Cabstar Rrr 24/10/06 16:49 Page 30
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
cabstar rrr 24/10/06 16:49 Page 30 AA CabstarCabstar isis bornborn in the eyes of vehicle buyers by the negatives of indifferent on-road performance, cab ergonomics Star quality: handsome But does it have enough star quality and interior trim aesthetics. styling is to dispel vehicle buyers’ preconceptions The first clear sign that Japanese refreshing, but manufacturers are beginning to wake up to the boxvan version need to tailor their vehicles more closely to suffers from about forward-control Japanese European preferences came last year with the meagre payload. introduction of the latest Mitsubishi Fuso Canter Double cab vehicles at 3.5 tonnes gvw? David (Transport Engineer May and September 2005) provides three sporting a longer, wider, taller cab with vastly- more seats at the Wilcox went to Spain to find out. improved interior trim. expense of one metre of body Now Nissan has followed suit with its Euro-4 length and 140kg Cabstar at 3.5 tonnes gvw. Not only is there a of payload. f there is one weakness shared by nearly all new Cabstar engine range but also an entirely Japanese forward-control 3.5-tonnes-gvw new cab which is 80mm taller, 100mm longer Ichassis-cabs on the UK market it is just that – and 70mm wider than the old one. An overall they are typical Japanese forward-control 3.5- external width of 1,870mm makes the latest tonnes-gvw chassis-cabs. Anyone who has Cabstar cab wider than rivals from Toyota and climbed into an Isuzu NKR, Mitsubishi Canter, Isuzu (both 1,695mm) but still appreciably Toyota Dyna or Nissan Cabstar surely will narrower than the Canter’s (1,995mm). Useable understand exactly what we mean by this. interior width is said to have been increased by The forward-control layout makes access to no less than 150mm, making three-abreast the driver’s seat inconvenient. The cab feels seating more comfortable than before. The extra cramped because the header rail seems too low width comes from extending the cab shell out to and the engine cover too high. The whole interior be flush with the front mudwings, leaving overall is a style-free zone of unremitting cheap, grey vehicle width (and manoeuvrability) unaffected. plastic. The 100mm increase in bumper-to-back-of- Yet these vehicles do have redeeming cab dimension gives the driver more legroom, features. They boast some eminently-practical more rearward seat adjustment, and easier truck-like characteristics: namely tilt-cabs access to the seat. Moving the air filter intake providing good engine access, ladder-type trunking from behind the cab has allowed the chassis frames for ease of body-mounting, and bulkhead to be pushed back without encroaching the space-efficiency that comes with a cab on body length potential. A bumper-to-back-of- perched directly above the steer-axle rather than cab measurement of 1,612mm is about average behind it. Compared with a a conventional for a vehicle of this class. Isuzu’s and Toyota’s European-style, van-derived chassis-cab, overall cabs are shorter. The Canter’s is a shade longer vehicle length is shorter by 650-950mm. So for thanks to a bigger front overhang. There are any given body length, the Japanese trucks can three Cabstar wheelbases (2.5, 2.9 and 3.4 beat their European rivals on manoeuvrability, metres), able to accommodate body lengths with noticeably smaller turning circles. Trouble is, ranging from 2.65 to 4.96 metres. such practical plus points are often outweighed Cabstars destined for European markets are 30 Transport Engineer November 2006 cabstar rrr 24/10/06 16:50 Page 31 built in Spain, at Avila, near Madrid. Engineering not make it short on stowage space. Drivers will development of the Euro-4 range was shared have no trouble finding safe places to put between Nissan engineers in Barcelona and paperwork such as delivery notes, including a Japan. The cab’s crisp styling, seemingly attuned couple of novel letterbox-like slots near the sun- nicely to modern European tastes, surprisingly visor and more on top of the dashboard, turns out to have been the work of the Japanese. thoughtfully designed to avoid distracting The field of vision from the driver’s seat is reflections on the windscreen. generous and the doors shut with a muffled In line with the current vogue for dash- thunk rather than a tinny clang. Dashboard mounted gear-levers, the Mitsubishi Canter’s was design is unexciting but inoffensive. This truck moved in that direction last year, creating more generally has an air of quality about it. space for three-abreast seating and making Unwilling to sacrifice even a few millimetres cross-cab movement easier. The expectation was of internal width, Nissan engineers decided to that the Nissan Cabstar would follow suit. Not so. forgo door pockets in the new cab. But this does Instead it retains a turret-mounted gear lever, Missed opportunity: new dashboard is a step forward but hardly inspiring. Open for business: bigger cab and less windscreen rake add up to improved ergonomics. Cool ideas: drinks holder is chilled by air- conditioning vent. The pod on the top of the dashboard takes A4-size documents. No through route: flat floor makes it easy to move across the cab – until you get to the gear- lever turret. projecting forward from the engine cover. This leave a gap of only 140mm (5.5in) between the turret and dashboard, making cross-cab movement difficult. The old Cabstar’s power unit is a 2,953cc four-cylinder turbocharged diesel at a nominal 105 or 125hp. The four-cylinder turbocharged Euro-4 engine has a swept volume of 2,488cc and power ratings of 109 and 129hp. In short then, though swept volume is down by half a litre, the new engine matches the old one in power and torque, courtesy mainly of its common-rail fuel injection system. The new Cabstar’s torque is nevertheless nothing to write home about: 270Nm at 1,800rpm from the 129hp version of November 2006 Transport Engineer 31 cabstar rrr 24/10/06 16:50 Page 32 the 2.5-litre engine. This compares with 320Nm So there is no option of single rear wheels with at 1,700-3,000rpm squeezed from the 2.3-litre the 3.5-tonnes gvw Cabstar. engine in the latest Iveco Daily (Transport One surprise in the braking system Engineer June) and 305Nm at 1,200-2,400rpm specification (hydraulically-actuated discs front from only 2.15 litres in the new Mercedes and rear) is that anti-lock is not standard. In the Sprinter (Transport Engineer March), both with UK line-up, however, the only model not fitted power outputs on a par with the Cabstar’s. with anti-lock as standard equipment is the base The fuel economy story is more promising: model. Nissan forecasts an improvement of about 15 per A brief test drive in Spain of a medium- cent over the old Cabstar engine. wheelbase Cabstar with 129hp, 2.5-litre engine Another power unit option in the new Cabstar and five-speed gearbox left us with a surprisingly is a 148hp, 350Nm common-rail version of the favourable impression, strong enough to dispel a 2,953cc Nissan ZD30 four-cylinder engine, few prejudices about Japanese forward-control already used widely in Euro-3 form in other vehicles. Ride, gear-shift, brakes and general Nissan/Renault alliance vehicles such as refinement are all commendably good. A little Renault’s Master and Mascott, and Nissan’s wind-noise from around the A-pillars was the Patrol and Navara. But this engine is unlikely to only minor irritant at an indicated speed of appeal to more than a handful of Cabstar buyers, 112km/h (70mph) with the engine turning at a mostly local builders, landscape gardeners and little more than 3,000rpm. The engine seems the like. For applications like these the 2.5-litre more flexible than its torque figures suggest and engine looks the better choice. Like the ZD30, it the gear ratios are nicely spaced, leaving us has twin overhead camshafts and is turbocharged and charge-cooled. Euro-4 exhaust emissions limits are met by virtue of cooled Building external exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) and a regulations: diesel oxidation catalyst (but no particulate filter) Nissan expects in the exhaust. The Euro-3 engine’s 20,000km about two-thirds recommended service and oil-drain interval has of UK Cabstars been extended to 30,000km at Euro-4. to be short- There are two Cabstar gearboxes. The five- wheelbase models with speeder is a Nissan box with direct-drive fourth dropside or and overdrive top. The six-speed ZF box has a tipper bodies. deeper first gear and smaller ratio steps. Fifth is direct and sixth is overdrive. wondering why Cabstar buyers in the UK are being forced to have a six-speed gearbox with Maintenance matters: a tilt cab the 2.5-litre engine in the medium-wheelbase is one plus for model. Typical Cabstar operators are unlikely to the forward need six ratios, so maybe the choice is dictated control by first-gear gradeability. But then of course this configuration is unrelated to wheelbase. Performance with the over the 129hp engine seemed perfectly acceptable, but conventional then it ought to be when the aluminium drop-side bonneted 3.5- body (a factory-fit option) was carrying a mere tonne van. 400kg rather than its maximum net payload of about 1,350kg. Like-for-like, the new model’s kerb weight is about 30kg up on the old one, according to Nissan engineers.