Ford Transit review

Post Reply
User avatar
Jobbo
Posts: 9391
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:20 pm
Currently Driving: S6 Avant, Jimny, Macan, Mini

Ford Transit review

Post by Jobbo »

I had to help move my dad down to Hampshire on Friday. After having a Citroen Relay a couple of months ago - viewtopic.php?p=202607 - I thought I'd try to find a place which would hire me a Transit to compare. Thrifty obliged:

Image

To be honest I think Enterprise have Transits too but Thrifty's hire costs were way less this time. Weirdly Enterprise wanted £350 or so to hire it from Thursday evening until Saturday morning, or about £200 from Thursday evening until Monday morning. Thrifty were £190 for the shorter hire and I had no great desire to have a van blocking the drive for two extra days and then get up early on Monday to return it before work. Turned out Thrifty's depot is closer too. I'll use them in future.

I booked a big van just in case we needed the space; turned out that we did because my dad's request to help him move a bed and a desk turned out to be moving a sofa as well, plus all his other furniture and possessions from his second home down to his main home in Hampshire. And that was the point at which I realised the unexpected feature of this particular Transit was a bit of a hindrance:

Image
Image

Yes, it has 4wd. Which means a higher floor and quite a bit less space than the Citroen Relay I had last time, as well as being more awkward to load. Damn. I also fell out of it once because I was stepping backwards and about 6" higher than I thought, plus I twisted my ankle stepping down from the back. Looking at other high-roof Transits on the road on Friday I realised that it was probably not far off a standard Transit in cargo size but at least had a couple of extra inches' interior height over a standard one so I didn't need to stoop when standing in the back. But if you do hire one, watch out for this version not being as accommodating as you'd expect.

Anyway, this is supposed to be a review. What's it like? Way, way nicer than the Citroen to drive, very easy and intuitive controls for things like the lights, stereo, phone pairing etc - a Ford trait which I appreciated. But it was incredibly sparsely equipped: no auto lights or wipers, no proper screen on the stereo so no Carplay nor built-in sat nav (had to prop my phone in the cupholder on the dash for Google Maps to get the traffic, which saved me a 20 minute delay that my dad encountered), no parking sensors even on the rear, no heated screen (it was frosty on Friday morning at 6.30am so I had to wait for it to warm up because I couldn't reach to scrape the ice off). It did have air-con, central locking and electric windows, but realistically I think you need a screen for Carplay/Android Auto and rear parking sensors in a hire van. I'd also have liked cruise control when sitting on the M40. Being 4wd it did have a couple of traction related modes but I didn't try them.

To drive though it was great fun. The dash-mounted gearshift was sufficiently enjoyable that I changed gear for the pleasure of it, not just because I had to. It didn't roll excessively, damping was pretty darned good both empty and laden, it was plenty quick enough - again, even laden when it would maintain speed happily in 6th up hills and even accelerate pretty smartly from 65-85mph without changing down on the flat. If you have to drive a van for work then I'd definitely want one of these, with a few options, over the Citroen.

The two negatives are related: refinement at higher speed isn't as good as you might hope because 6th gear is too low (about 2,600rpm at 70mph - I did try to change into 7th at one point in case they'd simply missed it off the logo on the gearknob but no, it only has 6 forward gears). And economy isn't great when sitting at 70-75mph; overall I did 30.4mpg according to the computer across 320 miles which included quite a lot of non-motorway. A higher top gear ratio would improve both refinement and economy.

Overall, Transit = good, still the standard against which to judge others I'd say. I had fund chucking it round some roundabouts on the way to drop it off yesterday morning. Oh, and you may have heard about a design flaw in the dash storage which breaks mobile phones - well, they've tried to solve it with a label. See for yourself - idiotic:

Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
Jobbo
Posts: 9391
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:20 pm
Currently Driving: S6 Avant, Jimny, Macan, Mini

Re: Ford Transit review

Post by Jobbo »

Oh, and it didn't have electric mirrors so I had to slide across three or four times to adust the passenger side mirror manually. But the lower blind-spot mirrors are massively better than the Citroen's pathetic versions, and the mirrors overall are way better located so passengers don't block your view.
User avatar
Gavin
Posts: 1840
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:27 pm
Currently Driving: Skoda Superb, R56 Cooper S

Re: Ford Transit review

Post by Gavin »

I hired a similar one last year but it came in Stealth grey metallic with no "enterprise" logo and it was not 4WD.

I drove it from Galshiels to Hull on day 1, loaded up then back up the road to Aberdeen, unload then back to Gala on day 2. I was really impressed with the refinement and I think it did have a camera but I am not completely sure. I was so inspirec by vanlife that I bought a McDonlads on my way back South but didn't risk the drivethrough! Compared to the Mercedes Sprinter lutons I drove as a removal man back around 2004 or so, it was much nicer.
User avatar
scotta
Posts: 3060
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:28 pm

Re: Ford Transit review

Post by scotta »

These have the 2.0 engine with the wet belt. I wouldn’t touch a wet belt engined vehicle with a shitty barge pole.
User avatar
Mito Man
Posts: 9944
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: Ford Transit review

Post by Mito Man »

The US Transits have the 3.5 Ecoboost which must be hilarious
How about not having a sig at all?
User avatar
Jobbo
Posts: 9391
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:20 pm
Currently Driving: S6 Avant, Jimny, Macan, Mini

Re: Ford Transit review

Post by Jobbo »

scotta wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2024 7:04 pm These have the 2.0 engine with the wet belt. I wouldn’t touch a wet belt engined vehicle with a shitty barge pole.
I thought that was probably the case. Fine for a hire vehicle though.
User avatar
John
Posts: 1188
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:31 pm

Re: Ford Transit review

Post by John »

Jobbo wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2024 10:27 pm
scotta wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2024 7:04 pm These have the 2.0 engine with the wet belt. I wouldn’t touch a wet belt engined vehicle with a shitty barge pole.
I thought that was probably the case. Fine for a hire vehicle though.
It's a shocking engine, they eat injectors for fun too.
User avatar
scotta
Posts: 3060
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:28 pm

Re: Ford Transit review

Post by scotta »

Jobbo wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2024 10:27 pm
scotta wrote: Sun Apr 28, 2024 7:04 pm These have the 2.0 engine with the wet belt. I wouldn’t touch a wet belt engined vehicle with a shitty barge pole.
I thought that was probably the case. Fine for a hire vehicle though.
Agreed or leased within warranty. Total Engine failure does tend to ruin the day a bit though. Especially when it leaves you stranded. I feel a thread coming on...
User avatar
mik
Posts: 11867
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: Ford Transit review

Post by mik »

All this talk of wet belts & bargepoles sounds like a mucky movie.... :?
User avatar
DeskJockey
Posts: 4752
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 8:58 am

Re: Ford Transit review

Post by DeskJockey »

scotta wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2024 9:21 am I feel a thread coming on...
Isn't that the problem with the wet belt system in the first place?
---
Driving a Galaxy far far away
Post Reply