1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160 
Long-term van tests often get mistaken as a freebie for
Page 48
Page 49
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
members of the technical desk (perish the thought!) but rest assured that there is a purpose to this year-long indulgence...
Ford Transit 280 SWB
• by Kevin Swallow We may not clock up as many "working" miles as an operator would, but we are able to improve the engine's performance over the 12 months it is with us, proving that things do get better with age.
So here are the bare facts. Six months in, with 15,000 miles on the clock, and the fuel efficiency of our Ford Transit 280 SWB has improved by 12.5%. When CM first tested the Transit in March with less than 2,000 miles on the clock it returned a pretty handy 32.57mpg fully loaded. Fast forward to a wet spring, followed by an equally damp summer plus 13,000 miles and the red SWB 'Tarmacers' van' has improved to a laden 37.21mpg.
CM s target of 20-30,000 miles in a year is looking to be achievable and regular runs around the Kent route are providing evidence that the engine is starting to settle down nicely.
The 99hp t6-valve Ford Duratorq 2.0-litre charge-cooled turbo-diesel engine, complete with exhaust gas recirculation and computercontrolled fuel injection, has certainly been in its element trekking up and down the country, as well as handling suburban journeys.
To put this in context our previous long-term vehicle, the Mercedes-Benz Vito, returned 38.8mpg with 30,000 miles on the dock—that same vehicle went on to win its class in last year's fuel consumption marathon.
Sure, the driveline will soon level off and start returning consistent fuel figures, but at the moment it's all positive reading. The FWD option for the Transit is very encouraging. Pick up from standing start is excellent, and tackling corners is not compromised. The rear end does feel a little light on occasion, but the, lower loading height makes it an easy vehicle to deal with when picking up or tipping.
Co date it has been serviced at a 4htly premature io,000 miles when could have left it another 5,000 les; at the same time a chipped windecn was replaced and a sticky sliding Dr was swiftly sorted out.
Dn the optional extra front, only the air-con and the electric windows have been used extensively. Cab comfort is certainly enhanced, and in proper "work" conditions the additional steel bulkhead and body side mountings would certainly come into play.
So far the only disappointment is not having a rev counter—listening for gear changes leads to over revving,
and if the driver is not paying attention it is possible to stall because of insufficient revs. The 'listen' technique now seems a little dated as many vans have improved noise insulation making the in-cab noise levels car-like.