LT1 chat - Lt35 vs sprinter

Print Page | Close Window

Lt35 vs sprinter

Printed From: The Brick-yard
Category: LT, Crafter & Sprinter Section
Forum Name: LT1 chat
Forum Description: Chat forum for LT1
URL: http://www.brick-yard.co.uk/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=58850
Printed Date: 19 Apr 24 at 00:32
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.06 - https://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: Lt35 vs sprinter

Posted By: j_robi
Subject: Lt35 vs sprinter
Date Posted: 16 Oct 10 at 14:22

Hi guys

I'm looking for a heads up...
Looking to get a campervan, was looking at getting a sprinter, but have come across a decent deal on an lt35. Looking for something thats nice to drive and reliable
I know they use similar body parts, but the engine and gearboxes are different

- but can't find any reviews comparing two

Please help ASAP

-------------
Carmarthen + Cardiff

Replies:

Posted By: j_robi
Date Posted: 16 Oct 10 at 14:23

looking at a 1999 vehicle

-------------
Carmarthen + Cardiff

Posted By: GT500
Date Posted: 16 Oct 10 at 15:34

From my experiance the LT is slower but more reliable.
The Sprinter has a great fault in boring a hole in the tops of the pistons due to worn injectors and high pressure.

Rob

-------------
Rob... The only LT on 18" wheels.

Posted By: j_robi
Date Posted: 17 Oct 10 at 00:00

oay thanks rob, any other opinions or experience?

-------------
Carmarthen + Cardiff

Posted By: Emperor
Date Posted: 17 Oct 10 at 07:48

I'd say sprinter has slightly better performance and bit better on diesel consumption but the engine is more fragile - electronic injectors and flimsy fuel pipes that are prone to air leaks. I think the LT is less sophisticated electronically but a better bet for long term reliability.

Sprinter has chain driven cams, whereas LT uses a cambelt that needs replacing at specified intervals.

Posted By: max and caddy
Date Posted: 17 Oct 10 at 11:49

hold on...not all lt35 have a vw engine in, most have a 4 pot merc in. never had a piston melt on either and i have seen a few as i work at vw and my step dad ran both as mini buses,

i would sat the merc engine is possibly better as its simpler and easy to live with and maintain. the lump itself is very basic, injecors are electic yes but so is the pump on the vw. vw has two toothbelts to snap as well, if the cam belt breaks its normally quite messy and expensive

all use a merc gearbox, vw has a adaptor plate on it.

only thing i never liked about my own lt35 van was it would knackers off at 80mph and at 100 would sup loads of diesel, undergeared for motorway use...not a great camper/long range van unless the box or axle can be swapped or a overdrive found.

Posted By: light
Date Posted: 17 Oct 10 at 17:43

The early 2.8 5cylinder mercs are excellent engines they use the same fuel system as the vw{providing you dot get the CDI which came later on the 2.8 } ,the only problem they suffered was head gasket failure due to bad gasket design but no problems after the revised gasket was fitted ,and a fair bit more power than the LT .The 4cylinder CDI engines do suffered with injector problems and are very problematic although very good when running properly and much easier/cheaper to service has chain driven cam/pump as the 2.8 5cyl PS the 2.8 lt is chain driven and a mechanical pump so no electrics but its a vm engine and not VW .If i was looking for a van of that size it would be a chose between the LT 2.5 and MERC 2.8 and the merc would win on the engine but I would not consider the CDI unless it was less than 4 year old

Posted By: j_robi
Date Posted: 17 Oct 10 at 17:48

thanks for the replies guys. I'm referring to the range around 1996-2004. Still not entirely clear about differences!

-------------
Carmarthen + Cardiff

Posted By: light
Date Posted: 17 Oct 10 at 18:36

all the above would apply to those years and if that's the year class you are looking at its a chose between the Lt 2.5 or the MERC 2.8 but not a CDi unless its very low mileage

The merc cdi,s are better engines performance wise and fuel efficiency but the longevity is a long way of that of the VW or the non CDI 2.8 MERC and are very costly and complicated to repair PS: if you go with vw look for the 109 bhp {the one with the intercooler}and by the way the merc 2.8 is 120 bhp or 110

Posted By: j_robi
Date Posted: 17 Oct 10 at 18:52

I've heard the 2.5 vw lt35 lump doesnt go on for as long as the sprinters, and that the gearbox isnt as strong or smooth...

-------------
Carmarthen + Cardiff

Posted By: light
Date Posted: 19 Oct 10 at 13:04

I think they both use the merc gearbox,as for the engines they are both good ,the merc cdi is better but it is far more complicated and they do suffer with injector problems as they get older and to compound that fact they have a nasty habit of seizing in the cylinder head which can lead to having to remove the head to have them machined/pressed/pulled out ,with the worst case needing a new cylinder head PS: if a injector problem occurs and goes unnoticed for a few thousand miles you end up with a big fuck of hole washed in the piston and a badly worn bore=fucked engine