Why does a 1.9 TiD have 150 Bhp and the 2.2 Tid only have 120Bhp? Can the Bhp of the 2.2 be 'upped' safely by replacing the EMS with that of one from a 1.9? Or, is it just a case of changing a chip in the ESM? Logic says a bigger engine should be more powerfull but I sense it's not as easy as that! Any ideas?
|
|
The 150PS (148bhp) 1.9 CDTI in a Saab/GM/Fiat uses common rail injection and 16v technology. The old 2.2 diesel was not common rail and therefore less powerful and less refined. Totally different engines I am afraid. Probably can get the 2.2 chipped, but it's old diesel technology.
|
Thanks for your reply rtj70. When I bought the car I was told that this was the first time this type of engine had been put into the 95 i.e. a new engine for the model. Am I to presume that the engine is of of the older varity? I guess if it was the newer model then it would say 'CDTI' and not TiD. Is there anywhere I can view new engine pics to find out for certain? Sounds like a spotter thing to ask but it'll varify if I've been spun a yarn so to speak.
|
The older 2.2TDi engines are shared with other GM cars, e.g. Signum and Vectra C. Not sure about pictures but the engine you have will be the same as the 2.2 Diesel in the Vectra. Now they use two variants of the FIAT 1.9, in 8v and 16v formats, giving either 120PS or 150PS.
I'm sure you were told the truth about this being the first time the 2.2 diesel was put in the 9-5. But that's not the same as it being a new engine I'm afraid.
Rob
PS I think SAAB still badge the new common rail diesels as TiD though. Believe me the newer 1.9 is a better engine but not the most poweful or torquey (is that a word ??)
|
Thanks once again rtj70. I'll live with it for now! Any comments or answers on my other subject I listed on here?
Kind regards.
|
I'd be very surprised if you could use a "chip" from the newer 1.9 in the 2.2 diesel. They are not related - the 1.9 is a FIAT engine and very good.
I assume you test drove the car and was happy and if that is the case what is the problem. For a diesel BHP is not the thing it's torque. I think the 2.2 diesel produced 280Nm of torque whereas the 16v 150PS 1.9 does about 315Nm. But to annoy Mondeo bashers, the Mondeo 2.2 TDCi can do 400Nm (with overboost but 360Nm otherwise). In many places I know the current 2.0 TDCi is apparently capable of 147PS (according to rolling road measurements) and 330Nm torque.
|
But to annoy Mondeo bashers, the Mondeo2.2 TDCi can do 400Nm (with overboost but 360Nm otherwise). In many places I know the current 2.0 TDCi is apparently capable of 147PS (according to rolling road measurements) and 330Nm torque.
Yes the 2.2 is quoted as 155 bhp / 400nm and the 2.0 130 as 130 / 350nm however in std form the 2.2s produce around 165 bhp and the 2.0 around 147 to 150.
|
|
|
|
When I bought the car Iwas told that this was the first time this type of engine had been put into the 95 i.e. a new engine for the model.
The 2.2 tid engine was fitted to Vectras and Saab 9-3's from 1998, but it wasn't fitted to the 9-5 until 2002. So he was not fibbing in saying it was a new engine for the model, even though it was a not a new engine overall. You say yours is a 2002 model in your other thread; the 1.9 CDTi engines were not introduced until 2004 (in 9-3's, poss. later in 9-5's) so no chance your car could have the 1.9 engine.
|
|
|
|
|
I had a 2.2 SaaB 93, and can tell you that this is a oldish design direct-injection diesel and is fairly unrefined compared to the common rail 1.9 unit.
I believe that there is some scope for upping the BHP on the 2.2, as this is normally just done by allowing greater Turbo boost pressure. However you have to accept that the 1.9 unit is really a 'next-generation' diesel and will always have the edge...
|
|
|
Everyone else has said most of what there is to say, but just to confirm it is possible to chip the engine to somewhere round about 150bhp. Have a look round the 9-5 forum at www.saabscene.com/saabforum/postlist.php/Cat/0/Boa...2 , where you'll find lots of good advice.
The 2.2 although "old tech" is a perfectly good engine and probably the most reliable in the Saab range. I had a 9-3 with the 115bhp version of the same engine and it was quite adequate with good econmy, although a bit rattly, and a good motorway cruiser with plenty of torque. As the 9-5 is heavier, you won't see supersonic performance unless you chip it.
|
I drove the 2.2 unit in a Vectra C belonging to a colleague and was very impressed with it. Effortless, torquey and quite responsive.
Has racked up 60k in this car and not missed a beat despite Vauxhall's ludicrous 30k service intervals.
Cheers
DP
|
|
|
You beat me to it Mike, I was going to suggest the Saabscene forum.
saab95tid:
I dont know a lot about 9-5's but I think the 2002 model had the 115bhp engine, not the uprated 125bhp that went in the 9-3?. Lots of companies do chip tuning boxes for 115's, not so many do them for the 125 model, but one company that does both is: www.tuningbox.com/ANG/marka.php . You'll have to check for definite which engine yours is to get the right chip. I've got a Tuningbox on my 9-3 115bhp and it totally transforms it.
Also research whether you can have a proper rolling road remap done somewhere local to you, as this can sometimes be cheaper and the mapping can be tailored to *your* car rather than the generic map in a tuning box.
But I would get your CEL issue checked out first before you chip it, to be on the safe side...
;o)
|
|
Thanks folks, lots of info there. rtj70, I did not test drive my actual car. I bought it from new and but test drove a 9-3 with the same engine. My car was built for me at Trollhatten, to my spec with all the extras I ordered. It was Diplomatic Sales, (tax free) and only came with a.............wait for it...............one year warranty. I didn't even look at the length of warranty as I took it for granted that ALL new cars came with a three year warranty. What I'm getting at is that I had a reply from BR subject of the '8 year engine warranty'. I'm going to look into this one for my CEL/Engine Malfunction problem. Does anyone know of a reliable Saab dealer in the Swansea area? Will get this problem sorted before thinking about upping Bhp. By the look of it though, I'll probably not bother!
|
|
I didn't mean test drive the actual car, but the same model. Before I chose current car I had one on loan for 3 days before I made my mind up.
|
|
|
|
I bought a car in Germany on the same deal as you ie Diplomatic/Military tax free and it certainly had a 2 year warranty, but this was in 1999 I must add. I thought anything from anywhere came with a 2 year Pan European warranty these days. Have you contacted SAAB sales in Picadilly to check this warranty duration?
|
|
Armitage Shanks, if it was a two year warranty then it would have ran out anyway. Or did you mean the 8 year engine warranty? I bought a book called 'Made in Trollhatten' and it mentions in there about Saab being pioneers of the turbo charged engine! Don't get me wrong, I love Saab and I love my car but when you here of such problems beinb so wide spread, you'd think that there would be a recall or a plan put in place by Saab to rectify the problem. Do you still have the car you bought in 99? Anyone else had problems with the stereo display? Oh, and the CD player in the dash doesn't work anymore either! Why do I still like Saab's so much?!!!!
|
|
The 1.9 150 is infinitely more refined than the 2.2 as well as being more powerful, more torquey and more economical. However as has been said it is certainly not class leading in torque terms being well behind the 1.9s and 2.0s from Ford (Mondeo/X-Type) Ford/PSA (Focus/407/V40 etc), VAG (Golf, A4. Leon, Octavia etc) BMW, Renault and Toyota.
|
|
|
|
Confusion caused by the fact that I am not familiar with the build changes to SAAB cars and I can't see that you mentioned a purchase date! Yes we still have 99 car; the paintwork is oustanding, in my view, it is the Pepper Red which suits the car. No other minor troubles except all wheel nuts went rusty and replacements were just as bad in 6 months, just major ones! A faulty batch of injector seals caused poor starting = easy fix under warranty. Poor, sluggish performance with no warnings or smoke. Main agent stripped and checked turbo system (out of warranty) for no charge. Car seemed to run better. Then more starting problems, turned out to be the injection pump and the MAF. See my earlier posted link in this thread, to the problem. I don't drive it much but my partner does and it suits her. The depreciation is/was horrendous and parts prices are steep; £1800 for a pump on a car not worth £2500! It now seems very dated, the windscreen is very shallow ie not tall - like driving in a letter box!
|
This is common to all diesels && one of the reason I won't have another. Dead diesel pumps are seriously bad news on a newer motor when they're worth £2-3K it will be crippling. Car Mechanics recently did a parts cost survey on the Focus TDCI & pumps for them are <£1,000 to £1,500! That'll annihalate any fuel savings when it's five years old.
|
It all started with a question which was raised due to me not knowing the full 'ins & outs'. I'm not planning on changing anything to do with the EMS. Apart from the problems I have at the moment the car is fantastic. I now know that I have old but reliable technolgy and not the technology that the 1.9 is based upon. Many thanks to all who have shared/parted with their pearls of wisdom and given me suggestions for where to look for more info. I have looke at Saabscene and there's enough there to keep me going for quiet a while! Once again, thanks you.
Kind regards,
Karl.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
