General Why not 1.3 Multijet

[janem]

Hi

Can someone post some explanation or thoughts why there is no entry level diesel option with 1.3 90HP multijet available? That same engine is used in Astra, also Peugeot 308 is coming with 90 HP diesel engine, but in Bravo you can choose only 1.9 Multijet which is quite expensive here.

Regards

 

[Hellcat]

The entry level petrol 1.4 100bhp is enough in a Panda to make a very quick car. In the Bravo it's a good enough entry level engine. The 1.3 diesel would make the Bravo a rather sluggish car which isn't the image Fiat want for the car.

All the segment C cars in the past have had 1.9 diesel engines ever since the 1.7 turbo diesel was phased out of the Tipo.

 

[santa]

Fiat's new 1,6 Multijet is to be presented in the near future (it's already mentioned in ePer). Should come 120hp (and perhaps 105hp) versions.

 

[Hellcat]

Is there much use for 3 sizes of engine?

Between the 1.3 and 1.9 they can get anything from 90 to 150 currently and with the dual-turbo engines upto 190bhp. I don't see why they would bother fitting in anything between 90 and 120bhp, unless they are trying to make a performance small diesel for the Panda/GP to compete with the Renault small diesel (1.5?)

 

[janem]

Yes, maybe there is no need for 3rd size like 1.6 but for me is little bit strange that entry level diesel is 120 HP when competition have entry level diesels from 80HP +- and they are selling them like hot cakes (VW), so if Fiat offers Bravo with 1.3 it will have more decent price. Also I think that it won't be so slower then 1.4 90HP.

Other question. Is 1.4 90HP sourced from GM or it is same detuned engine used in Stilo and GP?

 

[ChrisUK]

If your on about the 1.4 16v Petrol engine then its a Fiat unit (over bored and revamped 1.2 16v from the punto/bravo etc) and its 95bhp or a 100bhp depending on what car its in (95bhp in the new bravo I think).

As for a mid rang diesel unit there is not point the 1.3 mjet is good for 120bhp out the factory if fiat wanted to (wont do because it would mean the 1.9 8v unit isn't much better).

 

[santa]

The 1,6 16V Multijet will replace the 1,9 8V Multijet.
It's offering the same power but is more economical.
Also planed are 2 new diesels (2,0 and 2,5) based on the "old" 1,9 and 2,4 Multijets but very heavily modified.

 

[Tris Harris]

the 1.6 m-jet is also being introduced to help lower Fiats overall emissions on their car range as it it predicted to emit much less than the base 1.9 m-jet.

 

[janem]

If your on about the 1.4 16v Petrol engine then its a Fiat unit (over bored and revamped 1.2 16v from the punto/bravo etc) and its 95bhp or a 100bhp depending on what car its in (95bhp in the new bravo I think).

As for a mid rang diesel unit there is not point the 1.3 mjet is good for 120bhp out the factory if fiat wanted to (wont do because it would mean the 1.9 8v unit isn't much better).

I know that 1.3 engine has potential for 120 HP (in year or two) but for me there is no logic why they are not offering 1.3 90HP multijet in bravo range as entry level diesel when competition have that offer.

 

[ChrisUK]

Well I think its to do with whats already been mentioned they don't want to portray a slow image with any new fiat but most importantly the Bravo (which is currently there flagship model). The 1.3 90bhp is great in the punto but thats a fair bit lighter than even the Active Bravo (100kg+) according to fiats figures. This would make it just too much for the little engine to cope without being retuned.

 

[The Beard]

Another explanation is perhaps that while the 70hp MJ is a fine motor for my Panda, I understand from various sources that the 90hp model in the Grande Punto suffers from the odd flat spot. If this is the case, then trying to produce even more power and torque with engine development as it stands can only exacerbate the probem. As a parallel, if you go back to the late 70's Volvo were building 180 bhp 6 litre truck engines where the likes of Cummins and Gardner needed 9 and 10 litre motors to produce the same power and even greater levels of torque. There was a high level of distrust in the transport industry at the time of engines of that size producing those output levels, some of them well founded as there were issues with engine life and although they were light and quite economical they were high revving for the time which made them quite un-diesel like to drive which went some way to explaining some of the problems they had. But then look at the progress: 1967-12 litres = 190 bhp. 1977-8 litres =190 bhp. 1987-6 litres =190 bhp. 1997-4 litres =190 bhp. 2007-1.9 litres=190 bhp. I'm sure with more R&D the 1.3 MJ will go on to power bigger cars. It's quite possible the 2.4 5-cyl. will only appear in the big Alfas and Lancias putting out 240/250 bhp and the 1.9 with 190 bhp restricted to Croma/159 size cars. That would leave the 1.3 rated at 70-105 bhp and the 1.6 running at 120-150 bhp. Nonetheless, for quite some time I think the 1.3 would struggle to move any car much bigger than Grande Punto. Oops! That turned into a bit of a marathon . If anybody reads it I'll be interested to know if they managed to stay awake long enough to get to the end.

 

[Hellcat]

I.... made it..

 

[The Beard]

If you have problems sleeping, I can record it all onto a cassette or CD. Just make sure you don't have any sleeping tablets, sharp bladed implements or lengths of rope lying round.

 

[tonywalk]

If you have problems sleeping, I can record it all onto a cassette or CD. Just make sure you don't have any sleeping tablets, sharp bladed implements or lengths of rope lying round.

I have a tablet but it's hibernated not sleeping - is that ok?

Tony.

P.S. One word. Paragraphs!

 

[G.P.S]

Well I think its to do with whats already been mentioned they don't want to portray a slow image with any new fiat but most importantly the Bravo (which is currently there flagship model). The 1.3 90bhp is great in the punto but thats a fair bit lighter than even the Active Bravo (100kg+) according to fiats figures. This would make it just too much for the little engine to cope without being retuned.

I would say that the 90bhp unit is terrible in the GP Chris......I owned one before treating myself to a 130bhp. It had serious turbo lag and not nearly as economical as Fiat claimed.

You might as well get out and walk rather than put it in a Bravo

 

[ChrisUK]

I would say that the 90bhp unit is terrible in the GP Chris......I owned one before treating myself to a 130bhp. It had serious turbo lag and not nearly as economical as Fiat claimed.

You might as well get out and walk rather than put it in a Bravo

Aparantly this was adressed by fiat on later 90bhp models and there was talk of a software update (a.k.a remap) done by fiat which solves this problem.

I have drove one without the fix and one with and it makes a difference.

Of course you could get it done yourself and get the extra 20bhp+ but lets not start that debate again .

 

[G.P.S]

Aparantly this was adressed by fiat on later 90bhp models and there was talk of a software update (a.k.a remap) done by fiat which solves this problem.

I have drove one without the fix and one with and it makes a difference.

Of course you could get it done yourself and get the extra 20bhp+ but lets not start that debate again .

Still they're not producing the 90bhp anymore as I understand it. Whichever way you look at it diesel is the way forward.....but a 1.3 just isn't big enough for the new Bravo.

There was talk of a 1.9 16v 190bhp development that will be used by the new range of Alpha's......that's more like it!

 

[Hellcat]

There still is... if they can just hold off for a couple more years then I'll trade the Bravo 150 for a 190... Dont want mine to be 'old tech' less than a year since buying it