Multipla cambelt, £75?

Without knowing the technical details, that doesn't sound too far off just to whip off the old belt and replace with new.

You might want to check out exactly what work is being done - I'd want to spend a bit more and have stuff like the tensioners and possibly water pump (if it's cambelt driven) done at the same time.

Remember, it's a relatively simple engine and access is good in a Fuglypla engine bay.

He did say it could cost a little more if some kit he mentioned was needed.

Its the way it should be innit?

Pay up and get it done properly - I did a pikey change on my Cinquecento only to have to do it again 10k miles later because the waterpump gave up on me.

Even less convenient would be if a tensioner stopped tensioning, bending all the valves.

Cambelt changes are something I never cut corners on.

It could easily be like that if we were all satisfied with SOHC, 8v lumps with all the power of a 1975 Marina. If you want decent power and emissions, you're going to need twin cams, 16v and variable timing, which makes things a bit cramped.

Don't forget that the Fuglypla is significantly wider than most similar sized cars, meaning extra access space in the engine bay.

Im more than happy with this at the minute.

I heard that the Multipla diesel can be improved, rather than being chipped, by simply changing the MAF sensor.

Anyone know anything about this? A few more HP would make my enjoyment of it even greater.

Sounds like one of the 'tuning boxes' which fool the ECU by interepting and altering the reading from the MAF to get more fuel into the engine.

They can be quite effective on a diesel, but I'd be looking at having a proper remap - not usually too expensive considering the gains you can get from a JTD.

I wonder about the remaps, do they only offer benefits for certain circumstances such that many motorists would not notice any difference?

If improvements are possible, why didn't the manufacturer implement them? Are there detriments like increased wear?

I have read a bit on the chippers sites but they would rosy it up wouldn't they.

Not really. Swapping the MAF for that from a slightly larger sized engine may have its benefits. The uprated MAF may very well be of a larger diameter / and or less restrictive design, potentially increasing air flow.

A popular mod with the 1.8 Zetec is to fit the 2.0 MAF, which helps bring it towards the 130PS spec of the XR3i engine.

Mainly to be competitive in fuel efficiency, and to meet emissions standards.

But mainly so they can sell one with an extra 25-50bhp for a big wedge of cash more, even though the only difference is the map in the chip.

Nicely profitable, that one.

I think it can vary from engine to engine. An alleged Citroen specialist quoted me £70 for a cambelt change on an AX diesel, TUD5 engine, I queried it, he said he only did the belt and just checked the idler, tensioner and waterpump, and would changed them if any signs of wear at extra cost, however he had never encountered any wear on them in any TUD5 nor known them fail. I believed him, but then I wanted to because I'm a tight bastard.

I can't think of any vehicles like that, off the top of my head. Usually if a higher powered variant of the same engine is supplied, there tends to be some extra toys with it. An example is the ST24/ST200.

Erm, VAG are masters of it.

Think about the old 90 / 110 / 130bhp diesels.

In fact, it's the same now - my car has the 138bhp diesel, but you can get what's effectively just a remapped version with the 168bhp engine and exactly the same spec.

I'm sure Alfa did the same with a JTD, too.

ALWAYS CHANGE THE PULLEYS/TENSIONERS. They're usually the reason belts fail prematurely.

Don't they put in a stronger drivetrain components/brakes, or maybe stiffen the chassis?

Andrew

On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 09:52:27 -0000, I waved a wand and this message magically appears in front of Andrew Morton:

If they're producing the parts for a fixed price, it's still cheaper to use them rather than produce different parts made to a lower spec anyway.

Well, sort of - the 130bhp version was a lot different to the 90/110bhp engines. AFAIK the 90 and 110 were exactly the same with a different map (though maybe one had an intercooler and t'other didn't), but the 130bhp had the PD system.

I may or may not be right in thinking that the lower power of the earlier PD engines (115bhp) replaced the 110bhp old-style TDI in the range.