Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Ford Transit 5 to 3 Berth swap question

Options
  • 08-03-2014 11:20pm
    #1
    JohnnyBananas
    Registered Users Posts: 306 ✭✭


    Hi All,

    I own a 1989 Ford Transit camper (5 berth).

    I find the main disadvantage is that I am unable to make quick & safe overtaking manoeuvres (similar to a car). I am also unable to drive constantly at 120 kmph on a motorway.

    I am thinking of changing to a newer 3 berth Ford Transit, equivalent in value to my existing camper.

    My question is, am I right to think that the above typical 3 berth would be capable of meeting my requirements (ie quick & safe overtaking manoeuvres similar to a car and 120 kmph on a motorway).

    All opinions on the above will be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks in advance for all responses


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    moodrater
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,638 ✭✭✭moodrater


    JohnnyBananas wrote: »
    Hi All,

    I own a 1989 Ford Transit camper (5 berth).

    I find the main disadvantage is that I am unable to make quick & safe overtaking manoeuvres (similar to a car). I am also unable to drive constantly at 120 kmph on a motorway.

    I am thinking of changing to a newer 3 berth Ford Transit, equivalent in value to my existing camper.

    My question is, am I right to think that the above typical 3 berth would be capable of meeting my requirements (ie quick & safe overtaking manoeuvres similar to a car and 120 kmph on a motorway).

    All opinions on the above will be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks in advance for all responses

    What year, what engine, what size, weight.


  • Options
    #3
    ianobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 2,756 ✭✭✭ianobrien


    OP, Transits are not known for their lightning speed so maybe look at the Ducato base. We once were rushing for a ferry in France (long story) and the 2.8JTD Ducato happly spent hours at 140 to 150kph.

    Also, transits are thirsty buggers when pushed along at those speeds. When driving if there is a gap between the throttle pedal and the floor youre doing it wrong.

    Edit - if you are looking to stay in the late '80's for base vehicles, 120kph is out for comfortable crusing as turbo diesels were not very common. The '90 Autoquest we had was comfortable at 55mph or 90kph. After all, you're on holidays so why rush?


  • Options
    #4
    650Ginge
    Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭650Ginge


    A camper is based on a van not a car. Most are nearly flat out at 120kh. You are going to have to come right up the years to something modern. The shape will matter so low profile will be better.

    Rwd Transits come with different riffs this effects the gearing and the top speed. So do some research on that too. But I don't think you will get a comfortable 120 from an 89 transit. Or any other van of that era.


  • Options
    #5
    ianobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 2,756 ✭✭✭ianobrien


    650Ginge wrote: »
    A camper is based on a van .

    Ah I think I mentioned Ducato and Transits so of course I bloody know!
    650Ginge wrote: »
    Most are nearly flat out at 120kh.

    Ah not for modern ones! As I said, we were rushing for a ferry and the '01 Besscarr was sitting at 140kph all day. It did drink over two tanks of diesel that day. The current van will cruise all day at 120 to 130kph but we've never pushed it yet.

    I did say that the older ones wont and that let the outfit cruise at whatever speed it wants. Dont forget that the base is a van and they are designed for the "white van man" who drives flat out everywhere.


  • Options
    #6
    Moomat
    Registered Users Posts: 660 ✭✭✭Moomat


    I have a swb 97 Transit, it has a double rock n roll bed and a bed in the roof suitable for 2 kids or an adult.
    I wouldn't be going anywhere near 120km/h with it. It would be capable but you'd be screwing the brains out of it. 90-100km/h is a nice speed to sit at. We did 6000kms in europe last year in it and the highest speed we reached according to the sat nav was 107km/h. Handling is fine but like any high vehicle you wouldn't be making drastic movements.
    Diesel wise keeping it at those speeds we were able to keep the average consumption a bit less than 7L/100km or 40mpg


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    moodrater
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,638 ✭✭✭moodrater


    Moomat wrote: »
    Diesel wise keeping it at those speeds we were able to keep the average consumption a bit less than 7L/100km or 40mpg

    Thats miraculous mpg for a highroof smiley!


  • Options
    #8
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The era of the white van driver is past I'm afraid. It's all digital accelerators, sixth gear, traction control and drive train protection these days. :rolleyes:
    I haven't been able to powerslide a van since the legendary VW LT35.


  • Options
    #9
    650Ginge
    Registered Users Posts: 900 ✭✭✭650Ginge


    moodrater wrote: »
    Thats miraculous mpg for a highroof smiley!

    No that's what they do. I had an 1990 high top, 2.5di, flat out at 55mph, never did less than 40mpg.

    I would love to get near that now.


  • Options
    #10
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    ....and cup holders..


  • Options
    #11
    Moomat
    Registered Users Posts: 660 ✭✭✭Moomat


    moodrater wrote: »
    Thats miraculous mpg for a highroof smiley!

    Considering we went through most of the Pyrennese and the Alps it probably is.. Must of been that stop off and blessing we got in Lourdes ;)

    Because we were going on such varied roads I had budgeted 12L/100km for the trip so we came in way under budget which was nice.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Nekarsulm
    Registered Users Posts: 11,191 ✭✭✭✭Nekarsulm


    Sir Liamalot wrote: »
    I haven't been able to powerslide a van since the legendary VW LT35.


    Was that on a wet oily road? or was it snowing?:D:D:D


  • Options
    #13
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    650Ginge wrote: »
    A camper is based on a van not a car. Most are nearly flat out at 120kh. You are going to have to come right up the years to something modern. The shape will matter so low profile will be better.

    Rwd Transits come with different riffs this effects the gearing and the top speed. So do some research on that too. But I don't think you will get a comfortable 120 from an 89 transit. Or any other van of that era.

    the last Transit I had (before my current mk2) was a new (2008?) van with a freezer unit. It was quite happy at 80 mph all the way to London and could touch 100mph with ease if asked. A coachbuilt camper would of course be a good bit slower. (Even my mk2 will top the motorway limit if I can afford the petrol)


  • Options
    #14
    niloc1951
    Registered Users Posts: 2,035 ✭✭✭niloc1951


    Just looked in on this thread :eek::eek::eek::eek:

    120 Kph is plain crazy in a vehicle probably at, close to or over its DGVW and top heavy compared to a delivery van which would have all its load on the floor.
    An attempted emergency stop, a need to swerve, or God forbid a burst tyre at such a speed will only end in death and disaster.

    Why the need for such speed in the first instance. Motorcaravanning is supposed to be a leisure activity. I know there may be exceptions to make a ferry, but otherwise :confused::confused:


  • Options
    #15
    corktina
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    fully loaded and top heavy?...a camper? It's mostly fibreglass and empty space.


  • Options
    #16
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Nekarsulm wrote: »
    Was that on a wet oily road? or was it snowing?:D:D:D
    Learned how to do it in the packed snow on near bald tyres. Once I had the technique then it was easy enough turn corners at right angles in the wet or any bitta gravel.
    You know you're doing it right when you have to look out the driver window to steer.


  • Options
    #17
    ianobrien
    Registered Users Posts: 2,756 ✭✭✭ianobrien


    Edit - Decided not to feed the troll


  • Options
    #18
    niloc1951
    Registered Users Posts: 2,035 ✭✭✭niloc1951


    corktina wrote: »
    fully loaded and top heavy?...a camper? It's mostly fibreglass and empty space.
    Lockers, cupboards, seating, cooker, fridge, tv, microwave, gas bottles, batteries, pots pans & crockery, bedding, food, clothing, bikes, camping gear, water in tanks, all the 'must have' junk, plus all the other stuff which often puts many campers overweight.
    How empty is that??


Advertisement