Berlingo multispace/Peugeot Partner Tepee type MPVs - Any experience?

Amy.B_3

I personally would go for the partner teepee 1.6 hdi 110 xtr but if your budget doesn't stretch that far, the best all rounder is the berlingo multispace 1.6 90bhp vtr as it is significantly cheaper.

The berlingo in my opinion doesn't look as good as the partner, but for someone on a budget, it's briliant.

In terms of the Renault Kangoo, it's a practical and very capable family car (van) but don't expect luxury or performance as it's main strengths are in reliability and low running costs.

bigjl

Amy.B wrote: »

I personally would go for the partner teepee 1.6 hdi 110 xtr but if your budget doesn't stretch that far, the best all rounder is the berlingo multispace 1.6 90bhp vtr as it is significantly cheaper.

The berlingo in my opinion doesn't look as good as the partner, but for someone on a budget, it's briliant.

In terms of the Renault Kangoo, it's a practical and very capable family car (van) but don't expect luxury or performance as it's main strengths are in reliability and low running costs.

You are aware that the Partner/Berlingo is also based on a van not just the Kangoo.

And also that the Partner is a Berlingo? Also the 1.6HDi engine is a hand grenade with the pin pulled especially if you are buying used at around the OPs budget, new they are worth a punt if you are getting rid at 3 yrs, for example if you are on a Motability lease.

patman99

The secret to keeping the 1.6 HDi engine working as it should is regular servicing.
As for mpg, I get an average of 65mpg (mix of motorway and country driving) with branded fuels and 58 mpg on supermarket diesel.

People carp on about the 1.6HDi engine, but forget that the issues Vauxhall drivers with the 1.9 Tdi engine suffer (mainly fuel pump failure and injector problems). Fords also suffer injector issues.

It is down to how the car is looked after.

My friend is a plumber and drives a Renault Traffic. His van he just traded-in was the one with the dodgey injector issue. Strangely, niether him or his brother (or indeed any of the tradesmen I know with these vans (or the Vauxhall version)) ever had any issues with siezed injectors.

bigjl

The things with the 1.6HDi engine Patman is that it goes wrong in Fords, Citreons and Peugeots even when the vehicle is well maintained, but you are right it tends to wrong quicker in those given minimal maintenance.

The strange thing is the engine seems more reliable in Volvos for some reason, when I had my V50 I would frequent a Volvo owners forum now and again, and I noted a lack of failed 1.6d engines. One person believed that the Volvo 1.6d engines where not made in Dagenham but rather in a Volvo owned factory elsewhere, I don't know either way.

If I owned a 1.6d engined vehicle from new and subjected it to my usual maintenance routine (an extra oil change at half manufacturers interval) I suspect it would last very well.

However the world runs on evidence and statistics and that would make me very cautious indeed when considering a vehicle equipped with that engine.

The 1.4HDi lump is also problematic though the problems on that have been solved by the motor trade so that they can be fixed at sensible cost.

When running well they are both very nice Diesel engines there is no denying that.

It is interesting that you mention the 1.9 CDTi engine though. In my experience DPF issues are the biggest problem and caused hundreds of engine failures at my old work. There are still loads of the 56 and 57 plates Zafiras still being used 24/7 in London though you rarely see any 55plates.

If you consider the number of running hours as well as the mileage some of these vehicles will have in excess of 40,000 hours on them, some probably many more.

Though I never heard of any suffering injector problems, lots of limp modes that you would cure by turning off and restarting, and when that didn't work the fitters would reset the light for you. I never heard of any fuel pump failures either though perhaps that was more common on the 150 as all the ones we used where 120s (all Auto aswell).

The only other common issues where Autoboxes slipping when cold, only when you gave it the beans from cold and from memory only when going from 1st to 2nd, it felt like hitting a false neutral on a motorbike. Also there were swirl flap (valve?) problems and some EGR problems.

Interestingly these vehicles have only been run on BP fuel from new and the service interval was reduced to 3k miles or 6weeks inline with most of the fleet after repeated engine failures due to failed Regens. All parts were bought from Vauxhall and oil was in the big barrels and usually Castrol (caveat is I retired in late 2011 so that might have changed)

This would show that indeed maintenance is key to longevity.

The sample size I am talking about is not huge, I believe they had 350 initially, 55, 56, 57 and a couple of 08 plates. At least 150 have been totalled I would reckon.

They were not as reliable as the 1.8petrol Auto Astra or the Mk1 Zafira 2.0DTi (all 100bhp) Auto. The 2.0DTi had few issues but were prone to Turbo failure probably caused by being repeatedly hammered and switched off without a cool down, the fact they were so underpowered meant that even sedate progress required you to hammer them most of the time.

burlington6

I have 12 berlingo/partner 1.6 hdi's at the moment. They are by far the best van ever made ( for the money )

Pound for pound I've yet to find anything better. Got two caddys, a connect and a few kangoos.

SensibleSarah

Couple of options currently available near me for just under £2.5k each.

2007 Fiat Doblo 1.9, 88k miles and recent cam change
2005 Berlingo MS 1.9 Desire, 70k miles (one owner from new)

Think I'll try and look at/test drive both. Having never owned a diesel before - is one that has done only 70k miles in over 10 years a bit of a red flag?

Fiats are an unknown to me to be honest! Looks more boxy than the others, but like I said, the look of it is fairly near the bottom of the priority list.

bigjl

Due to the unbreakable nature of the 1.9XUD engine I would go for the diesel Berlingo.

The Doblo you mention also has a 1.9d lump which will be the same as that engine fitted to Vauxhalls/Saabs/Alfa Romeos I would suspect.

Not a bad engine but it had more reliability issues than the older XUD engine. It is a smoother engine however, though I think for your usage robustness and reliability is more important than refinement and performance.

It was not uncommon for the XUD engine to do several hundreds of thousands of miles without problems, though it may sound more agricultural than the much newer Fiat engine.

The XUD engine was designed and built with subsidies from the French government and was cutting edge technology at the time.

I would not be bothered about the low mileage to be honest, especially if it has had one owner, for a start being an old school diesel means no DPF and also a much simpler injection system.

SensibleSarah

Thanks! Really appreciate the advice.

patman99

The Doblos offer a bigger internal space. Their diesel engines are also their own design and not a GM lump.
If I remember correctly, the 1.9 lump has a reputation for being bullet-proof and reliable.

The one bad thing with them is that the rear coil spring arms hang very close to the ground and are thus very vulnerable to impact damage.

As for the PSA 1.6HDi engine being more reliable in Volvos, may be they use a different injector gasket when building the engine.

Might be worth investigating as it would cure the issue of no. 3 injector working lose and allowing extra air into the combustion chamber. This leads to the engine producing more soot and it is this that clogs the vanes of the turbo and leads to it's destruction.

bigjl

patman99 wrote: »

The Doblos offer a bigger internal space. Their diesel engines are also their own design and not a GM lump.
If I remember correctly, the 1.9 lump has a reputation for being bullet-proof and reliable.

The one bad thing with them is that the rear coil spring arms hang very close to the ground and are thus very vulnerable to impact damage.

As for the PSA 1.6HDi engine being more reliable in Volvos, may be they use a different injector gasket when building the engine.

Might be worth investigating as it would cure the issue of no. 3 injector working lose and allowing extra air into the combustion chamber. This leads to the engine producing more soot and it is this that clogs the vanes of the turbo and leads to it's destruction.

GM lump?

If by GM you are referring to the 1.9 (or indeed 1.3 diesels) they are same Fiat derived engine as fitted to various Fiats, Alfas and Saabs. Though any differences in reliability could be partly due to the differences between the figments. Do they have different injection systems, EGRs etc?

I would agree that the 1.9 is a decent engine if you are able to find a good one and can sort out the common problems, EGR, Swirl Flap and DPF related issues. The interesting thing is there are two versions, 8v and 16v. I thought for ages that the only differences where power output, 120 and 150.

This won't be the first time an identical engine has had different ancillaries fitted to it when used by another manufacturer.

Remember the Omega with the BMW 2.5 straight six diesel? It had different injection system in the Omega and was less powerful, less economical and less reliable than it was in the 525.

As far as the Volvos fitted with the 1.6lump I had thought it might be down to the different ownership demographics? And perhaps the position in the used market a Volvo tends to occupy as usually retain value better than a Ford/Pug/Citroen equivalent. Certainly when I bought my V50 similar age and mileage Focus estate where several thousands of pounds cheaper.