Transit - FWD vs RWD

[abbotsmike]

Jakg said:

I should also mention that the rented van came with ESP which couldn't be defeated (press & hold, it switches off, light comes on the dash, but then about 10 secs later went away again).

And I only managed 34 MPG over 500 miles... ooops.

The ESP can only be disabled at low speeds. Switches itself back on over 20 or 30mph from memory.

Cyberprog said:

Just remember that on Dual Carriageways you've got a lower speed limit in a van - 60 vs 70. Easy for you to get a fine if you're new to driving a van and don't realise!

Somebody forgot to tell all the other van drivers! Funnily enough, a tourneo (SWB or MWB FWD transit with seats in the back) is a 'car' and thus can be driven at 70 on dual carriageways!

[Jakg]

Cyberprog said:

Just remember that on Dual Carriageways you've got a lower speed limit in a van - 60 vs 70. Easy for you to get a fine if you're new to driving a van and don't realise!

I remembered, but I soon gave up after being the slowest van on the road

[Cyberprog]

Jakg said:

I remembered, but I soon gave up after being the slowest van on the road

Aye, just remember it when you see a scamera van. Gatso's can't tell.

[grumpy52]

We now have a 63 reg lwb 2.2 ltr 3.5 ton Transit in black on long term test from Ford .Had it 12 weeks and done 22000 miles !
Did 400 plus miles in a day and what a pile of poo it is.
Underpowered (other transit is 3.2 ltr turbo)
Seats lack any thigh support.
Radio is crap(keeps drifting off radio 2) too fussy to use.
Instruments /dash too cluttered
Front is very fugly.
Not as economical as the larger engined ones we use.
A post very thick

[matrignano]

What's the rationale for offering virtually the same model van in both FWD and RWD guise?

[vanordinaire]

matrignano said:

What's the rationale for offering virtually the same model van in both FWD and RWD guise?

One is for practical everyday use, the other (the wet roundabout edition) is for Pistonheads?

[matrignano]

Of course, makes sense!

[vanordinaire]

vanordinaire said:

matrignano said:

What's the rationale for offering virtually the same model van in both FWD and RWD guise?

One is for practical everyday use, the other (the wet roundabout edition) is for Pistonheads?

And for the sensible answer, vans which are used for volume rather than weight(light haulage and works vans carrying tools etc) are better with FWD as they have better traction and lower loading height while vans expected to carry more weight(in the back) are better with RWD and the driving wheels are directly under the weight

[grumpy52]

Our rwd transits have traction control that is very hard to defeat !
I have tried !
I wish I could ,as the high power 3.2 ltr turbo would be fun.
We have to run with the eco system in use so 72mph max.
Without the eco system switched on , mucho fasto !

[abbotsmike]

vanordinaire said:

And for the sensible answer, vans which are used for volume rather than weight(light haulage and works vans carrying tools etc) are better with FWD as they have better traction and lower loading height while vans expected to carry more weight(in the back) are better with RWD and the driving wheels are directly under the weight

And the RWD have better traction for towing.

Having driven a 9 seat FWD tourneo, whilst it was fairly quick and easy to drive, the traction was poor when loaded with 9 people and stuff in the 'boot'. Accelerating from roundabouts in 3rd would spin up the inside wheel without fail, and I thought I was going to get stuck driving up a mildly steep muddy slope. Was a tarmac road leaving a country park. the RWD heavier transits had no such worries!

[philmots]

Cyberprog said:

Just remember that on Dual Carriageways you've got a lower speed limit in a van - 60 vs 70. Easy for you to get a fine if you're new to driving a van and don't realise!

And 50 on national speed limit, not 60!

[DrDeAtH]

I have a fwd transit, and honestly it's the worst van I have owned.
It's quick and fairly comfy, but try putting the power down when pulling out of a turning.... Rubbish especially in damp/wet conditions.
Front tyres don't last more than a year
Too small in the back
After 5 years ownership...
I'm off to buy a sprinter....

[BonzoG]

The biggest practical difference with our FWD vans (new shape VX Movano LWB) is that the loading step at the back is probably the lowest I've ever seen - great for manually loading/unloading or using a ramp to get stuff on. The Safe-T-Bar almost sits flush with some high kerbs!

I've hired a RWD variant of the same van and the rear step feels (though really probably isn't) a foot higher when you're lifting a heavy box off - because they have to squeeze a diff under the back. That said, the RWD van offers a slightly better turning circle for the same length because they don't have to squeeze driving gear in at the front.

DrDeAtH said:

I have a fwd transit, and honestly it's the worst van I have owned.

Our company went en-masse from Ford to Vauxhall a few years ago, and have not looked back. We'd all rather have Sprinters but they lost out because our stuff is voluminous but low-weight, and on cost.

Edited by BonzoG on Tuesday 8th April 21:37

[Jakg]

To update this thread, for the second round I stuck with "FWD Lo-Roof Transit or similar".

What I got was this...



It was st.

Problems included:
MPH speedo, but KMH instantaneous speed readout
A radio "on" button you can't reach from the drivers seat
Very uncomfortable (seat back was vertical at it's furthest back!)

On the plus side, from Heathrow to Suffolk via Central London (I thought it'd be a shortcut at 5:30PM on a Friday... I was wrong!) it averaged 40 MPG - better than my diesel daily driver!

[Jakg]

abbotsmike said:

You can't powerslide the front wheel drive one around a wet roundabout

Ended up in this the other day



Having now driven a RWD one, I wasn't terribly impressed.

It was a LWB so it still had a worse turning circle than the SWB FWD model (but was super handy when moving office - I'll never get a small van again if I move!)

High roof made it less stable at speed (ok so not a FWD vs RWD issue).

Was trying to get up a kerb from grass and only managed to dig a hole with the back wheels (unladen so not surprising!).

And it had stability control, but no button to even turn it off - so I could get a bit sideways off a roundabout but then it would just fix itself! No fun

Edited by Jakg on Thursday 7th May 08:10

[skip_1]

The stability control is accessed via the trip computer menu.

[Hooli]

DrDeAtH said:

I have a fwd transit, and honestly it's the worst van I have owned.
It's quick and fairly comfy, but try putting the power down when pulling out of a turning.... Rubbish especially in damp/wet conditions.
Front tyres don't last more than a year
Too small in the back
After 5 years ownership...
I'm off to buy a sprinter....

In about 98-2000ish I was working as a van driver & we swapped our proper RWD transit for the then new FWD ones. Worst thing they ever did, so much stter to drive & as you said they can't get out of junctions or anything.