whats the best cheap mid-to-large van out there?

[Dez]

I want to build something a bit off the wall as a campervan/'shop hack/ billboard for my work, but that is actually really useful to me. ive been feeling the need for a campervan again recently and something like the following could fit the bill......

I was thinking of a swb low roof mk4/5 transit and chanelling it a furkload, then messing around with the hubs to get some better wheels tucked up in there. leave it plain white, black wheels, just totally on the deck with a nice interior in the back to sleep in and make a brew in the morning, etc.

I thought transit as-
1. they're available everywhere for peanuts
2. they're incredibly, stupidly simple.
3.parts for them are super cheap
4. massive parts interchangability
5. I have experience working on them.

but, is using a transit a curse word idea, and should I be looking at a different base vehicle? I don't know much about vans, except a hate reno masters as they break loads and are overly complicated for what they do, and everything for sprinters is expensive.

any pointers much appreciated!

[grasser26]

Hi-I've a 1996 transit semi high roof lwb van-if you need a work/camper van then you'd probably need something lwb.Use the back part after the inner wheel arches(to the doors) as working space and the rest as a camper.My shr is less than 6' high inside,it can be tiring if you are standing in the back for long.The lwb is about 10' long inside.Transit's are good as you say due to their simplicity,I think the newer-post 2000 type suffer with the same dual mass flywheel/clutch trouble as the mondeos.The older type like mine have rust issues-wheelarches and sills etc.If you look on ebay for rally service vans or motorsport support vans you might get ideas.If you do get a van that hasn't been pannelled inside,use insulation foam between it and the panelling-keeps cold and drips to a minimum.Also if you can get one with the bosch pump you could run it on biodiesel.Or vegetable oil if you can get it cheap enough.

[Dez]

I'm not concerned about it being less than a certain height/size inside- the previous campers ive had have been splitscreen VWs so I'm used to 'small' interiors!! i just want it to be large than an estate car really, don't need to be able to stand up in it or anything.

by work van i mean something i can put a tarp/carpet down and sling some wheels or scrapyard fodder bits in there, i wont be using it full time, just if ive got a van ile want to be able to more large items in it now and then.

i know the ones I'm looking at are prone to rust- ive done more than a few sets of arches and front wings on em myself!
theres definately still good ones out there though, its just they're getting harder to find.

[popuptoaster]

Cant think of any reason not to use a transit, although i guess that depends on your plans for it, if you want one with some go in it they did make some petrol ones with the same twincam lump in that i'm fitting in my mk2 or the 2.9 V6 version, i dunno if they are low compression but even if they are its not hard to swop to a car engine, they don't have the scene tax VW or japanese vans have on them, although mk1's and 2's are dearer these days.

[dungbug]

Transit's are a great choice for the reasons you've mentioned, cheap, repairs are cheap/easy, readily available. VW's are pricey by comparison as are the J vans....& you've already answered the case of the Renault. If you're thinking of using it as an 'advert' for your business maybe pick up a transit ambulance.....You'll get noticed.

[ruishy1]

the transits are slow as death with the 2.5 NA diesel, i would only buy another if it was turbo !

[rob0r]

Transits get my vote. We had a '88 LWB transit that drives like it's brand new, a real pleasure to drive. That really could swallow anything too...

[composimmonite]

One van I'd say avoid is an LDV despite being cheap. I had one and not a patch on the previous Transit it replaced.
Anyway Transit gets my vote. Don't automatically dismiss petrol versions as an LPG conversion is easy to do on the good old Pinto.

Paul H

[mattblack]

AFAIK Mk4/5 Transits don't have a seperate chassis, so channeling it could be a problem...

[Rob M]

Back in 2004 I went out and bought a1991 Renault Trafic LWB Hightop to move as much of my home as possible from Norfolk to Mallorca. It had done over 150,000mils was solid and utterly bullet proof. It wasnt fast but i drove that baby, loaded to the roof and every gap filled, 3 up, with my foot to the floor all the way from the Port of Caan in France to the Port of Barcelona. It did not miss a beat. Three weeks after moving to Mallorca some cockspanner t boned us on a junction and wrote her off. Gutted was an understatement.
The point? I think they are far superior to Transits ( Ive had many from new on BT ) they have the internal dimensions born to be converted to a camper, workshop or a combination of both, the engines are tough and durable and spares are not the nightmare that people assume them to be as they made plenty of them and loads ended up over here.
As an all rounder its no contest.
Oh, MK2 Fiesta Ghia seats easily fit too...

[conrad]

transit transit transit... always a transit. You'll always get parts for them, cheap, tough, crude, they work.

[Dez]

dungbung-
thats what I'm thinking, theres no 'scene tax' on transits. i mean, a t25 is gunna cost a grand when a transit thats a bit bigger and does the job better, is more powerful and has better economy is half the price?! good job theres no such thing as 'traveller-tax', lol!

ruishy-
speed is all about gearing in relation to torque. as id be changing the wheels/tyres id have to change the rear axle too, so that can easily be corrected. turbo models are no more than n/a versions really though so id plump for one anyway.

rob, is that the old blue one on the farm?

compo- yeah i know about LDVs, its a joke how technologically un-advanced they are. beam axle on leafs on 2000's models!! theyve always had a rep for being pretty curse word tbh.


mattblack-
a integral chassis doesnt mean you cant 'channel' it. i believe the septic minitruck yoof call it 'bodydropping'
transits are so basic they essentially do have a seperate ladder chassis- its just welded to the floor!

zeb- you wont convince me, 2 of the guys on site have them, and theyve been nothing but headaches. the 2.2 was ok but underpowered, and was prone to bits randomly falling off every week (doors, exhaust, PAS pump, lights- yes really!) even with relatively light use moving new furniture. the 2.8 was a pita, the cambelt went 40k before it was due and it would have been cheaper to go buy another van with what the bill for parts alone came to!!


so i recon, that i will be needing a 2.5 turbo swb low roof mk4 or mk5 that isnt ballbagged should do the job.

[popuptoaster]

Wheel choice is a bit limited for transits, but I think mk2 and mk3/4/5 hubs are similar if not the same, I havent investigated properly yet but looking at my front ones, the face that has the wheel studs on it looks like its bolted onto the hub, and the bolts that hold it on measure up the same as Granny/Merc wheels.

I am working on the theory that I can unbolt the adapter bit and either fits some studs in the bolt holes, or use wheel bolts, and either get the rear axle redrilled or fit a yank Ford car rear axle with the same stud pattern and a higher geared diff.




Actually, now i've just written that down and thought about it, if those bolt holes are exactly the right stud pattern, and i can take that plate off the front there is a nother way to sort out the rears.

if i were to knock the studs out of the adapter plate and fit them through the bolt holes, i should be able to fit the adapter plate on the back of the van, giving me the same smaller stud pattern front and rear, with no drilling or measuring required.

any holes in this theory?

[conrad]

i don't know about that^^^^

but you could just use adapters... the vw scene's best friend... apart from the grinder that is. there's a few transits about using adapters

[conrad]

p.s. traveller tax was mentioned... there's a reason they use them, they like things that work, can be fixed in a field, and can make them money without costing loads in the first place

[Ads 19]

Transits can be good, and if your starting from ground up rust wont be such an issue.

i think the pre 90 transits mk3s can be lowered easier as leaf sprung, but handling is more dubious.

I'd avoid the 3tonne vans unless you need the weight abilty as wheels wont be as common as the 5 stud wheels.

if your after a low roof you'll almost certainly get a 5 studded one anyway. generally the petrol ones seem to be better looked after, plus as already mentioned the na di is very slow. 50 on flat little bit more downhill make sure you blank of egr as it will some like a paddle steamer.

Ambulances should really only be considered as a donor van, as the fiberglass body causes issue with the rear chassis as it for some reason rots out the top of it, and only solution is to remove the body, which is bonded onto the cab section. but it will give up a nice v6 with normally a autobox on it. i have a mk3 donor on the farm atm. 5th one i've had from surrey ambulance service.

I've only put wheels on the latter transit 5 studs, but they are 5x 160mm.

i think the newer shape mk7s are a smaller pcd, possibly 5x 130 as i've seen some on cayenne wheels.

there are probably still some old wellers around somewhere.

tbh if i was after a cool van the only answer has to be a bedford CF. (mine)

[popuptoaster]

I wated a CF, but they are harder to find and cost more than the equivelant Transit van, plus its harder to find parts for them, not impossible by any means, but defiately not as widely supported as the Transits, CF is better looking though (well the mk1 anyway, not keen on the face lift) i guess thats why they cost more.

[joe90]

Jun 19, 2010 6:39:19 GMT ruishy1 said:

the transits are slow as death with the 2.5 NA diesel, I would only buy another if it was turbo !

Turbo mk5's are costly to repair, fly by wire accelerator and expensive for pumps, it was cheaper to supply a fit non turbo engine than it was to supply a fit a turbo pump.
As for speed they may take a bit more getting going but my last half dozen or so mk4/5's have all been good for 80mph, but i had blanked off the air recirculation from the exhaust to the inlet manifold.

Bryan

[rob0r]

Jun 19, 2010 13:49:19 GMT Dez said:

rob, is that the old blue one on the farm?

That's the one, heavy duty I think since it has doubled up wheels at the back. Drives amazingly and it's a non turbo but not that slow, but the bodywork hasn't held up. It failed its MOT on brake pipes that's the story ever since! We also have a MK2 transit in the same shape, neither of them available though. They get my recommendation though!

[surprisingskoda]

I've driven / worked on a few.
The Mercedes vans (Vito or sprinter) are well specced and fast, but expensive and can suffer electrically.
The transits as mentioned are generally either rusty or problematic - newer 2.0 diesels especially. The dual mass flywheels can be converted to single but thats not the only mechanical failure they are prone to. Brakes seem common too.
The Fiat Ducato is a very good van with few problems save perhaps an appetite for light bulbs, but the Vauxhall big vans don't seem to survive as well.
VW vans as mentioned already are overly expensive, although a bit more reliable and rust-free than a similar age transit. If you're looking at older vans, ie early-mid 90s kind of age, a VW Transporter will be much superior to a Ford Transit.
Not much more to add except that everything from France should be avoided.