1.9 td and 2.1td similarities

8304 · Unread post by **8304** » 28 Sep 2006, 23:33

hi

for those of you who are familiar with both the 1.9td engine and the 2.1 td, how similar are the engine mounting positions??
Will the 2.1 go in the place of a 1.9td or are the mounts in different places.

also, will a zx td gearbox fit onto a 2.1td engine??

i understand the 2.1 has a hydraulic clutch release.

any comments greatfully recieved.

citronut · Unread post by **citronut** » 29 Sep 2006, 08:45

yes the 1.9/2.1 engines do mount in the same place,and the2.1 i work on dose have a hydraulic clutch,but i find mos of the 1.9 ZXs i have driven seem to be a bit flat as opposed to BX and xantias with the 1.9D,so i think the gear ratio must be diferant,not only that you might find the speedo drive ratio is wrong for the xantia
regards malcolm

JohnD · Unread post by **JohnD** » 29 Sep 2006, 09:28

The top mountings are different. The 2.1 has additional fixing points down the side of the innerwing. Also the 2.1 has a ME5T gearbox.

Kowalski · Unread post by **Kowalski** » 29 Sep 2006, 11:32

JohnD wrote:The top mountings are different. The 2.1 has additional fixing points down the side of the innerwing. Also the 2.1 has a ME5T gearbox.

The 2.1 produces a load more torque than a 1.9, hence the need for the different gearbox. I think it would probably eat the ZX TD gearbox fairly quickly...

Unread post by **Peter.N.** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:07

If you get a 2.1 td from an XM it has a mechanical clutch.

8304 · Unread post by **8304** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:28

how similar is the block. would the zx gearbox physically bolt onto it??

i would be inclined to risk using the zx box as it removes the need to source driveshafts to fit both the zx hubs and the xm gearbox which would be difficult. if it goes bang i can change it for the xm box later.

im going to go to the breakers over the weekend and measure up the 2.1 and compare it to the 1.9 to see if it will fit.

does the 2.1 use the same block but with the 12 valve head?????

how good are the 2.1 engines?

Unread post by **RichardW** » 29 Sep 2006, 12:46

AFAIK the 2.1 uses the same block as the 1.9, just bored out a bit (and possibly stroked too). It is then fitted with a 12v head. It is a very tight fit under the Xantia bonnet, so getting it in a ZX is likely to be tough - but nothing's impossible with a grinder and a MIG! Since it is the same block, it ought to take the BE3 box, but the higher torque may well munch it after a while - you might need to fit a flywheel from a 1.9 to suit the cable clutch though.

You will need to find an early engine though - as all the ones fitted to the Xantia were ECU controlled, which is a heap more difficult to transplant.

Good luck!

8304 · Unread post by **8304** » 29 Sep 2006, 13:01

i have thought about swaping the flywheels over to accomodate the zx clutch and release mechanisms - luckily my brother is in the middle of fitting a 1.9td into a 205 so he has a spare flywheel which i can pinch!

it would be a real interesting project - my 1.9 with extra boost and fuel goes nicely but i bet a 2.1 with etra boost and fuel would be very quick.

the thing tdhats on my mind is ive just re-done evrything in my 1.9 (all belts, tensioners, clutch, water pump) when the head gasket failed so do i want to throw that engine away with all those new bit.......

it is very tempting though.

jeremy · Unread post by **jeremy** » 29 Sep 2006, 13:53

It's worth investigating the bore and stroke measurements and comparing the 2 engines. The difference between a 1.7 and 1.9 XUD is 3mm bore - which is 1.5mm all round as it were. Could a 1905 block be bored and take 2.1 pistons? - or what exactly is the difference?

Note Turbo engines have many unseen mods to make them stand the extra loads and remain reliable.

8304 · Unread post by **8304** » 29 Sep 2006, 14:29

the reason i am keen on the 2.1 is that it has a 12valve head. 1.9td is the biggest size indirect diesels have gone up to with two valves per cylinder. I think this is becuase above 1.9 they dont breathe well enough.

jeremy · Unread post by **jeremy** » 29 Sep 2006, 14:36

Strangely the old CX and I believe some XM.s were 2500 cc Turbo-diesels - and about 120 BHP if I recall correctly. 2 valves only!

Yes your point is valid. Some people claim considerable increases in performance by overboosting. I don't know where the head engine mount is on a 2.1. It could be this head fits the 1905 block (may be able to compare cylinder head gaskets) and so on.

Unread post by **Peter.N.** » 29 Sep 2006, 15:07

The 2.1 td is a brilliant engine, in fact I would go as far as to say its one of the best IDI engines ever produced. It has much more low down torque than the 1.9 and is quieter to due to the hydraulic tappets. In my XM, which is heavier than the Xantia I get between 40 and 50 mpg although I dont drive hard or very fast, but because of the high torque it will pull anywhere at 2,000 rpm so you dont have to change gear much and use a lot of revs.

It is not as easy to work on though, mainly because of its size relative to the engine compartment and because it is more complicated. It does have a considerably improved cooling system over the 1.9, the thermostat being in the return from the radiator, so no obstruction to the head and therefore no airlocks.

Because of the hydraulic tappets it has a seperate camshaft carrier which makes the engine taller than the 1.9 and its is set at an angle, leaning back toward the bulkhead, which is one reason that its difficult to work on in the car, so if you do use one, put a new head gasket on before you fit it if its done much more than 100k. I did change the head gasket on mine in situ, last year but it took about 20 hours and a lot of grazed knuckles and back ache!

As Jeremy says the 2.5s in the CXs were brilliant for their day, even the non turbo ones were 75 bhp which gave petrol engine type performance in the early '80s. My last one was a turbo which was 95 bhp, the intercooled one which came out in '87 was 120 bhp and 183 ft/lbs at 3,600 rpm and would do 120 mph with amazing refinement. I rattled a bit a tickover but you really couldn't hear it when you were driving, and the handling was like driving a 17' mini!

8304 · Unread post by **8304** » 29 Sep 2006, 15:47

thanks for your replies.

the other option i have got is to see if the 2.1 head will fit onto the 1.9 block.
i will check this by comparing head gaskets.
As the 1.9 and 2.1 are fundamentaly the same block i suspect this might be the case.
i need to go to the breakers on the weekend and measure it all up to see if it will work.

ive heard good things about the 2.1 - if i can fit a complete lump i will but i would settle for the 2.1 head as it has 12valve and loads more potential.....

KP · Unread post by KP » 29 Sep 2006, 17:22

Certainly worth a go as our 2.1 is so much easier to rev than our 1.9td xantia and i reckon is a lot better on the old go juice at say 80mph+ as well. its more like one of the newer HDi engines with a VNT turbo it picks up so well low down

If you do get just the head which pump are you going to use as it would be interesting to see if the Bosch pump would fit on as the lucas pumps arent as strong and if your thinking longterm i would certainly be putting bits on that have been proved to last the longest. Also maybe getting the injectors cleaned out would be an idea while its all being done and its not too pricey and certainly worth doing with the age of the vehicles and may enable you to use some veggie oil and advance the injection pump a little for some more power and make use of that extra boost from the turbo

JohnD · Unread post by **JohnD** » 29 Sep 2006, 18:45

[quote="jeremy"]It's worth investigating the bore and stroke measurements and comparing the 2 engines.quote]

For the 1.9 and 2.1 engines the figures go like this:-
Bore 83mm and 85mm.
Stroke 88mm and 92mm

Also the two engines have different belt tensioner mechanisms and different sizes of cambelt. One has 136 teeth, the other 149. Mixing a 1.9 block with a 2.1 head could need a belt somewhere between the two.