The Auto-Sleeper Motorhome Owners Forum (ASOF)
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Peugeot Symphony -v- Ford Duetto.

3 posters

Go down

Peugeot Symphony -v- Ford Duetto. Empty Peugeot Symphony -v- Ford Duetto.

Post by bumperman Thu Aug 04, 2011 6:17 pm

As the title really...........

Considering 94-99 Peugeot Boxer Symphonys & 94-99 Ford Duettos, which is better for wilding?


We have viewed a Duetto & quite liked it (it was a non turbo & a bit slow).

We only need 2 berth but I am 6ft 1in so need a good size bed.

We plan to do some long journeys so good engine/comfortable front seats are essential(esp. for 60 yr old bones!).

Hope to be looking over a 95 Duetto non turbo 2+2 berth this weekend.

Any tips & pointers on Duettos?
All/any comments welcome,

bumperman
bumperman
bumperman
Member
Member

Posts : 28
Joined : 2011-06-04
Location : Wiltshire, UK
Auto-Sleeper Model : 95 Duetto

Back to top Go down

Peugeot Symphony -v- Ford Duetto. Empty Re: Peugeot Symphony -v- Ford Duetto.

Post by Paulmold Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:06 pm

I answered your question on the 'wild' forum and notice Phil didn't come back with measurements as promised, he won't like you asking on here but that's another story. I can't help you more than I have already but I'm sure someone on here can give you the information you need. Good luck with your search and welcome to this forum from Paul and Carol in North Wales handshake
Paulmold
Paulmold
Donator
Donator

Male

Posts : 26686
Joined : 2011-02-21
Member Age : 73
Location : North East Wales
Auto-Sleeper Model : Sussex Duo
Vehicle Year : 2010

Back to top Go down

Peugeot Symphony -v- Ford Duetto. Empty Re: Peugeot Symphony -v- Ford Duetto.

Post by chrisvesey Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:47 pm

Hi,
The non turbo boxer is about on a par with the non turbo transit as far as being sluggish is concerned, both models are better in their more recent form. The petrol boxer that I run only returns an average of 23 mpg but diesel is dearer than petrol and petrol is exempt from the LEZ. The older transits seats were better than the boxer and you also get a flatter floor. On the boxer the passengers feet are off the floor when the seat is reversed. In the transit you have to clamber past the gearstick to get in the back twiddle_thumbs . The older transits may have rust problems on the wings and rear arches, this is repairable and transit parts are available and cheap. The boxer is approximateley 4 inches wider which means you can make the bed without all the infill cushions and sleep across the body, (you would need to try this), the transit is too narrow for this so you have to take all the infill bits which take up valuable storage space. Boxer gearboxes are not as good as transit boxes and water ingress can cause failure (usually 5th gear) and speedo problems. I would have gone for a Transit but the difference in width swung the boxer my way. Turbo Diesel Transits are a much nicer drive but can have problems with the turbo, wastegate etc. which are expensive. At the end of the day try as many as you can, write your thoughts down , make a decision, hope.
Regards,
Chris V
PS be aware of the door locks sticking on older transits, we used to say the only person who couldn't get in was the one with the key lol4
chrisvesey
chrisvesey
Donator
Donator

Male

Posts : 816
Joined : 2011-03-07
Member Age : 77
Location : Burton upon Trent
Auto-Sleeper Model : sold it
Vehicle Year : 2001

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum