2.2 Litre transit powerful enough?

Niall_G

My current van is on a 1.9l Ducato and struggles with hills. The previous one was a 2.8l Ducato and had no such problems. I would go back to 2.8l again but have seen a nice van on a 2.2l Transit (2005). From what I have read, this has 125BHP (no idea what the Ducatos were) and I have seen comments that it performs better than a larger Fiat engine, is nippier, and uses less fuel. Before I waste everybody's time on a test drive I wonder if anybody has any experience of this comparison?

Thanks in advance.

moodrater

125 is pretty much the same as the 2.8 turbo ducatos nice van to drive. I thought the 2.2 didn't come until 2006. Make sure you get to drive it from cold and that its not smoking and dmf isn't banging. Give the gearbox and clutch a good workout. It more economical than the 2.8 but say the new shape ducato multijets would equal or better it. The 2.2 transit engine is an option with the ducato too but the 3.0 it the business.

odds_on

I've got a 2005 Transit 2.2 low profile camper, 6.7 metres long (so its no lightweight!) and I find it great. I don't drive fast - usually around 70 km per hour so I get about 34-35 mpg. You can get just over 70 mph but I've never driven at that speed, even on motorways.

moodrater

odds_on wrote: »

I've got a 2005 Transit 2.2 low profile camper, 6.7 metres long (so its no lightweight!) and I find it great. I don't drive fast - usually around 70 km per hour so I get about 34-35 mpg. You can get just over 70 mph but I've never driven at that speed, even on motorways.

At 70km per hour I imagine you see a lot of dangerous overtaking and stressed/angry drivers

Moomat

odds_on wrote: »

I've got a 2005 Transit 2.2 low profile camper, 6.7 metres long (so its no lightweight!) and I find it great. I don't drive fast - usually around 70 km per hour so I get about 34-35 mpg. You can get just over 70 mph but I've never driven at that speed, even on motorways.

moodrater wrote: »

At 70km per hour I imagine you see a lot of dangerous overtaking and stressed/angry drivers

If I was heading towards the pearly gates I'd be taking my time too!

Anyway at least one thing he doesn't see often is a diesel pump!:)

moodrater

moodrater wrote: »

At 70km per hour I imagine you see a lot of dangerous overtaking and stressed/angry drivers

Easy way around that is let them past before they try. I've a "70" sticker on my towbar, tailgating pretty much stopped the day I put that on, it breaks the suspension of disbelief. I only ever see 36mpg for about 1500 miles after I swap all the filters.

odds_on

Sir Liamalot wrote: »

Easy way around that is let them past before they try. I've a "70" sticker on my towbar, tailgating pretty much stopped the day I put that on, it breaks the suspension of disbelief. I only ever see 36mpg for about 1500 miles after I swap all the filters.

I keep one eye firmly on my rear view camera's monitor and frequently pull in when the road allows it - often where farms or houses have a parking space in front of them. I know what it's like being held up by a slow vehicle.

Irishgoatman

My camper is very happy going at 80k and I also pull over when possible.

I get very little tailgating, possible because the first numbers on the plate are 86, but what is annoying is the number of cars, today coming back from a few days out for example, that do not bother to thank you when you have pulled over or overtake slowly.:mad:

Meant to add that one car that didn't thank me had a sticker in the rear window that read something along the lines of "Kindness and politeness cost nothing".

World is full of [censored]!

As a rule I don't give cars turning right in front of me the flash to manoeuvre because they'll miss their mark, expect me to stop, not just slow and then take all day (usually). Van driver's however; gone, soon as and I don't have to drop a gear. Truckers are also usually grateful and courteous.

Aidan_M_M

re the Tranny 2.2 , the are a very "sooty" engine internally , and can cause problems with the EGR , but otherwise they are a nice little engine . No match for a 2.8 JTD , but good on juice . Not far off a 2.3 in performance.

Aidan_M_M

Aidan_M_M wrote: »

re the Tranny 2.2 , the are a very "sooty" engine internally , and can cause problems with the EGR.

Add hydrocarbons to the fuel mix, ie. Dipetane or alternative. Pays for itself anyways.

Aidan_M_M

Sir Liamalot wrote: »

Add hydrocarbons to the fuel mix, ie. Dipetane or alternative. Pays for itself anyways.

Oh I couldn't agree more.