Pug/Cit 1.9TD engine starting problems in Synergie MPV

Other XUD experts will add, but AFAIK there is only a very simple electronic controller on your engine and this controls the EGR and pump advance solonoid. It doesnt link with the immobilizer, which is a separate unit- and all this does is inhibit the cut off soloniod so stopping fuel to the injectors.

Your problem does indeed sound like an immobilizer problem (although the red light should flash if its detected a fault) OR for some other related (immobilizer relay) or non related reason- the cut off solonoid is not retracting to allow fuel to pass - as indicated by the total lack of combustion during cranking the one moment, and then a normal instant smoke free start the next.

Tim..

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "Tmax" saying something like:

Utter, utter bollocks; that's exactly what modern high-speed diesels are designed to do - sit on load for hours on end.

You obviously know next to f*ck all about it.

Why would that cause them any problem?

The message from DuncanWood contains these words:

In fact, running at a constant load, whether high or low, may actually be better for the engine 'cos it's not running up and down the temperature range all the time.

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Guy King saying something like:

In fact, there's no better way to f*ck up a diesel than to run it lightly all the time. They're built for running under load and an 1100 mile blast at 80mph is well within the capabilities of a modern lump.

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "Tmax" saying something like:

I certainly don't buy into that piece of bullshit. Oil changed every 5-6 thousand on my vehicles.

I actually agree with you on that one.

But now you're talking rubbish. A long steady high-speed run will not damage a decently-designed engine (yes, there have been some s**te designs in the past), and in the case of modern high-speed diesels (here's a tip, look up the commonly accepted definition of high-speed as applied to diesel engines) it's what they are designed to do; day in, day out. I've come across many cooking diesels fitted in light commercials which have uncomplainingly covered 2-300,000 miles.

It's now that many private buyers are reaping the benefits, and to say that a modern 1.9 tdi isn't capable of doing an 1100 mile motorway blast is total bollocks. Ffs, crappy old Escort diesels were doing that on a daily basis years ago in many courier companies. Indeed, one of the best and unsung small diesel engines was the Perkins dieselised O-series from the Rover Group. That bloody engine went on for ever.

But the Perkins was (almost certainly) a slow revving, long stroke, engine.

Just look at the ridiculous amounts of power now being extracted from small diesels - 130ps from the VW 1.9 pd, for example. To get this sort of performance you've got to be working the engine very hard indeed - with massive compression ratios. What diesels needed a cambelt change every

I know the new diesels are good, I know they're powerful, and I know they're economical - they're just comparatively short lived because of the massive strains being imposed on them.

The OP said that he drove at a constant 80mph - what revs does that equate to - 4,000?, that must be getting reasonably close to max permissible.

You sure?

Isn't it the boost which gives the power, not the compression ratio? Anyway, you only rarely use all that power - certainly not motorway cruising.

What diesels had a cambelt in the 'old days'? From the cambelt's point of view, there's no real difference between a petrol and a diesel engine - and you're not complaining about petrol cambelt intervals.

More like 3000. And that won't be at full throttle either - constant speed like that isn't actually too hard. Probably be in 3 figures to be running foot flat to the floor.

The 1.9TD being talked about isn't that new either - it's the generation before the VAG engines you're thinking of. (PSA XUD engine - 1982?)

cheers, clive

Clive George ( snipped-for-privacy@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Exactly.

Surely that's *GOT* to be easier on a 130bhp engine than an 80bhp lump?

Probably more like 2.5k with a 130 PDi lump that

It'll probably be *very* light throttle.

Yeh, '82 sounds about right - BX/Visa D.

It's also used as a marine engine, which is intended to.... sit at constant throttle high load for hours on end...

The message from "Clive George" contains these words:

Nope, high compression for maximium fuel economy although bloody awfull off boost performance

Well diesels didn't have cambelts, if you don't need to rev you don't need OHC. & the power comes from effecient burning & high boost , not high compression

But they're not comparatively short lived, that's the point

Less than 80% of max revs at less than 60% of max power.

I promised myself I wouldn't waste any more time responding to tmaxtrolls utter s**te, but hey ...the wifes watching big brother which is slightly more full of s*it than tmax.

I'm not one to generalise, but 'most' of the people I've seen driving Nissan Patrols ( in the UK ) have been lard arsed coronary cases sat with their arm out of the window on the slow lane of the motorway with twin axle caravans in tow for their customary half dozen outings per year. Then the car does its remaining 2000 miles per annum @18mpg commuting to asda and back, usually hogging the wider parent&child spaces to avoid the chilling horror of a parking dint. This geezer is so backward/outdated on engines he probably sends his cherished motor into the shop for a decoke every 2000 miles and feeds it werthers originals.

Since I'm sure Tmax won't be able to help himself lets welcome some of his witty gems. At least we'll move on from the fact nobody will ever get through to him that things evolve and get better, manufacturing processes/tolerances & materials/elastomers improve. Tmax, what oil do you put in your torque oodling Sherman which revs a whole 100rpm less than my

Big brothers just finshed so enuf said :-D

Not really, it was based upon the 2 litre O series petrol engine, with a

Actually on turbo's the CR is sometimes lower than that of the NA varient, due to the turbo adding to the effective compression ration when its boosting. The VAG 1.9 TDI PD engines run at 17:1 whereas the non turbo SDI engine is 19:1.

You are forgetting that the final drive ratio is alot higher on a diesel compared to a petrol as its limited on revs. Usually top gear is such that it is reached at around peak power revs, which on the PSA XUD is 4000rpm. Therefore at 80mph it would be turning over at around 3100rpm. (based on top speed of Synergy of 105mph).

Tim..

But you talk bollocks mate