Just how good are these cars?

XantiaMan · Unread post by **XantiaMan** » 27 Jan 2008, 19:13

It is now 6 months since i first got my Xantia and in that time i have already covered 12k! Apart from a knock at the front end which is most likely the cheap ARB links i replaced 10k ago, its been great.

When i first got it i was not expecting great things from it performance wise but just recently it has been surprising me.

Cars it has shown a clean pair of heels to including a Mondeo TDCI Titanium X (130bhp/230lb ft?), a Lexus IS200 (not difficult they have very little torque) and the best one was being glued to a very hard driven 53 plate BMW 320d, payback time!

All i have done is tweak the boost a couple of psi and added the fuel to match, the talk of these engines not pulling from low revs maybe true below 1500rpm but this thing really does pull like a train from that point. My car is not a low mileage example, now at 153k but since 20k miles had been driven gently by a lady owner. It still refuses to use any oil between changes.

I really would like to compare at some point a 110 HDI, it cannot be far off in terms of performance if not mpg!

Currently running on 100% SVO is just the icing on the cake, so i can enjoy pokey mid-range if i want to and not suffer majorly in the pocket!

I would love to try a proper tweaked XUD9T, there is a certain ZX on this site that must be alot of fun!

Gareth

AndersDK · Unread post by **AndersDK** » 27 Jan 2008, 19:23

You may be disappointed comparing to a 110HDI.

1) they produce the 110 from 1.6L engine volume - yours are a 1.9L
2) they produce UN-surpassed torque at low rpm for a 1.6 - yours are pretty good for a 1.9
3) they are at least 20% better mpg on regular derv - you get a cheap run on chipssauce

But yes - I do believe your tweaked 1.9TD feels like being up to the mark.
As long as it takes.
Better start now looking for a spare engine at the right price.

The HDI will still be running when yours get crap

Honestly - you cant really compare old technology to the latest technology in diesel engines. Its not just a rumour - they are in fact better in all aspects 8)

XantiaMan · Unread post by **XantiaMan** » 27 Jan 2008, 19:32

AndersDK wrote:You may be disappointed comparing to a 110HDI.

1) they produce the 110 from 1.6L engine volume - yours are a 1.9L
2) they produce UN-surpassed torque at low rpm for a 1.6 - yours are pretty good for a 1.9
3) they are at least 20% better mpg on regular derv - you get a cheap run on chipssauce

But yes - I do believe your tweaked 1.9TD feels like being up to the mark.
As long as it takes.
Better start now looking for a spare engine at the right price.

The HDI will still be running when yours get crap

Honestly - you cant really compare old technology to the latest technology in diesel engines. Its not just a rumour - they are in fact better in all aspects 8)

I was on about the 2.0 HDI not the 1.6 unit which i have tried, excellent low down response but a bit coarse.

Dont for a second think i am comparing it all round with either engine though, apart from the longevity, but in out right performance i reckon it would have to be on par. Speaking from experience as i have driven alot of modern turbo diesels and have a 250bhp weekend car aswell! I love the old school power delivery and the fact its low-tech, i wasnt expecting it to be *that* good.

In all other respects like emissons, mpg etc yes it pales in comparison, its not drive by wire, common rail etc so its actually quite refreshing to have some simple to work on

I dont really consider my engine to have had anything but minor tweaks which has had a massive affect on the way it responds and performs, thats why i am surprised because nothing i've done has cost a penny, running 56p a litre for fuel with reliability, there cannot be alot of cars that can compare for the money.

If my company was paying for a fuel i would definatly get a 2.0 HDI but they are not!

AndersDK · Unread post by **AndersDK** » 27 Jan 2008, 20:23

I know - I know -

Even the earlier and lesser BX 1.769TD unit is very fun to tweak, but still it must be done with a light hand, to make it survive the fun.
This little unit produces 90Bhp as standard - compared to the Xantia 1.9TD which produces 92Bhp as standard and a bit better torque.

I'm not trying to raise a finger at you. Just reminding you that the fun may cost you more than you thought in the first place - if you tend to overdo it.

Motoring is fun, but helplessly costly if serious fun is tweaked for

Unread post by **CitroJim** » 27 Jan 2008, 20:52

Gareth,

Have a try of a 2.1TD. They can pull out treestumps

Having the same sort of torque (and power not far short) as the 2.0CT Petrol Turbo. Both the CT and 2.1 use more or less the same gear ratios. 70mph at 2400rpm in top

The 2.1 is a brilliant if rather characterless engine compared to the 1.9TD which, especially when tweaked (I drove MikeT's and it flew) and it does not engage you in the same way, having no discernable "kick" or feeling of coming on boost. It just sits under the bonnet growling, waiting for some action and then just quietly gets on with it. Quietly is the operative word. It sits there idling sounding like a really clattery diesel compared to the 1.9 but once under way it quietens right down to a whisper and flies. A 1.9TD owing pal was moved to comment at its quietness yesterday.

Downsides are that it won't run veg as it has the Lucas EPIC fly-by-wire fully electronic pump. It's a lot more complex and the engine bristles with sensors like a contemporary petrol engine

Against that, the fuel system is not as complex as an HDi, nor as fussy, and is very reliable.

The upside is that it's potentially more economical than a 1.9TD if not driven like Lewis Hamilton

Thus negating the veg advantage a little.

Any time you're up this way, you're welcome to take mine for a test drive.

EDIT: And take the the Activa for a blast if you want but that'll spoil you until you come to put petrol in it

XantiaMan · Unread post by **XantiaMan** » 27 Jan 2008, 21:14

citrojim wrote:Gareth,

Have a try of a 2.1TD. They can pull out treestumps Having the same sort of torque (and power not far short) as the 2.0CT Petrol Turbo. Both the CT and 2.1 use more or less the same gear ratios. 70mph at 2400rpm in top

The 2.1 is a brilliant if rather characterless engine compared to the 1.9TD which, especially when tweaked (I drove MikeT's and it flew) and it does not engage you in the same way, having no discernable "kick" or feeling of coming on boost. It just sits under the bonnet growling, waiting for some action and then just quietly gets on with it. Quietly is the operative word. It sits there idling sounding like a really clattery diesel compared to the 1.9 but once under way it quietens right down to a whisper and flies. A 1.9TD owing pal was moved to comment at its quietness yesterday.

Downsides are that it won't run veg as it has the Lucas EPIC fly-by-wire fully electronic pump. It's a lot more complex and the engine bristles with sensors like a contemporary petrol engine Against that, the fuel system is not as complex as an HDi, nor as fussy, and is very reliable.

The upside is that it's potentially more economical than a 1.9TD if not driven like Lewis Hamilton Thus negating the veg advantage a little.

Any time you're up this way, you're welcome to take mine for a test drive.

EDIT: And take the the Activa for a blast if you want but that'll spoil you until you come to put petrol in it

I would like to try a 2.1 but the figures suggest on paper at least its not got a huge power or torque advantage over a 1.9TD especially if tweaked and well run in like mine. It really is a shame they didnt come with a Bosch pump, but i'm more than happy with mine as it stands, for such a heavy car (1310kg) it now doesnt feel underpowered like when i first got it, when it used to struggle up hills!

I should imagine the mpg advantage (stating the obvious here) is due to the more efficent fuelling control, the 12 valve head and the extra torque available because of the larger capacity, cant remember if its bigger bores or longer stroke than the 1.9.

Apart from when given some, mpg doesnt not seem to be any worse than an untweaked 1.9, in fact i would go so far to say its better because now its more responsive, it doesnt need to be revved so much, with 2k gearchanges enough for normal progress.

Gareth

Unread post by **CitroJim** » 27 Jan 2008, 21:37

XantiaMan583 wrote: It really is a shame they didnt come with a Bosch pump..

Early XMs fitted with the 2.1 did

And so did a lot of the PSA white vans, where the 2.1 was used extensively.

The transplant is not difficult actually and if my EPIC ever packs up I have a Bosch mechanical pump (admittedly off a 1.9TD), injectors and pipes safely stashed away ready to fit

I've always wanted to do this experimentally to see what difference it makes but I'm not going to experiment on mine

I'll wait for a dead one.

The 2.1 is bored and stroked compared to the 1.9. (85 mm bore against 83mm and 92mm stroke against 88mm).

The point you make about the fuelling could be right Gareth. the EPIC system never allows it to smoke to any great extent, however hard you are on it, suggesting the fuelling is held and controlled very tightly. Also, it never smells of diesel fumes when idling, unlike my 1.9TD or my fathers 205D, suggesting again that fuelling is tightly controlled. This may be why it feels a bit lifeless and not very characterful.

A little side advantage of the 2.1 and a 110 HDi (but not the 90 HDi) is the ML5 gearbox and hydraulic clutch. Sheer joy (until it goes wrong)... You also get the bigger brakes.

Xaccers · Unread post by **Xaccers** » 27 Jan 2008, 21:40

Comparing Dex with Cassy, I have to say Cassy flies while Dex, um, well Dex accelerates like a diesel locomotive. Speedy he was not, well, not unless you over rev him above 3000rpm, and then fuel economy drops to scary low levels.
I think the only other PSA car I've driven that was less responsive is mum's HDi Xsara.
Will have to compare cars along the A5 sometime Jim

deian · Unread post by **deian** » 27 Jan 2008, 22:05

I can vouch for the 1.9td in a ZX and a Xant 2.1. Both are awesome cars, but I reckon the 2.1 is a bit of a wolf in sheeps clothing. The 2.1 was an absolute dream on motorways, I regret selling it now, I sold it because the aux belt tensioner unit was kerput on it, and one of them is £400+ to replace. I'd LOVE another one, I had no issues with the Lucas EPIC pump. Give me a 2.1 with Bosch pump and it would be a great combination.

As for the ZX, again I'm very impressed, 1.9td mechanical, i've tweaked a bit, a bit more to do, shame the car hasn't got the stability of the xantia. It's raw being a K reg one. I'm holding on to it despite it's age related wear and tear, it just takes the hard work and doesn't moan. Engine feels faster, but I bet it isn't.

Bottom line... I'd take the 2.1 any day, impressive engineering there.

Unread post by **CitroJim** » 27 Jan 2008, 22:09

Xac wrote:Comparing Dex with Cassy, I have to say Cassy flies while Dex, um, well Dex accelerates like a diesel locomotive.

A great analogy

Maybe because of the taller gear ratios it pulls. Dex is my workhorse and here the "locomotive" aspect is well valued. It does pull like a train however it is loaded

It's going to be very interesting when I use Dex to pull the caravan in the spring. I'm expecting great things of him...

Bottom line is, for me, the 2.1 characteristics suit me rather well. It matches my driving style and gets the job done with good economy but as I said earlier, it's pretty characterless and for fun, the 1.9TD comes out tops. I still love taking my 1.9TD for a fun blast every now and again. The 1.9 seems to be a lot freer revving and spirited but lacks that level of low-down torque that makes tree-stumps quake in fear. The 1.9 a revver whereas the 2.1 is more of a plodder. Despite that, it seems to get to 70 pretty sharpish without going over 3000rpm.

Xac wrote:Will have to compare cars along the A5 sometime Jim

Yes, the 1.9 v 2.1 Shootout. It needs to be done. A standing start from Stacey Bushes slip road up to the Old Stratford Roundabout perhaps

I chased you driving Dex along the Finmere bypass many moons ago in my Activa. It seemed to me to be a close-run thing...

We need some HDi owners to cast their opinion now...

KP · Unread post by KP » 28 Jan 2008, 04:46

As mentioned above teh 2.1 can be converted either by a pump and injector swap or by using a twin tank system(dino/SVO) but for me the 2.1 really could do with a 6th gear or higher ratio'd 5th as my dads 2 have always pulled extremely strongly from about 35-40ish without any complaint. I towed my old Fiat Coupe down to birmingham using it on a flat bed trailer (Ifor Williams) and i must admit they possibly wieghed a wee bit more than the xant

but the car didnt complain or struggle at all

KP · Unread post by KP » 28 Jan 2008, 04:47

http://www.vegetableoildiesel.co.uk/for ... p?tid=4580

Unread post by **RichardW** » 28 Jan 2008, 08:12

citrojim wrote:We need some HDi owners to cast their opinion now...

Oh, go on then

My experience is 85k in BX TDs, followed by 105k in Xantia TDs, recently followed up by 11k in a Xantia HDi 110. Plus 35k on the side in ZX TDs. Still got a ZX TD so can direct compare the 1.9TD to the 2.0 HDi.

I never tuned my Xantias, but was always impressed with how well they went considering only 90BHP was pulling 1300 kg or so of car. They have a particular character, and need to be revved to make them go - to keep up any progress on contry roads you need to work the box and keep it above 3k rpm. Fun, but a bit wearing!

The HDi 110 is an altogether different beast. No turbo shove above 2.5k rpm makes it feel a bit 'flat' initally, but in actual fact what you get is seamless acceleration from 1500 rpm upwards - you give it some, go up through the box and suddenly realise it's pulling nearly 90mph without trying

Driving it on country roads is a joy - I found it would accelerate up a 1 in 8 - in 4th at 50 mph!! The 1.9TD would have been above 3k in 3rd and an up change would have made it die. The HDi just makes life easy - I rarely rev it over 3k, and almost never give it full throttle - in fact I often find when I do need FT, I forget how far down it is! On the motorway 70 comes up at about 2,500 rpm, but it's difficult to hold it back to that - a 77mph 2750 rpm is easier, and it will happily pull an 84 mph 3k if allowed - there's plenty left too for increasing speed if required. My estate is returning 45mpg too - although I suspect this would improve if I freed off the brakes that seem to be dragging and bit - and was a bit more gentle with the loud pedal

When we picked it up, I followed my wife driving it, in the 1.9 Xantia - going out onto a dual carriageway I couldn't keep up with the acceleration - I mentioned this afterwards, and she said she was just driving naturally, not even trying!

Chipped to 140 BHP it would be an awesome machine....

Swapping back to the ZX is an interesting comparison - I find my self in the wrong gear with no acceleration, and have to change down. Booting it at 2k in 3rd and waiting for the turbo surge at 2.5k rpm still brings a smile to the face.

I've certainly no regrets about shelling out for the HDi.

XantiaMan · Unread post by **XantiaMan** » 28 Jan 2008, 08:47

citrojim wrote:

Xac wrote:Will have to compare cars along the A5 sometime Jim
Yes, the 1.9 v 2.1 Shootout. It needs to be done. A standing start from Stacey Bushes slip road up to the Old Stratford Roundabout perhaps

I'm there!

Would agree about the 1.9 being a bit of a revver, back in its hey day magazines always described it as very petrol like but with diesel economy and mid-range.

steelcityuk · Unread post by **steelcityuk** » 28 Jan 2008, 15:23

If I ever get my XM back in one piece I'll have a comparison between the 1.9 TD, 110HDi, 2.1 TD and 2.5 TD. I've found the 2.1 to be the best up to now in terms of feeling powerful and the HDi best for fuel consumption. The 2.5 has a Bosch pump and so is OK on veg.

Steve.