Thanks for all your brilliant posts. I was interested to learn that the PD engine was dropped as it was unable to feed fuel to a DPF. But I have seen vw Audi cars on 09 plates with 1.9 tdi engines. The reason I ask is what is the way of identifying a 1.9 tdi powered car without a DPF . or did some 1.9 tdi engines have DPF s fitted towards the end of their production.?
The operative date for Euro 5, which required DPFs on diesels, was 1st September 2009 - that was for new Type Approvals, production build requirement a year later.
So it's quite possible for 09, 59 and 10 plated cars not to have DPFs - whether they did would be up to the manufacturer as some fitted them in the early '00s.
|
The operative date for Euro 5, which required DPFs on diesels, was 1st September 2009 - that was for new Type Approvals, production build requirement a year later.
So it's quite possible for 09, 59 and 10 plated cars not to have DPFs - whether they did would be up to the manufacturer as some fitted them in the early '00s.
The actual final registration date for cars type approved before September 2009 was 31 December 2010 so it is possible to get a non-DPF Euro 4 or Euro 5 car on a 60 plate.
Most manufacturers stopped making non-DPF cars mid summer 2010 so any cars registered late in December would have been old stock.
We had one of the early mid 90's 1.9 90 PS TDis in a Golf. The engine was simply the best on the market at the time, the power delivery was better than any other diesel I had driven and the torque was certainly better. Like all diesels of that period the pwer dropped off fast once you had passed 3500 rpm which made overtaking exciting at times and drivability in town was poor, you never appeared to be in the correct gear. Economy wise it would do about 45 mpg in town and the high 50's on a long run, averaged out at about 48 mpg, almost double what we got out of the previous petrol.
Over the years diesels improved out of all recognition and if I had stepped back into the Golf when we had the Ceed it would, I am sure, been a real disapointment.
Now we have a Seat Leon with the latest 140 PS TSi petrol. This blows every other engine we have owned into the weeds. The power delivery is linear all the way from 1500 rpm to 6000 rpm. The economy is low 40's in town to mid 50's on a long run, averages out at about 45 mpg which is not that far short of the old TDi.
Do I miss it, not really, things have moved on.
Edited by skidpan on 20/09/2015 at 18:45
|
|
Thanks for this Skidpan.
My daughter has just taken delivery of a Polo GT with the same petrol engine as yours. Amazing performance but will it stand the kind of abuse thrown at the PD engine by taxi drivers who report mileages into the late 100 s ?
|
My daughter has just taken delivery of a Polo GT with the same petrol engine as yours. Amazing performance but will it stand the kind of abuse thrown at the PD engine by taxi drivers who report mileages into the late 100 s ?
Looked after correctly there is no reason why it should not be reliable over huge mileages. But I would expect it to not appreciate poor maintenance that Taxi drivers tend to lavish on their vehicles.
But personally I am not panicking, just done over 1000 miles in the past week and averaged a true (not dash computer reading) 50 mpg and I was not pussy footing about. Brilliant engine.
|
|
|
|
Now we have a Seat Leon with the latest 140 PS TSi petrol. This blows every other engine we have owned into the weeds. The power delivery is linear all the way from 1500 rpm to 6000 rpm. The economy is low 40's in town to mid 50's on a long run, averages out at about 45 mpg which is not that far short of the old TDi.
That engine is working its way across the bigger cars in the VW/Skoda/Audi ranges, I'll have to test-drive it in one of those. I've yet to read a bad review of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 1.9 pd was a great engine , indeed I had one for over 10 years in a 2003 Skoda Superb. Sadly I recently sold this as I can't be bothered dealing with car body work these days - mechanically it was still amazing(original battery and exhaust!). I usually got about 50mpg with my driving although the new owner seems to be getting better than me getting over 700 miles to a tank of diesel - best I got was 650.
HOWEVER the 1.9 pd does not work well if fitted with a DPF. Basically the pd injection has mechanically pumped cam operated unit injectors (electrically fired) but is not designed to pump again on the exhaust stroke - requred for diesel regen of DPF (unburnt fuel fed into exhaust on regen cycle). DPF's did appear on a few 1.9 notably on later 1.9 VM golfs and Skoda Superb II 1.9 Greeline (the non Greenline Superb II 1.9 OK though)
Personally - I'm trying to avoid the latest diesel technology (DPF, Adblue etc.. ) as I know too many people who have had expensive problems and the longevity of engines now reduced - unburnt diesel squirted into a bore (especially if worn) does not make a great lubricant
I've now moved to a 2014 Superb II 1.4 tsi (previous generation compared to the engine in the current Leon but the latest revision) and whilst clearly the economy is not a good as the 1.9PD SUperb I it's not tooo far off. Most fills tank to tank are about 46mpg although did get 49.5mpg after a recent trip fro Hampshire to Yorkshire via horrendous traffic on M25 and a trip up the A1 to avoid the awful very long roadworks on the M1
Edited by Big John on 21/09/2015 at 17:10
|
|
I would say that the 1.9D had it day in 2010 being one of the best options, but not the greatest engine. For sure the VW 1.8 Turbo petrol far out shined it for me.
The VW 1.9D was not so reliable further the 1.9D with DPF suffered further problems, to the degree of putting many off the 'D' word all together along with fuel prices.
Many who only had VW will love the VW's (and why not), but then BMW drivers love there engines as much as Merc drivers and so on.
Further, the new wave of small petrol engines with turbo's that pull away from 1500 rpm with good torgue thoughout the range and decent mpg excite more these days
|
|
An engine that never seems to get praise but was both bullet proof and reliable was the 2.0 SDI found in various Rovers.
|
Although I agree about the VAG 1.9 tdi being an excellent long lived motor (I`ve had 2, oldest daughter and youngest son got one each) they can and do commonly suffer from sticky vnt vanes and even terminal turbo failure without much notice.
They can also suffer failure of the injector wiring loom - electrical wiring sat in hot oil not really a good idea - mine was OK during the 170k miles I did in it.
The vacuum/solenoid operation of EGR, turbo and antishudder valve can be a bit unreliable with the small pipes springing a leak or solenoids failing. I had one issue with this - vibration had eventually rubbed a hole in one of them - easy no cost fix
Never had turbo or EGR failure and I was on the original DMF/clutch. Mine was the pd100 version.
|
|
I had driven an A4 fitted with the 130bhp 1.9PD for 6 months - good amount of power and torque from around 1700rpm and during the 10,000 miles it averaged 49.3 (brim to brim figures)
I now drive a civic with their 2.2 CDTI engine which i've had since April and its done 8000 miles since ive had it. Similar power delivery if im honest - but from 1500rpm. This has averaged 48.7mpg with the same style of driving
I civic was fitted with that engine upto 2011
|
|
Well the civic does not seam to be class leading when it comes to D.
I'd say the bmw 320D with 184bhp returns easly 53mpg on mixed driving and around 60 on the motorway. The turbo kicks in around 1700 rpm. Drove one for around 150 miles over three years without issue.
Don't do the milage now so gone to petrol lol.
|
Drove one for around 150 miles over three years without issue.
50 miles each year is really way too low for a diesel. ;)
|
|
We are not talking about the EA189 version here are we ?
|
I'd say the bmw 320D with 184bhp returns easly 53mpg on mixed driving and around 60 on the motorway
The BMW 2 litre diesel is a great engine, had one in a 118D. But even with the 143 PS engine in a smaller lighter car it would never do those sorts of mpg figures. 47 average for 5 years of mixed driving and a best of about 55 mpg on a long run of 360 miles in the day. But those were calculated figures, If I had teken them off the dash display I would probably have seen what you have.
|
|
I had the 130bhp 1.9 on a VW Bora. Sold it at 240,000miles from new and it was still insured a year later. So I reckon it cleared 300k. The introduction of the Euro 5a DPF in 2010 and the withdrawal of these clean smelling mechanical PD engines in favour of newer electronic ignition, which stink, is the kiss of death for diesel due to increased Noxious emissions. I am contemplating electric - too many people have it in for diesel these days. The health scare stories will only get worse.
|
I had the 130bhp 1.9 on a VW Bora. Sold it at 240,000miles from new and it was still insured a year later. So I reckon it cleared 300k. The introduction of the Euro 5a DPF in 2010 and the withdrawal of these clean smelling mechanical PD engines in favour of newer electronic ignition, which stink, is the kiss of death for diesel due to increased Noxious emissions. I am contemplating electric - too many people have it in for diesel these days. The health scare stories will only get worse.
Er - whilst I really liked the engine in my 2003 Superb 1.9 pd100 being well maintained and serviced always passing the MOT emissions test with flying colours - I could never have described it as clean smelling. If you floored it you could see some smoke.
Actually until recently modern direct injection petrol engines created way more particulates compared to a modern diesel engine fitted with a DPF, this is why now as of September most new direct injection petrol engined cars are now fitted with Particulate filters (GPF or PPF or OPF) to achieve Euro 6d temp.
|
|
There was a popular story in the press a few years about the possibility of using old vegetable oil from the chippy in a diesel engine with virtually no side effects (apart from giving off a whiff of Full English Breakfast when waiting at lights). IIRC the "plain vanilla" PSA XUD 1.9 engine was one of the best engines to fill with cooking oil. I'd imagine the German oil burning PD would have given it a rotund "NEIN!"
What, I wonder, are the implications of running an XUD on chippy oil ? (Apart from the obvious requirement to declare and pay tax to HMRC on regular fill-ups) We're firmly in pre-DMFW and DPF days, but would there be any issues with other diesel gubbins under the bonnet?
|
|
It's inadvisable to try to fuel any diesel with used frying oil. But you can use used frying oil to brew your own bio-diesel. Loads of websites about to tell you how to do that.
No problem with HMRC up to I think 2000 litres/year, you just have to keep records of quantity, no tax to pay.
Older IDI diesels - the pre-chamber in head type, can tolerate new fresh clean veggie oil, but they won't start reliably on it at low temperatures, so a twin tank diesel/veggie system is needed with heated filters etc.
DI engines don't like veggie oil, they are likely to suffer from gumming of piston rings and possible mixing of veggie oil with sump oil resulting in a jelly in the sump and goodbye engine.
All in all, unless you have to, don't do it, too complicated.
|
I had to suffer a 1.9 Bora when my 2.4 petrol Accord was in for repair. It was nicknamed travis the tractor, rough, noisy, constantly surging. Best engine ever? Hardly.
|
I had to suffer a 1.9 Bora when my 2.4 petrol Accord was in for repair. It was nicknamed travis the tractor, rough, noisy, constantly surging. Best engine ever? Hardly.
You have to remember that this thread is an VW Audi 1.9 TDI PD mutual appreciation love-in.
They even think that Honda diesels are not up to their standard LOL !
|
|
In reply, I'm on my 2nd Passat 1.9pd. Last one did 184k, failed due to suspension, not the engine, latest one has 4wd and is currently at 179k, a wonderful car, had it for 6 years now. It's noisy, strong, very torquey indeed. These engines last far better than the smoking (petrol) CRV I was following two days ago.
|
|
Oh and I have used mine for years to harrow fields, tow 1800kg horse boxes, tow a caravan to Scotland from the south coast as well as driving it from East Kent to the Isle of Skye in ONE DAY, during new years when other cars were abandoned in the snow. So yes, best engine ever.
|
These engines last far better than the smoking (petrol) CRV I was following two days ago.
I think it is probably fairly safe to say that most engines, (good or bad), are likely to last longer than any other engine which is about to expire!
I have used mine for years to harrow fields, tow 1800kg horse boxes
Surely harrowing fields is more to do with it being 4wd rather than the engine?. And I'm not sure what is quite so impressive about a 4wd car with 130bhp and 310nm of torque (@1900rpm) being able to tow an 1800kg trailer?. The old Daihatsu Fourtrak F8 was rated to tow 3500kg, that was with 102bhp and 249nm (also @ 1900rpm)
driving it from East Kent to the Isle of Skye in ONE DAY, during new years when other cars were abandoned in the snow. So yes, best engine ever.
As with the harrowing of fields, I think I'd be more inclined to attribute your ability to keep going while others were abandoned in the snow to your car being 4wd, rather than it having the 1.9PD engine.
I worked at a VW dealer in the early noughties, so had plenty of experience of the 1.9PD TDI in all guises (100, 115, 130 and 150bhp). They were all impressive engines (for the time) in terms of power, torque and economy, but best engine ever?, don't think so!. Even amongst VW diesels, I was more impressed by the 1.4 PD TDI in the Polo when it first came out. It only had 75bhp, but the 195nm of torque meant overtaking on the predominantly single carriageway roads around my neck of the woods was no problem at all. It had me laughing out loud the first few times I did so!
I remember driving two Passat's back to back, a 1.9PD TDI (130bhp) from Peterhead into Aberdeen and a 2.5 TDI (150bhp) back to Peterhead. Being objective, the 1.9 felt pretty much as fast and its torque came in harder and earlier. But the 2.5 (V6 mind) was just a nicer engine to use, smoother, more refined, and a much nicer noise.
|
|
Sadly said farewell to my A4 with the PD engine as I was handed down a e320 CDI estate from my son . So handed up. Again it’s a 2007 so no DPF or adblu thank goodness!
Always had a lot of interest to buy from arrivals from Eastern Europe who reject newer diesel technology in favour of pre Euro 5 engines.
The car has probably had a return journey to Romania by now and still manages to pass the emissions test on the MOT.
Im sure the Passat from this era was produced by VW in China and used as taxis. Would they have been fitted with the PD engine ?
|
I remember driving two Passat's back to back, a 1.9PD TDI (130bhp) from Peterhead into Aberdeen and a 2.5 TDI (150bhp) back to Peterhead. Being objective, the 1.9 felt pretty much as fast and its torque came in harder and earlier. But the 2.5 (V6 mind) was just a nicer engine to use, smoother, more refined, and a much nicer noise.
But the v6 was usually killed prematurely by a terminal demise of the fuel pump and drank much more diesel. Cam belt was an expensive job as well.
Sadly most cars with the great 1.9pd are a bit past it now. The 1.4pd was a 3 cylinder version with an additional balancer shaft.
Edited by Big John on 28/06/2024 at 22:36
|
|
Absolutely hated the 1.4 pd three cylinder engine in my Audi A2. No low end torque and noise.has put me off three cylinder engines for life. Just hard work driving it and soon it had to go ! Just loved the A2 and will get the 4 cylinder petrol if I get another one !
Two ends of the spectrum IMHO 1.9 and 1.4
|
Absolutely hated the 1.4 pd three cylinder engine in my Audi A2. No low end torque and noise.has put me off three cylinder engines for life. Just hard work driving it and soon it had to go ! Just loved the A2 and will get the 4 cylinder petrol if I get another one !
Two ends of the spectrum IMHO 1.9 and 1.4
I guess it depends on your perspective. For example, I'd consider the 1.3 petrol in the previous shape Jazz as having little low end torque, it made 123nm @ 5000rpm. The 1.4PD made just under 60% more than that at 2200rpm.
The noise?, well it certainly wasn't a quiet engine, but as with all 3 pot's, the perceived roughness compared to a 4 pot is only apparent at very low revs. Once at a normal cruise, it isn't actually "a thing". And let's be honest, the 1.9PD was hardly a paragon of silent refinement itself!.
I did take an A2 1.4PD from Peterhead to Inverness once and found the performance just as impressive as in the Polo, though no better (despite the much hyped lightweight aluminium construction). I also found it didn't ride as well as the Polo 1.4PD demo we had.
I am a fan of the A2 though, IMO the last genuinely clever and interesting car (in terms of design) Audi made.
|
|
That’s interesting BAd bus.
Im wondering if I got a bad one or are all A2s renowned for poor reliability?
The driving position , quality seats , rust resistance etc and the fact that they wear so well .
Have they reached Classic car status like the Audi TT ?
|
That’s interesting BAd bus.
Im wondering if I got a bad one or are all A2s renowned for poor reliability?
Not really sure TBH. Hadn't really heard or read anything too alarming, at least mechanically. I did have a wee search and couldn't find much problems mentioned on an old Audi forum thread?*. I certainly can't imagine there would be much to worry about on the 1.4 petrol, but I believe the 1.6 is an FSI. I'm sure I remember SLO saying these had issues though cant remember if there was something specific mentioned.
What I have read about and experienced first hand was the poor ride, which will obviously be worse on models with wider and lower profile tyres. I'd also imagine any bodywork damage might require more expertise than your typical local bodyshop due to the aluminium.
But much as I liked the 1.4PD when new, I wouldn't buy one now for the same reason I wouldn't touch most ageing diesels. I do like the A2, but if I was to buy one it would ideally be a low spec 1.4 petrol (with the smallest wheel option)
I wasn't aware that the TT had reached classic status?. Maybe the early cars which were closest to the shape original design prototype. The 225bhp versions were quick, but they weren't actually that great to drive otherwise. I wouldn't be overly concerned about classic status anyway, just get a nice one and look after it!
*Things that were mentioned was the blind spot caused by the thick A pillar, not having a low screen wash level alarm(!), very limited space for footrest next to clutch pedal, pedals being at different heights(?), trim rattles (probably a result of the hard ride). Seems to be relatively minor suff really.
|
|
One of our previous cars, a VW Touran, had the 1.9 PD engine. It was an excellent engine. The only problem it had was when the electronics for one of the injectors failed, causing a misfire.
|
|
|
