Fleet Transport June 2020

52 | GROUP TEST
levels of the engines pleasing the test drivers the most in the urban
environment, although the Transporter didn’t lag far behind.
Transporter’s controls were rated most efficient in urban
driving with Proace’s systems receiving the thumbs down.
Indoor noise levels during city driving was found to be most
pleasant in Transit Custom with the Trafic likewise perceived to
be quietest.
The Transit Custom recorded the lowest average fuel consumption
in urban driving, returning 7.47 l/100 km, with the Trafic coming in
second with a reading of 7.63 l/100 km. The average consumption
of Proace in city driving was 7.78 l/100 km, while the four-wheel
drive Transporter consumed 7.82 l/100 km. Margins differed little
around the city.
In the urban environment, the importance of mirrors and reversing
is significant. Definitely the best exterior mirrors were to be found
in Ford Transit Custom’s large frames, with testers noting that its
wide-angle section assured good all round visibility especially when
reversing. The Renault Trafic’s mirrors also received an honourable
mention, being of good size and having a small wide-angle section.
The mirrors of the Transporter and Proace were deemed to be too
small.
Evenly on the highway
On the 300 kilometre long on-road driving section, the Toyota
Proace proved to be the most economic vehicle. Its average road
consumption was 5.99 l/100 km, which is almost two litres less
than in the urban drive setting.
Second in the road consumption trial was the Renault Trafic with a
fuel usage figure of 7.01 l/100 km, with the Volkswagen Transporter
third with 7.87 l/100 km and the Renault Trafic next on 7.88 l/100 km.
On the road, the Transporter’s engine and dual-clutch transmission
impressed the drivers the most, along with its overall control. The
driver’s seat, on the other hand, felt most comfortable in Transit
Custom.
Each vehicle was fitted with cruise control, with adaptive (ACC)
versions on the Proace and Transporter increasing driving comfort
by one notch. The cruise control systems were slightly different
in each vehicle, and looking for them while driving takes time to
engage . However each solution does work well once the driver is
used to it.
Some noise levels were experienced at high speeds, with
the Transit Custom and Transporter being perceived
as the quietest. In decibel measurements at the speed of 80
km/h, the indications were almost equal among the vans.
On the highway, a vibrating sound was noticed from the Renault,
while the sound of the Transporter’s turbo was clearly heard as it
accelerated. In general, the measured decibel levels were surprisingly
similar between all the vehicles.
Load space
Noticeable at first was the Toyota’s load area, being slightly
smaller than other test vehicles. In contrast, the Volkswagen
differed from the others in that it was not equipped with a lower
bulkhead hatch that allows long goods to be transported.
As the one-tonne class vans are made for transporting goods
efficiently there were a number of well-placed load lashing loops
in the cargo space of each van tested - up to 17 in the Trafic. In
addition to the loops, the Proace had load-bearing rails. Thanks to
these load lashing loops, the securing of the cargo is fast and easy
in every van.
While the Proace’s load volume capabilities was less than the
others, the Transporter’s cargo space was measured as the largest.
Surprisingly, the loading sill height at the rear door in the Proace
was higher than the others. From the side door, the lifting height was
pretty much the same on all the vans. The widest cargo compartment
doors were seen in the Ford and the Volkswagen.
In conclusion
In all respects, the analysis went very smoothly. The test drivers
were impressed by the good driveability of each vehicle. The overall
assessment of the urban driving phase was a close call. The Transit
Custom, Trafic and Transporter received the same average rating
from test drivers in city driving. On the longer road test, the Transit
Custom received the best overall rating, while the Toyota Proace,
on the other hand, (which as we know is based on the Groupe PSA
Peugeot/Citroen/Opel Expert/Dispatch/Vivaro) excelled in terms
of overall fuel economy.
Big man in cramped conditions
The van does the distribution work. The addresses of the goods to
be delivered are usually close together, often in population centres
on the streets, in cramped places.
Being a van driver, having to bounce in and out throughout the
day tests the taller person. As a measured 190-centimetre driver
experiencing the 34 th Arctic Test in a big winter jacket, it was quite
a challenge.
The Volkswagen T6.1 had the narrowest space to get behind the
wheel. Space was cramped behind the steering wheel between
the backrest and pedals, even with the best seating position at the
steering wheel. The Renault Trafic was the second most difficult
to get into, as the front seat was positioned 100 centimetres above
the ground. However, the doorway aperture made room for the
first step. There was a more spacious feel behind the steering wheel
than in Volkswagen, mainly due to the steering wheel placement
and its more suitable position.
The driver’s seat of the Ford Transit Custom was 98 cm from the
ground, but the large size of the door opening made it easier to
enter. From the first step, there was as much space. A comfortable
driving position was possible, with the pedals and arm rests suitably
placed behind the wheel.
On the Toyota Proace, the driver’s seat was only 92 cm from the
ground. It was the easiest of the four vans to enter and exit. From
that first step, the space at the top of the doorway was only 181
centimetres. Of the four, the driving position offered the most
room for both the pedals and the steering wheel. The choice of a
long driver would surprisingly be the Toyota, then Ford, Renault
and Volkswagen, respectively.
Text: Klaus Bremer
FLEETVAN&UTILITY | Summer 2020