Hi, we're going to change our dobbie this year, its the 3rd we've had, and we're very happy with it, apart from poor resale value.
Anyhow, I phoned up supersaver, they offered me a new dobbie for £7950, when I asked about a diesel qubo they quoted £9500.
In my oppinion this pricing policy is wrong, the cars should be similar price surely, what do other think ?

It does make sense for the new model to be more expensive as they need to pay for the development costs, tooling etc. Perhaps the Qubo is made in Italy rather than Turkey? If this is the case, it's manufacturing costs will be higher. I tend to think of the Doblo as a cheap & cheerful vehicle, compared to the more refined MPVs such as the Ford Galaxy.

I've been looking into this too, and have come to a few conclusions...

the Qubo, in top Diesel spec, which is the only one to have IMHO as it has the essential A/C and the folding forward front seatback - as an extra I think comes in at just over £13,000. This is £4000 more than I paid for my equally well specced Doblo - bar antilock - back in '03. OK, the Qubo has electric mirrors, but I don't want those anyway

I love the Qubo, and it ticks pretty much all my boxes - I love sliding doors and the driving position is great - but, and this is a deal breaker, the 75bhp Multijet just isn't powerful enough. Yes, it gets low emissions, but 0-60 in 16 seconds is just hopeless. My Doblo is about four seconds quicker. I would expect that they will fit the 1.6 Diesel at some stage: this would give the same low emissions, better fuel consumption, and decent performance. But until they do...

oh, and there is a rumour of the 90bhp 1.3, but this is a peaky torqueless thing and I wouldn't want it.

Another dilemma comes in the form of the new Citroen Picasso C3, which does pretty much the same thing as the Qubo, but with clever folding seats and more powerful and probably economical 1.6 Diesels: and the one of these that gives me all I want and more (except the slidy doors) is only a few hundred more than the top spec Qubo. At the moment the Picasso, which has rave reviews and arrives in March, looks like the better bet.

I have not spoken discounts here because that is another matter.

The Doblo was launched in 2000 with a rubbish selection of engines and I fully expect the Qubo will within a year be offered with the 1.6 Diesel. Also, Fiat has other new engines coming soon, so I'm hanging on.

By the way, the Qubo is made in Bursa, like the Doblo.

PS. Manufacturers are putting their prices up now. Ford and Vauxhall have just raised theirs by about 4% - the falling pound!

ulpian, you've hit the nail on head with your post spot on, I expect there to be some pretty heavy discounts to be had on the qubo anytime soon, If I do change my dobbie it will be for another new one, by the way I've had this 85 bhp 1.3 mj for 2 years, and I'm very happy with it, being a tight yorkie, I would probably be willing to put up with slow acceleration to claim the low roadtax, I dont know fiat dont simply offer people the chance to choose their own power level when they order the car, afterall its only chip change thats needed to change the power output

I agree with you bobian. Manufacturers need to recognise they have entered a new market climate and they should react accordingly. Given that the Qubo is van based, on a GP chassis, and the development is shared with Peugeot/Citroen, the price should be low. I think £13,000 is far too high. Shame: at £10,000 it would get rave reviews, even with the underpowered engine.

Interesting what you say about the 85 Multijet: you like the way it drives then, and the economy?

Ulpian said:

I agree with you bobian. Manufacturers need to recognise they have entered a new market climate and they should react accordingly. Given that the Qubo is van based, on a GP chassis, and the development is shared with Peugeot/Citroen, the price should be low. I think £13,000 is far too high. Shame: at £10,000 it would get rave reviews, even with the underpowered engine.

Interesting what you say about the 85 Multijet: you like the way it drives then, and the economy?

Click to expand...

Yea, its great until you 5 people and a load of luggage in, then its a bit sluggish off the mark, but otherwise great, I went for the multijet, as I'm paronoid about cambelts breaking on diesel engines, the mj is chain driven, I once had a low mileage punto, and the belt snapped at only 35k and knackered the engine, in my oppinion, the low maintainance mj is great,apart from the weak water pump, manufacturers should drive the cams on a chain, and all the auxillaries should be seperately belt driven

I had my cambelt changed at 50 thou as a precaution. I too believe they should all be chain driven. And then the water pump But the 1.9 has collapsing auxiliary belt drives to contend with... and so it goes on...

So the 85 Multijet moves it along OK then. I saw a Belgian one going like stink on the M25 once, and he looked happy enough in his manic Belgian way. But is the economy any good. I'd like a realistic 50 when driven hard?

Ulpian said:

I had my cambelt changed at 50 thou as a precaution. I too believe they should all be chain driven. And then the water pump But the 1.9 has collapsing auxiliary belt drives to contend with... and so it goes on...

So the 85 Multijet moves it along OK then. I saw a Belgian one going like stink on the M25 once, and he looked happy enough in his manic Belgian way. But is the economy any good. I'd like a realistic 50 when driven hard?

Click to expand...

I swear to you, when driven hard, I cruise at 85 ish, it does as much to the gallon as the wife panda mj, so about 47 mpg at speed, the panda does much better when driven slowly, overall the dobbie does about 51 mpg

Picasso C3? As Jim Royle would say. "My ar$e!

I've just spent a confusing 10 minutes looking at the stupid website for said motor and am still no wiser what it looks like or what it is meant to achieve!

It must be my age, but I just wanted to see a few photos and read a few stats. I don't want odd angle shots of its flanks, a variety of icons that bear no relation to their function and a stupid soundtrack. I don't want to wait whilst it all downloads and no bloody thanks I don't want to explore the c3picasso on my bloodly iphone!

If the car is designed by the jumped-up twirps that designed the website I'll be sticking with my 'Soviet like' big box Doblo until I've ready for my own final wooden box!

Just google 'Picasso C3' and hit the paid for link at the top of the page and you'll soon feel older and more outdated than your Doblo ever will.

I looked at the Picasso website, and it is slow certainly, but after a minute you get the hang, and it gets better - trust me Try googling 'Picasso C3 tested' or some such and you'll soon find some much more relevant comments, and stats.

Manufacturer websites are usually just glossy annoyances which don't give any of the stuff we need. The Picasso really does look like a useful car though, and as long as you avoid the top spec with the glass roof :yuck: it appears to be good value. They will almost certainly discount too.
Fiat will have to get a move on with getting its new engines to market, and it will need to come in at aprice well under the Picasso if it wants to sell Qubos. The Qubo is an honest vanny thing, wheras the Ctroen is more acceptable for most as it looks more like a wacky MPV.

And thanks bobian; that consumption is very fair in so blocky a car. I am impressed, and encouraged. The Qubo certainly needs more than 75 horses though, because 0-60 in 16 is rubbish.

I used to run citroens from 93 to 2002, the zx diesels were fabulous, cheap, reliable, never rusted I had 3 on the trot, then they started to do fancy things with diesels engine management, starting with the zaras, my zara was an awful car palgued with electrical faults, it also suffered a power steering pump failure at 48k miles, which caused a grand worth of damage to the engine when the pulley sheared off, I changed that for a piccasso, and that was an awful car plagued with electrical problems, I've been on fiats ever since, the only really bad car I had was a stilo jtd, and that was also plagued with computer m/ment problems, so I'm sticking with fiats for the moment

Always the same stories about belt failure, caused by cheapened components IMHO, and of course the dreaded electrics.

Until my old Uno we too had Citroens: DS, GS (two), Dyanes (two) and finally a rather rusty 2CV, which wasn't a patch on the Dyanes for reasons I won't bore you with. Good cars all, but in those days it was always the rust that killed cars. The mechanicals were in every case bullet proof, and some of the systems on those old Cits were not uncomplicated. We changed to Citroen in the 60s after a run of utterly unreliable BMC cars; Rileys, Minis and 1300s, which were just dismal. The French cars were paragons of reliability by comparison. Not one of those Citroens ever broke down.

So now they are all at it! Truth is, the Japanese and Koreans do it best. Don't read this, but the Honda Jazz also ticks a lot of boxes

Yes, for some reason the Japs don't seem to make anything like the Doblo, which is a shame. If I could get a scaled up version of the Suzuki Wagon R it would suit me fine, apart from the usual problem of high spares prices on anything Japanese.