Has anyone had any experience of both the 3-cylinder 80bhp diesel and the 4-cylinder 105bhp diesel in the Roomster? I had a brief road test in the 1.9 Scout version this week and was very impressed: very solid car, quiet engine and good acceleration. The smaller engine is quoted as marginally more economical but its acceleration times are way down.
Any opinions on the Roomster from owners who've had one for a while?
|
The 3 cylinder will likely be grim on torque, below 2,000 revs.
I had the 75bhp version of this engine in a Lupo TDI. It seemed like a 3 legged donkey until 2,300 revs, then it took off, only to loose the torque a little further up the rev band.
Regards
|
The 1.9 105 sounds like the standard 105 PDI. I have had two of these now - Its got great torque from 1500 revs up to 4000 revs and these is no sudden "off the cliff" loss of power at the top end. Fabulous 50 - 70 punch in any gear, and frugal. Sounds like a 1968 transit starting from cold, its not as refined as some but good enough.
------
< Ulla>
|
Highly recommend the 1.9, all the tests tell you that the 1.4 is too weak. The 1.6 is plenty fast enough...the diesel is pretty good. Still impressed, no gripes so-far.
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?f=2&t=57...8
Has the full story - so far.
It is the 105bhp. I like the engine, very willing little lump (and it can be chipped). Steering is best described as "quick" with a sharp turn in. Brakes are quite fierce, radio is a bit iffy, but binning that next week for a nice little Alpine head unit I had stashed upstairs. I've been let out of more junctions in the last
week than in the previous year.
Edited by Pugugly {P} on 14/11/2007 at 19:10
|
|
I take it you have looked at this thread which deals with the same question: www.briskoda.net/forums/roomster/1-4-tdi-1-9-tdi-c.../
|
|
Thanks very much for this, tyro. Hadn't been on the Briskoda website before. The thread you highlight answers all my questions!
|
|
|
|
|
No wonder people are being nice to you you're no longer a BMW driver.
|
|
By the way, Corrib12, are you still weighing up the respective merits of the Roomster and the Berlingo, or have you definitely opted to go for the Roomster?
|
|
Still got the Berlingo, 56K on the clock, running great. May keep it through the winter, though that will involve replacing four Vredestein Quatracs at around 28K. Am very drawn to the Roomster but also waiting to test the Suzuki SX4 with the Peugot 1.6HDi in rather than the 1.9 Fiat engine.
|
I had the 1.9 in a Fabia estate and replaced it after 6 years with the 1.4 80bhp in another Fabia estate, so can compare the two engines in the same car - would agree that the 1.9 has much better power range than the 1.4, also its a lot smoother and less noisy. The 1.4 is more economical, though not that much and I think in the Roomster they are both in the same tax band, which does away with the saving you will get if you got a Fabia where one is B and the other C! The 1.9 would happily potter around in 5th at 35mph, but the 1.4 won't.
In the Roomster I'd get the 1.9, its a big bigger and heavier car than the Fabia and I suspect that the 1.9 would suit it better.
|
|
|
|
|
