Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

This is the place for posts that don't fit into any other category.

Moderator: RichardW

User avatar
spider
Posts: 3949
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 15:28
x 63

Re: Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

Post by spider » 23 Nov 2013, 15:29

The earlier 1.9 would be OK as its likely a lot easier to obtain in good condition compared to a 1.8TD unit, given there are more 1.9's around.

Ideally get a 91-95 unit (this has nothing to do with the DHY 'concern' that I won't go into (perhaps that should read "will come out" regarding the block) , its just the earlier units apart from no module on the pump are EGR free and also are more powerful, on the road for sure, on paper the same. I guess they wound it down to curb smoke emissions.

User avatar
nametooshort
Posts: 146
Joined: 22 Mar 2012, 10:22

Re: Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

Post by nametooshort » 23 Nov 2013, 15:57

I was under the impression that there are actually a lot of minor differences, almost like the 1.9s are like the Mk II version or something. They have different cylinder heads, different inlet/exhaust systems (the 1.8s got the alloy log inlet manifold, whereas the 1.9s got the more familiar semi-banana alloy inlet that mates to a top mounted plastic plenum) and apparently the 1.8s have better flowing heads.

Its not a impossible scenario. For example with aircooled VWs, the 1.8 is actually better than the 2.0 because of it's much better heads. Car manufacturers seem to have a habit of making their own engines worse.

A lot of people seem to say that the 1.8td is actually BETTER than the 1.9td, because it breathes better and revs higher. Thats the whole reason why I posted this thread, to find out if thats true or not.

I kind of ignored the 1.9, the choice has always been either the 1.8 (because of its legendary performance, supposedly) or the 2.1, just because its the biggest one they made.

Northern_Mike

Re: Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

Post by Northern_Mike » 23 Nov 2013, 20:36

The 1.9TD, to me, is a much nicer engine. You'll find it relatively easy to get more power out of too. I think Xac is the expert on that.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

evilally
Posts: 743
Joined: 17 Apr 2008, 22:39
x 1

Re: Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

Post by evilally » 24 Nov 2013, 13:19

I think swapping out a 1.8 with a 1.9 would be a straight forward task (certainly I've seen a lot of 205 1.9TD conversions kicking about). Swapping it out with a 2.1 would be a lot of work as far as I can gather but can be done. I suspect that your concerns about flow and revs would be more influenced by the choice of turbo rather than the choice of engine.

As Mike says if you want to go faster in a 1.9 it's easy and cheap to do so. Standard turbos can yield up to 130bhp with no additional parts, DW10 con rods and a larger turbo will see you a cheap 180bhp. Some of the more enthusiastic types have fitted variable geometry turbos for 200+ bhp. I expect the 1.8 would be similar but I don't recall having seen a build, whereas the 1.9 is tried and tested and it has been well proven what works and what doesn't. Likewise the 2.1 can see decent gains but then you have the headache of getting it fitted. This is the conclusion I've come to at any rate for my 405 build. :mrgreen:

User avatar
nametooshort
Posts: 146
Joined: 22 Mar 2012, 10:22

Re: Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

Post by nametooshort » 24 Nov 2013, 20:15

Well, its kind of the impression I got, but after posting a lot of threads on here and researching it in every way possible (if you look at some of my other threads, you can see I had this headache for a while no lol), I still don't entirely understand in detail what the major differences between the 2.1 and 1.9 are. In theory, since they are basically the same block, it should be no more or less difficult than fitting a 1.9, since the 1.9 and 2.1 *should* be the same apart from bore diameter and injection quantity. But, obviously life is never that easy. What I am trying to gather is exactly what, in detail, it would entail.

I own or have owned quiet a lot of cars with engine transplants, and there are two golden rules when it comes to them:

1) Fit the motor with the most potential, which usually means the biggest motor out of that family.

2) Stock is better than modified, always. There is no point turning a weaker variant when a stronger stock variant exists. The only genuine reason to modify something is if you have already exhausted all stock options first. Everybody forgets this rule, but its very important. For example, I know a dude who spent like 25Gs on a Golf. It has stand-alone engine management, a hand-built engine, etc etc. But for some reason he did that to a 1.8. You could just pick up a VR6 of the same age for a couple of Gs and it will absolutely wipe the floor with it, while still maintaining stock reliability, air conditioning, and a stock service interval, running on normal pump gas etc. So basically he think he all individual and such but really he made a Golf less reliable and more maintenance-intensive while achieving power levels which can be achieved with a stock VR6 variant, and he also wasted a lot of cash doing that.

So, to maintain reliability and maintenance friendliness I want to fit the best stock option.

But a lot of people think that the 1.8 is a better stock option than a 2.1, for reasons which I am trying to ascertain by this thread.

Like I said, it HAS been known for a smaller engine to be better than it's bigger brother, but its very uncommon. Instinct tells me that for sure a 2.1 is much better than a 1.8, but some people disagree. Are those people just incorrect?

User avatar
spider
Posts: 3949
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 15:28
x 63

Re: Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

Post by spider » 10 Dec 2013, 18:16

The only thing I disliked about the STDT's I saw is that most of them appeared to have a beige fascia :vomit1: :oops: :( whereas the D-Turbo's had a black facia, as well as the later MardiGra models although the STDT and DTurbo's had the full length central console with cubby box and heater outlets etc, a decent tacho equipped instrument panel (looks like the early 405 ones) and digi clock at the centre (ish) of the dash.

Talking of digi clocks its was on the wrong side on a RHD car, Jim not sure if you noticed but you cannot really see the clock easily as the steering wheel obscures it on a RHD car. I looked at swapping the clock to the other side of the panel way back then but it was not easy panels not symmetrical.

User avatar
CitroJim
A very naughty boy
Posts: 41564
Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 23:33
x 1033

Re: Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

Post by CitroJim » 10 Dec 2013, 18:31

You know Andy, I'd almost forgotten about the beige fascia in the STDT... Yes, it was a bit but then it went with the beige carpet and seats...

The 205 was not unique with the clock problem. Sit in and drive a LHD XM and see how things make much more sense. It seems that in the RHD model some minor but important things were well overlooked..

Biggest thing in the XM which is important in an auto with cruise is there's no footrests in the driver's footwell. The passenger has them :roll: :twisted:

Also, you cannot see the gearbox sport and snow buttons and have to grope for them. The passenger can see them perfectly...

User avatar
spider
Posts: 3949
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 15:28
x 63

Re: Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

Post by spider » 10 Dec 2013, 18:43

:)

The 206 wipers annoy me a bit actually as they are LHD, 307's are not too bad given they move "up and out" instead of "across" but the 'gap' on the drivers side ie a blind unswept part of the screen is a fraction larger than the left side, if that makes sense.

Don't you have your 'parking brake' pedal there on the XM ? , then again that's high up the dash so room for a footrest yes.

Oh well. :D

User avatar
CitroJim
A very naughty boy
Posts: 41564
Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 23:33
x 1033

Re: Anybody had/have a 1.8D-turbo? (205 or otherwise)?

Post by CitroJim » 10 Dec 2013, 19:12

I noticed the 206 wiper issue when Robyn had one. I would have driven me mad if it was my car..

The XM still has plenty of room for a footrest despite the parking brake pedal as it's high in the footwall...

I guess they used as much of the standard LHD shell for RHD cars and changed as little as possible; production numbers perhaps could not justify the tooling so we're left with funnies like the footrests...