1990’s Quality Diesels

[forddeliveryboy]

The Mercedes OM602 is one of the greats, it's the 5 cylinder 2 valve/cyl version (2.5 litre) in both the 190 and 250 which I'm thinking of here, but with 400cc more it appeared in other vehicles. None of the fault-prone and awkward to access multiple pipe O-ring seals which cause starting problems on the later multivalve engines, stiffer than an inline 6 and just as quiet.

 

These engines were often criticised for a lack of go, partly due to accelerator pedal travel which wasn't much less than the size of their steering wheels of that vintage, partly because the cam was timed for German speeds, they revved beyond 5000 and because manual box ratios were looooong. And because 'diesel' to most meant all the go under 3000 revs whereas these old lumps began to pull their hardest over 3000.

 

They needed getting used to, then other diesels would seem a bit loud, fragile-feeling and generally Third World - you'd struggle with their narrow rev bands. If you cruised under 90 mph, mpg would soar to 50 and more, change down a gear at that speed and the car would pull steadily to 115 and beyond, depending on conditions.

 

The 2.1 XUD was the best PSA of the lot for me - it always felt particularly strongly built and had enough go to allow gears long enough to eradicate the 4 cylinder drone. But the smaller unblown ones were so peachy and characterful - mustard been a revelation in the early-mid 80s, I remember some bloke who couldn't shut up talking to my Dad about his 19D.

 

For me though, never one to go near new cars, Citroën's CX revolutionized car diesels. Here's the German take (they were popular as taxis in Berlin)

 

 

Years ago had a CX with the non-turbo 2.5 four, a version of the engine which powered all big Citroëns from 1933 to 1991. It was as gravelly as a tractor and only about 75hp, but it would pull anything and surprisingly smooth - in a different league from 70s Peugeot diesels. If you were in a rush on quicker roads it felt slow (until bends were reached) but on certain B roads was invincible. The turbo version which replaced it was in decently quick for its era, the fastest diesel car there was. 70-100 felt to take about 3 seconds, it was quite brutal. Sadly as the power went up, material quality fell and late cars were a bit crappy. The N/A ones had gears to drive the camshaft, blown ones had a belt which took about half an hour to change.

 

Some mention of the VAG inline four, a bit horrid when IDI but pretty ok in mechanical pump TDi form, lighter pistons and more modern turbo design turned it into a very worthy workhorse by the end of the decade. Their 5 was much better, a good combination of economy, speed and character.

 

If Volvo hadn't run out of money in the 90s they'd have had no need to use this engine, instead their D5244 all-ally could have been fuelled by a mechanical pump and would have been the ultimate veg-drinker.

 

PS the big Cit dizzle was a wee bit more like this than the vid above:

 

[Lacquer Peel]

Think I'll not bother with the R19 with the NA 1.9 then. I'm wondering how horrific my Tempra 1.9 will be, it's certainly got a nice old diesel sound to it.

 

Are the R8s with the XUD7 turbo any good? I keep looking at them for sale...

My Clio 1.9D was pleasant to drive, quite perky, it's not quite as grunty as an XUD9 but it's a fine engine.

 

The Rover 218D turbo has the full fat XUD7TE with intercooler so should go quite well.

[bramz7]

The ZX I just sold to beige 1100 had a surprising amount of torque from second to third to fourth gears.

 

I drove Barrett's old diesel BX estate to Dean and the turbo had given up, it was actually slowing down going up very slight inclines.

 

I also had a straight diesel Xantia which drove like a massive boat, hilariously under powered and foot to the floor did nothing. However it was very relaxing to drive. Until I had to scrap it anyway.

[forddeliveryboy]

My Clio 1.9D was pleasant to drive, quite perky, it's not quite as grunty as an XUD9 but it's a fine engine.

Yea, I used an early Clio D as a smoker and really enjoyed it too, big engine little car style. It could cover ground really well, plus the idle was as gravelly as an old CX. Sure, all out at 95 but isn't that fast enough most of the time? I seem to remember it was the brakes which could've been better.

[D Spares & Tyres]

I'm a big XUD fan but I had an early Scenic 1.9td for a year or so so although I can't comment on it longevity, I thought *whispers* it was actually better than an XUD..

[0ldCh0d]

A completely shit engine; but not too bad with a turbo, an r19 dturbo or a megane shift nicely; but the non turbos are shit (and when the head gasket fails, and it will, the head is scrap; the engine is overwhelmed in an empty Berlingo mk1)

 

I know this is 90's diesel engines, but, was the above mentioned engine fitted to non turbo diesel early mk1 renault kangoo vans? I ask because, I once bought one of these at auction many moons ago now, & on the way down the M90.....It decided it wanted to overheat & promptly did so in the outside lane...& then when I got it onto the hard shoulder, let it cool down, it flat refused to start again.......Piece of fucking shit.

 

I scrapped it once I got it home. Just curious as it was a 1.9 Non Turbo diesel. 

[gordonbennet]

My favourite NA engines of the time were the 1.9 as fitted to Regatta, and the 2.1 as fitted to Renault 21, i had both and they were superb engines reliable and economical,  the 21 was the Savanna estate and the handling was bloody amazing, felt like it was on tracks.

 

Two favourite turboDiesels,

the 3.0 mechanically pumped 4 cyl that was in my first 70 series Landcruiser, (that engine became the 3.0D4D which is in my present LC120 series) quiet and refined with massive low revved torque that the closer it got to stalling the more it simply refused to stall, would climb the side of a house on tickover, all you could hear engine wise going down the road was the turbo spooling up, an addictive noise and you could drive on that sound alone, not a trace of black smoke no matter what you did.

 

VW's 2.4 LT van engine as fitted to Volvo 940, very agricultural and none the worse for that, half a turn clockwise on the fuelling screw brought the turbo in much lower, had a 4 speed manual with overdrive and you could drive nearly everywhere just be flicking in and out of OD, my mrs loved the thing.

[twosmoke300]

I had forgotten about the Isuzu diesels ! Sooo much better than the Gm wanky 1.7 .

[Niffleman]

Does the diesel engine in the Volvo V40 qualify?  Could just about be 1990s.  Mine seemed quiet, smooth and the whole car seemed indestructible with the engine being no exception.  I am still impressed by that car, given that I read that Volvo cobbled the design together at the last minute from a Mitsubishi Carisma and, I think, pinched the engine design from Renault.

[Lacquer Peel]

Is the GM 1.7 TD that bad?

[chrisjvm]

Peugeot 505 .... Just made it to the nineties I think....

 

I had a 505 gtd turbo that I cabbed for a couple of years in that there Lundin.

 

And also had an srd turbo in about 2001... Great solid old barges and really comfortable cruisers avec plenty of understeer.

[Rusty_Rocket]

Is the GM 1.7 TD that bad?

 

It's not much cop.  It's the old 1.7 n/a diesel with a low pressure turbo strapped onto it, I think, so it would pass the higher emissions limit that turbo charged engines were allowed.

The n/a engine was good in its day, but that low-blow turbo was too much for it.  Heads crack, the (electronic) Bosch pump suffered 'sudden death syndrome' that many of them did and the power and economy was very average.

 

Above all, it was totally overshadowed by the TC4EE1 Isuzu engine in Astras, Cavs and the very early Vectra 1.7TD.  That was a very good engine and I ran one for years on bio, with no issues at all.  82bhp and 55mpg all the time.

[Lacquer Peel]

The later GM TD is a "full blow" engine with similar BHP and torque to the Isuzu TD.

[forddeliveryboy]

My favourite NA engines of the time were the 1.9 as fitted to Regatta, and the 2.1 as fitted to Renault 21, i had both and they were superb engines reliable and economical, the 21 was the Savanna estate and the handling was bloody amazing

I've often thought the Renault IDI diesels were every bit as good as an XUD, the cars in which they lived - Clio, Espace, Kangoo, early Laguna, Safrane - broke less, were stronger and more comfortable.

[Rusty_Rocket]

The later GM TD is a "full blow" engine with similar BHP and torque to the Isuzu TD.

 

Not to my knowledge.  The GM 1.7 diesel turbo lump was always 68ish bhp and always had a low pressure turbo.  The 'suzu was always 82bhp.

[Hendry]

This talk of Vauxhalls with both the GM 1.7TD and the Isuzu TD, were they available/sold alongside each other at the same time? And if so, why? And if you bought a 17 turbo diesel Vauxhall was it just pot luck which engine your car ended up with when it was being built?

 

Diesels were really uncommon in the 90s as I remember, however my vote is going to go to the 2.0 DTi Vauxhall engine fitted to my fathers 2005 Vectra C, which I think was a 90s engine introduction, only 100bhp but wasn’t underpowered at all in the heavy Vectra C, as a taxi it did 43mpg consistently stop start town journeys, and it had 232,000 hard, abused miles on it and it still had no engine issues or FTPs for engine related stuff ever, the only thing it had at that mileage was a camshaft which ticked almost like a petrol Vauxhall with noisy hydraulic tappets, been run low on oil or camchain noise.

[Lacquer Peel]

Not to my knowledge. The GM 1.7 diesel turbo lump was always 68ish bhp and always had a low pressure turbo. The 'suzu was always 82bhp.

The Isuzu TD was supplanted with a GM TD boosted to 80bhp in 95/96, I think that's when they started using a TDS signifier.

 

Hendry, the "low blow" GM TD existed alongside the Isuzu TD in Astras, as a lower cost option I guess.

[Rusty_Rocket]

Well, I've never seen a higher powered GM 1.7 diesel, they were always 60-something bhp and the Isuzu was always more powerful.  The lowblow couldn't take any more of a power boost, it was right on its limits as it was.

 

Hendry, the Isuzu engine was fitted in the higher spec Astras, LS upwards.  GM lowblow was for entry level stuff like Merit trim (13" wheels, no electric windows or PAS!!) and vans.

The Cavalier Mk3 started with the n/a GM 1.7D then quickly got Isuzu power to keep the fleet sales buoyant.

[Hendry]

Well, I've never seen a higher powered GM 1.7 diesel, they were always 60-something bhp and the Isuzu was always more powerful. The lowblow couldn't take any more of a power boost, it was right on its limits as it was.

 

Hendry, the Isuzu engine was fitted in the higher spec Astras, LS upwards. GM lowblow was for entry level stuff like Merit trim (13" wheels, no electric windows or PAS!!) and vans.

The Cavalier Mk3 started with the n/a GM 1.7D then quickly got Isuzu power to keep the fleet sales buoyant.

Ah! I remember when my old man bought his ’97 mk3 Astra from the main dealer in 2000 they had a few similar age mk3s for sale which were diesels badged as ‘TDS’ would those have been the Isuzu engine?

[wuvvum]

I didn't mind the lowblow GM engine.  I had an Astra LS thus powered and found it to be perfectly adequate - certainly a lot more usable than the hopelessly slow NA diesel (in either Isuzu or GM form).

[twosmoke300]

Ahh the 2.0 dti now that was a bloody good strong engine !

[Rusty_Rocket]

Ah! I remember when my old man bought his ’97 mk3 Astra from the main dealer in 2000 they had a few similar age mk3s for sale which were diesels badged as ‘TDS’ would those have been the Isuzu engine?

 

Yes TDS was always with an Isuzu engine! 

[Sir Snipes]

I hate diesel.

[Lacquer Peel]

Yes TDS was always with an Isuzu engine!

Soz but you're wrong. Definitely a GM diesel by then, the Isuzu engine was replaced in 95/96.

[twosmoke300]

Mk3 astra was available until 98 and never had the 2.0 GM engine and if it was badged TDS then it had the Isuzu motor

[chaseracer]

All Vauxhall-related arguments are shit... 

[twosmoke300]

Im offended by that!

[Lacquer Peel]

Mk3 astra was available until 98 and never had the 2.0 GM engine and if it was badged TDS then it had the Isuzu motor

Late Mk3 Astras used a GM 1.7 TD engine which replaced the Isuzu TD. I have seen one with my own eyes.

[twosmoke300]

The TDS had the isuzu unit - the TD was the GM slow blow

[Dirk Diggler]

I know this is 90's diesel engines, but, was the above mentioned engine fitted to non turbo diesel early mk1 renault kangoo vans? I ask because, I once bought one of these at auction many moons ago now, & on the way down the M90.....It decided it wanted to overheat & promptly did so in the outside lane...& then when I got it onto the hard shoulder, let it cool down, it flat refused to start again.......Piece of fucking shit.

 

I scrapped it once I got it home. Just curious as it was a 1.9 Non Turbo diesel.

 

F series, a diesellised petrol, every bit as shit as a hateful 1.8 endura; but unlike the endura transformed by a turbo, a turbo 19, megane, 21 or scenic with that engine is brilliant. 4250 redline