• A van more suited to the town, rather than
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
the motorway, is the overall impression of our Renault Trafic long-term test van, which has been with us for just over 23,000km (14,300 miles). Because of the high interior noise levels, the low gearing, and the poor seating position, most of our staff would rather drive the van for short distances at low speeds where the van's good points show.
We have calculated the fuel consumption from the end of the running-in period, and over 22,0571crn (13,706 miles) the overall average fuel consumption has been 11.63 litres/100Icm (24.3mpg). Considering the white monster has been only partly laden (at best) during its stay, this does not represent the zenith of light van economy with a small diesel engine.
Some might even say this was the nadir of fuel economy, but these laurels must go to the petrol-engined Trafic that could manage only 16.14 litres/100km (17.5mpg) when we tested it last year (CM 3-9 September 1987).
When we originally tested the diesel Trafic earlier this year (CM 7-13 April 1988) inclement weather did not allow us to get an unladen fuel consumption figure. The laden figure, however, was 12.37 litres/100km (22.83mpg).
Our long-term overall figure is better, but we expected more, considering the light duties of the van.
MIRACLE
Our major surprise of the test has been the "serviced plugs and adjustments to carburettors" carried out by Wilsons of Epsom, Surrey.
When we enquired about this magnificent feat of engineering on our dieselpowered van the company replied that it was "a miracle". Miracle it may have been, but the uniqueness of the event did not prevent Wilsons from billing us — 213 (ex-VAT). Miracles, it seems, come cheap these days.
We have recovered the money, although there was some delay. Subsequent visits to Wilsons have been altogether less mystical affairs. The second service to the van at 16,090km (10,000 miles) was completed in record time, and with pleasant service. Our only complaint is that at most dealers one never talks to the people actually performing the service, only to a misinformed, inexperienced, clothes-horse at the reception desk.
The resultant frustrating chaos must lead to a general increase in the blood pressure of members of the public so inflicted. Dealers beware, coronary victims in the reception area generally have a bad effect on trade.
The cost of the first service was 281.30 ex-VAT and, when we received a refund for the impossible plugs and carburettor service, this sank to a more reasonable 268.31 plus VAT. The second service cost 2133.97 ex-VAT, although this included 235.55 ex-VAT and fitting for a new driver's door mirror, removed by an errant tanker on a narrow road. The service also included the mending of a split engine breather pipe. The split might have accounted for the heavy oil consumption we had experienced.
Most complaints about the van have concerned the quality of the gearchange. It is noticeable that these have come in the main from the more inexperienced drivers in the office. It seems that if you stop to think about where the gear lever should be, the troubles start. An instinctive approach allows the best qualities of the box to shine through. In particular these are the lightness of the change, the short throws and the almost unbeatable synchromesh.
POOR FIT
The second most mentioned item is the extremely poor fit of the doors. The driver's door has very low-mounted hinges, which allow the top of the frame to flap about at speed.
When combined with the booming body, the resultant air flow is almost like a bracing day at Skegness, although we doubt whether Skegness can provide the aches and pains that the Renault's draughts have given our testers.
The rear door has not improved since our original test. Despite Wilson's sterling efforts, the nearside rear door still needs to be closed with both hand and foot to effect a perfect locking. If this is not done, it flaps around and can open unexpectedly.
Many of the drivers have also mentioned the poor seating position, with the pedals offset to the left of the driver. Other complaints have included: the poorly-illuminated controls; the lack of bulkhead, which ensures high in-cab noise levels; and the slightly uncertain brakes, which allow an element of doubt to creep in during the stopping process.
Apart from the moans, there are several excellent points about the Trafic which should not pass without comment. Most drivers have commented about the light and responsive steering. The steering is so direct that it takes a bit of getting used to. Once mastered, the steering can be used to great effect in crowded streets, and tight corners. The low load height we mentioned in the original test, but it has come into its own when the van has been used for moving house. All other vans seem hard work to load after the Renault.
While it is not the most economical unit in the world, the engine is very flexible and, when combined with the van's low and close ratio gears, it is ideally suited for town driving. The van will zoom around town in fourth or fifth gear, which makes for relaxed driving. It is only at prolonged high speeds that the gears seem rather short and the engine gets a little breathless.
QUESTIONS
When we took on the test van early this year, there were several questions about Renault's reliability: things we wanted to investigate. The Trafic has never let us down, even in the most adverse conditions. The engine always bursts happily into life after the pre-heat in the morning, and the van has so far been completely dependable.
It is, however, tiring to drive on a long run, and many people feel that the deletion of the high roof would make a massive improvement to the van's performance and noise levels.
Not only that, but it would also make the van a lot easier to clean — but then we can't have everything.
CI by Andrew English