HDi 1.6 vs 2.0 Picasso?

pmhpmh · Post by **pmhpmh** » 14 Mar 2006, 16:41

I need to replace one of my older cars, altho I have feeling that the BX may stay!

A possibility is a Picasso as the discounts on offer are so good that it is not much more expensive to buy than some thing smaller. I will probably go diesel, a discount of more than £5k on a £15k car means that effects of a high depreciation rate is minimised.

HDi 1.6 vs 2.0 Picasso?

In the UK the 2.0HDi engine in Picassos has now been replaced by the newer, lighter, more powerful, torquier, more economical 1.6HDi.

There are some (new) 2.0HDi still available but they do not attract the same discounts and dealers seem unwilling to do do deal!

Do they know something I dont? Are they tougher more reliable or something?

Any comments from owners out there please.

wheeler · Post by **wheeler** » 14 Mar 2006, 20:03

id have the 2.0,no contest.

deian · Post by **deian** » 14 Mar 2006, 20:37

Maybe the 1.6 might have more torque, torque is what you feel, but it's the bhp that keeps the weight moving up the hills, so if the bhp is lower (which i guess it is from the 1.6 vs 2.0) in a big-ish car like the picasso and if you have a car full of people then you will lose the economy because the engine needs to work harder to produce the torque, which in turn may be why the dealers probably don't offer the discounts on the 2.0hdi's, also think about how long the engines have been out, the mechanics will know more about the 2.0HDI than the 1.6HDI, remember that the 2.0HDI is prone to failure if there is too much water in the diesel filter, so maybe the 1.6 has it's problems too. personally i'd go for the 2.0HDI, they still do 54MPG!

pmhpmh · Post by **pmhpmh** » 14 Mar 2006, 20:56

The power output of both the 1.6HDi and the 2.0 HDi in this application is the same at 90BHP.

There are 110 BHP versions of both engines but at a price premium of about £1k.

I am not over concerned about fully loaded performance since most use is 2 people + the flexibility of space for occassional use. Most people who have one are satisfied with performance.

I am looking for dirt (or otherwise ) on the 1.6HDi !!!

AndersDK · Post by **AndersDK** » 14 Mar 2006, 21:33

The following info may come as a disappointment to someone.
But the fact is that the later HDI 1.6 is as powerfull as the earlier HDI 2.0 - even the earlier HDI 2.2.
And that is at an impressive lower rpm figure

New technology is here now

- not just in the future

Sure this is brains food for some

Xsara Picasso HDI 92 (VTR) - 1.56L (1.6L) - 92Bhp/66kW @ 4000rpm - 215Nm max @ 1750rpm
Xsara Picasso HDI 110 FAP (VTR Plus) - 1.56L (1.6L) - 110Bhp/80kW @ 4000rpm - 240Nm max @ 1750

Jumper HDI 2.0 (1.997L) - 84Bhp/62kW @ 4000rpm - 195Nm max @ 1900rpm
Jumper HDI 2.2 (2.178L) - 100Bhp/74kW @ 4000rpm - 240Nm max @ 1900rpm
Jumper HDI 2.8 (2.798L) - 127Bhp/93.5kW @ 3600rpm - 300Nm max @ 1800rpm

Source : Citroen Denmark

Richard Gallagher · Post by **Richard Gallagher** » 14 Mar 2006, 21:55

I've just swopped my 2.0 HDI (90BHP) Berlingo for the new 1.6 HDI (92BHP) version and the difference is quite a revelation.

The 1.6 is much quieter and unlike the 2.0, there is virtually no turbo lag making the engine feel quite lively particularly at low revs. On top of this its also 3-5 mpg more economical.

Provided the difference in price is not too much then 1.6 is definately the way to go.

Homer · Post by **Homer** » 15 Mar 2006, 08:02

I almost commented on this yesterday having experience of a 1.6 and finding it lacking compared to the 2.0 especially on hills but then checked the Citroen website to find there are several versions of the 1.6HDi.

Since this was a Spanish model I don't know if the one I drove was the 110, the 90 or even the 75bhp model. (the 75bhp one is available on the Berlingo).

8304 · Post by **8304** » 15 Mar 2006, 08:48

deian wrote:Maybe the 1.6 might have more torque, torque is what you feel, but it's the bhp that keeps the weight moving up the hills, so if

its not bhp that keeps you moving on hills its torque..

bhp for accelaration and torque for staying power.

bhp is Pub talk. torque is more important.

Kowalski · Post by **Kowalski** » 15 Mar 2006, 11:22

AndersDK wrote:The following info may come as a disappointment to someone.
But the fact is that the later HDI 1.6 is as powerfull as the earlier HDI 2.0 - even the earlier HDI 2.2.

Jumper HDI 2.2 (2.178L) - 100Bhp/74kW @ 4000rpm - 240Nm max @ 1900rpm

The C5 didnt get that version of the 2.2 HDI, it got a more powerful 136bhp version.

You're right about the 1.6 HDI being more powerful than the 2.0 HDI that the Picasso got, the 2.0 HDI in the Picasso was only 90 BHP where as the 1.6 HDI is available with 110 BHP (and advertised on TV in the UK as having the 110 BHP).

Personally I'd probably go for the 1.6 (with 110 BHP), its more powerful and more economical. If I wanted to buy new and do half a million miles with it I'd probably buy the bigger engine, its more heavilly constructed, less stressed and will it'll no doubt last a lot longer.

8304 wrote: its not bhp that keeps you moving on hills its torque..

bhp for accelaration and torque for staying power.

bhp is Pub talk. torque is more important.

This was an interesting argument last time around...

The power that your engine is producing is what is accelarating the car, the torque goes into the gearbox and can be multiplied or divided but the power comes out at the other end. (Disclaimer, transmission losses may occur

)