Had a couple of cars with the old 1905 lump. (both non-turbo). Excellent engines, and most on here seem to agree.
Wondering about the 2.1 litre derivative - is it just as durable?
Comments, on a postcard, to.......
|
I would say yes.
A mate has a 2.1 in a Xantia....its done 270,000 miles and has only been serviced four times!! Still runs fine.
|
|
I had a 605 with this engine for a short while, it was company pool car, very narrow power band IIRC.
|
|
|
>>>its done 270,000 miles and has only been serviced four times!!
Are you telling us that the oil was in the engine for 70,000 miles at a time? Or did it have interim oil changes?
|
|
I know it sounds crazy, but yes the oil has only been changed four times. Im amazed the thing still runs, but its actually fine.
|
|
|
|
|
As far as it goes I think these will run as long as an XUD and folks like the more powerful feel. However I think you will find any 2.1 has some complicated and potentially unreliable electronic controls on the diesel injection compared with the basic easy to repair 1.9 system.
Also on the 2.1 some jobs are engine out or head off that would have been routine on the 1.9.
David
|
|
I seem to recall one or two long running threads on here a few years back, regarding misfires (I think) on the 2.1 diesel lump.
|
|
Mine (in a 605 auto) threw the cambelt and destroyed the engine and yes it did have a narrow power band.
|
|
I mini-cabbed a 605 auto with this lump in, bought it with 125,000 mls changed the cambelt, then used it hard and sold it with 225,000 onit and it still ran fine didn't use any oil either.
|
IIRC the engine has electronically cided pumps (with immobiliser).. and in some applications (Xantia) are very very tight fits so .. ... difficult to work on.
Excellent reliability record if maintained and water levels kept up to snuff otherwise HG problems..
|
|
|
|
|
I ran a 605 with the 2.1 engine for about 6 years. Did 175,000 when sold, no problems with engine/ gearbox/ clutch. Great car, wish I had kept it.
|
|
|
