Carthago 5.5t on Ducato 180 bhp struggle to go uphill (2 Viewers)

[optimus-prime]

Hi forum, freshly subscribed member, but long time reader. I am new to motor-homing, coming from caravanning, and as the title suggests, I had some issues going uphill with my new Carthago quite heavy motorhome. Hence, I'm looking for your experiences to understand if this is how it should be, or I should pay a visit to a Fiat dealer.

Setup: Carthago liner-for-two model 2023, fully loaded at 5500 kg, Fiat Ducato 2.2l 132 kW (177 bhp), automatic gear box, alko tag axle chassis. Everything runs as expected on highways and flat roads, but I have just returned from a trip in Tyrol, Austria, where currently the Arlberg tunnel is closed and traffic is directed over the Arlberg pass (1800m height) which according to google has a maximum gradient of 13%. In both ways, the ascent starts with a straight segment slightly inclined. In both ways, my motorhome could not drive faster than 30-35 km/h (18-21 mph). Acceleration was on the floor, auto gearbox changed to the third gear (out of 8), and this was the max speed. Needless to describe the queue behind me.... after manually forcing the gearbox on the 2nd gear, I was able to drive 5 kmh faster, but the engine was obviously very loud. Unfortunatelly because of the stressful situation, I did not think to check the rpm of the engine... I was just listening to it, and it felt to me as it was over revved.
To cut the long story short, how fast do the funsters drive in mountain areas (straight road, not curves) with similarly heavy motorhomes? In about 3 weeks I'm planning to start driving towards Norway, and I'm pretty sure there will be more inclined roads over there.

 

[ontheroadagain]

How many miles have you done?
I don't know about the 2.2L but the 2.3L engine is quite "tight" until you have done at least 5000 to 10,000 miles.

 

[dunnah01]

It’s clearly not working for the OP though!

This almost comes back to the debate on the other thread, auto vs manual. IMHO, I want to be picking the gear and not the box on tricky inclines. The OP suggests he was trying to accelerate up a steep incline.. a small engine, however much torque it delivers, will always struggle pulling 5.5T up big and steep inclines.

These vehicles with larger weights (not 3.5T) are not car like with these small displacement engines and need driving specifically up and downhill.

The torque don't lie . With 9 gears to flick through it shouldn't struggle, it may have to drop a cog or two but it will always be nearer the optimum torque than an left foot clogger

 

[Lenny HB]

How many miles have you done?
I don't know about the 2.2L but the 2.3L engine is quite "tight" until you have done at least 5000 to 10,000 miles.

My last couple of 2.3's were like that the 2.2 I've only had a few weeks only done 1200 mile it's gone like a rocket from the start.

 

[Basildog]

My last van was 4.5t with the 2.3, 150hp with Comformatic box that had no problem with mountain roads.
The 2.2 180hp engine is far superior with power delivery should easily be able to cope.

They are all complete rubbish compared to the older 3.0 litre lumps .
I have had all 3 of them now the 2.2 , 2.3 both supposedly 180 but they aren’t a patch on the older 3.0 litre that was 160 .
Even in our 3.5 tonne van its foot flat to the floor

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Guigsy]

They are all complete rubbish compared to the older 3.0 litre lumps .
I have had all 3 of them now the 2.2 , 2.3 both supposedly 180 but they aren’t a patch on the older 3.0 litre that was 160 .
Even in our 3.5 tonne van its foot flat to the floor

I wonder how much of that is just the programmed throttle pedal response rather than the capability of the engine? Manufacturers can get quite significant fuel economy gains just by dulling the input when you put your foot down. The power is still there. Just you have to plant your foot and hold it for a second for it to kick in.

 

[TinaLes]

I have never had one, but I guess 3+ ltr V6 turbo, married to the correct gearbox & twin RWD, would take a lot a beating, less stress, less sensors & dpf/egr maybe.
Its all about reaching the lower emission's target, yet if they don't get us on The ULEZ, they will still get us on the congestion charge all too often.
LES

 

[Bessy765]

Ours is a 2019 Burstner A Class, 2.3 150hp comformatic running at close to 4500kgs. 27550 miles. Pollock hill going steady will do it in 4th till near the top then third. We found much better performance after fitting a K & N air filter. Just a silly suggestion can you try removing the air filter element to ensure a good air flow just to rule out a dodgy filter. Cost nothing but ten mins kick in the **** if thats all it is.

 

[tonyidle]

If the same engine is mated to a 6 speed manual, it isn't going to be any better on the hills.

Mine? It doesn't need to be any better! I certainly would not want a manual.

 

[maison]

It may be worth checking hose connections to the Turbo unit.

My neighbour, with a Ford Transit based vehicle, had a similar symptom. It was simply a detached hose to the Turbo causing the problem.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Fulham Dave]

We are 5700kg and tow a trailer and scooter, 6150kg in total.

We are 2020, 2.2l with 6 speed Comformatic gearbox, so slightly older and less gears than you. We have travelled over 40,000 miles, through 16 countries in the past 4 years, so up and down many hills, but not sure of the exact gradients.

As someone mentioned earlier, we normally accelerate into the hill, so slightly above speed limit, and whilst it does lose acceleration (as you would expect as it is dragging a lot of weight) from memory, it has never gone to less than 60kph and only rarely gone below 4th gear, maybe twice or 3 times.

If I were you, I would certainly get it tested, if only for peace of mind

 

[Pausim]

We are 2020, 2.2l with 6 speed Comformatic gearbox

Yours is likely to be the older 2.3l Fiat engine. I don’t think the new 2.2l Fiat engine was mated to the Comfortmatic or introduced until Series 8 or 9.

 

[CazPaul]

They are all complete rubbish compared to the older 3.0 litre lumps .
I have had all 3 of them now the 2.2 , 2.3 both supposedly 180 but they aren’t a patch on the older 3.0 litre that was 160 .
Even in our 3.5 tonne van its foot flat to the floor

Yes I fully agree the old 3 litre so much better.

 

[WESTY66]

They are all complete rubbish compared to the older 3.0 litre lumps .
I have had all 3 of them now the 2.2 , 2.3 both supposedly 180 but they aren’t a patch on the older 3.0 litre that was 160 .
Even in our 3.5 tonne van its foot flat to the floor

Yes I fully agree the old 3 litre so much better.

I know it’s no use to the op but fully agree with the above, mines similar HP and slightly less KW than the op with the comfortmatic, but flew round and up and down the alps with zero problems, so like others have suggested I’d take it to be checked out for sure

3.0L comfortmatic rools

There ain’t no substitute for Cubic Centimetres

 

[Pausim]

I thought torque was more important than BHP when it comes to hills.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[DBK]

I thought torque was more important than BHP when it comes to hills.

It's only torque at the wheels which counts and this is increased by changing to a lower gear. BHP is calculated from torque multiplied by rpm. This means for the same BHP a high revving engine will have lower torque at the crankshaft but this will generate the same torque at the wheels as a lower revving engine with higher torque at the crank shaft.

 

[bigtwin]

I thought torque was more important than BHP when it comes to hills.

It is.

Ian

 

[dunnah01]

Yes I fully agree the old 3 litre so much better.

The old 3.0l 160bhp holds the full torque (410Nm) from about 1500-2500 rpm compared to the newer 2.2 auto which holds more torque (450Nm) but only from 1500-1750rpm. The manual 180bhp only has 380Nm of torque at best so not even a contender. Both auto and manual 2.2 180bhp still hold good torque but the driveability and feel suffer.
That's why the 3.0l rules, especially in Comfortmatic form

 

[Guigsy]

The old 3.0l 160bhp holds the full torque (410Nm) from about 1500-2500 rpm compared to the newer 2.2 auto which holds more torque (450Nm) but only from 1500-1750rpm. The manual 180bhp only has 380Nm of torque at best so not even a contender. Both auto and manual 2.2 180bhp still hold good torque but the driveability and feel suffer.
That's why the 3.0l rules, especially in Comfortmatic form

So how long does the new 180bhp hold above the old threshold of 410Nm? It'll be a wider band than just 250rpm. And with 50% more gears with a 9 speed, how much of the range from 0 to 60 mph can it hold 410Nm? I suspect the old 3 litre won't look as impressive.

 

[MichaelT]

So how long does the new 180bhp hold above the old threshold of 410Nm? It'll be a wider band than just 250rpm. And with 50% more gears with a 9 speed, how much of the range from 0 to 60 mph can it hold 410Nm? I suspect the old 3 litre won't look as impressive.

I feel we need a drag race to prove which is the best

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[WESTY66]

I feel we need a drag race to prove which is the best

I’ll hook a strop round uncle Lenny’s axle and pull him round Newbury showground

 

[Ridgeway]

I feel we need a drag race to prove which is the best

Up Hardknott pass

 

[dunnah01]

So how long does the new 180bhp hold above the old threshold of 410Nm? It'll be a wider band than just 250rpm. And with 50% more gears with a 9 speed, how much of the range from 0 to 60 mph can it hold 410Nm? I suspect the old 3 litre won't look as impressive.

The band for +400Nm torque is about the same but the new auto is changing gear 3 times whilst the old 3.0 is pulling along in the same old gear. The new box will probably be faster on paper but the old 3.0 will feel more manly

 

[WESTY66]

So how long does the new 180bhp hold above the old threshold of 410Nm? It'll be a wider band than just 250rpm. And with 50% more gears with a 9 speed, how much of the range from 0 to 60 mph can it hold 410Nm? I suspect the old 3 litre won't look as impressive.

I don’t think it would be the motor letting it down, more like the fewer ratios available! (The 9 speed isn’t available with the 3.0L) I think you could only compare like for like if they were both coupled up to either a 6 speed comfortmatic or the 9 speed ZF, that would be a true test

 

[Landy Andy]

I feel there is a big difference in what is written/stated, and what is reality, in this modern world of making results match the wanted outcome.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Guigsy]

The band for +400Nm torque is about the same but the new auto is changing gear 3 times whilst the old 3.0 is pulling along in the same old gear. The new box will probably be faster on paper but the old 3.0 will feel more manly

I bet the 9 speed is 3 times quicker than manually shuffling cogs. And 6 times faster than the Comfortmatic.

 

[Richard n Ann]

My van is a 2.2 puma engined 130bhp 3.5t. It goes up motorway hills in top gear easily and even in the pyranees I've never changed down lower than 4th.
It must be mapped to deliver plenty of torque, bhp isn't important

 

[WESTY66]

I suspect the old 3 litre won't look as impressive.

I bet the 9 speed is 3 times quicker than manually shuffling cogs. And 6 times faster than the Comfortmatic.

It may well be, I don’t think anyone is disputing that, BUT……

What’s that got to do with the 3.0L??

 

[dunnah01]

I bet the 9 speed is 3 times quicker than manually shuffling cogs. And 6 times faster than the Comfortmatic.

Good job the old clunkers, either manual or robotic, don't have to change very often to make respectable progress then

 

[CazPaul]

Weight does make a massive difference, we had a 4 tonne Hymer with Merc 2.7 156bhp it flew up hills, we had the same engine on a 6 tonne Hymer it was embarrassing going on anything but flat or downhill.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Lenny HB]

I don’t think it would be the motor letting it down, more like the fewer ratios available! (The 9 speed isn’t available with the 3.0L) I think you could only compare like for like if they were both coupled up to either a 6 speed comfortmatic or the 9 speed ZF, that would be a true test

Not really rellavant as it's the final result that counts.
The 2.2, 180 is so much smoother and resposive to drive I reckon it will leave the 3 Lt in the dust.