new 2.3 are belts and only the older 3 litre Ducato was chain
0
coppo

Avatar / Picture

Executive member, Forum Supporter.
Registered:
Posts: 2,059
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMJ
Good point Paul

Something else I hadnt considered.

The 3litre definitely had a chain but the Fiat handbook with my new one only has references to belts and my Google search hasn't thrown up anything to help..

Graham



Sure you are correct Graham with that, the engine should free up after a few thousand
0
allan09

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 13
Reply with quote  #17 
I've a ducato 2.3 150 bhp euro 6. According to the readout I get 28mpg which I feel is OK. It's my first van/moho so no prior to gauge against. Haven't done the fill to fill check. It's around 3.2 Mt running mode normally and I just use the auto all the time. Only time I feel u need more oomph is overtaking something on 2 way road.But I don't do much of that . If I need to make progress I've got the 200bhp motorbike.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

Go to top of page         Return to forum home page