General Twin turbo 1.9 JTD

Currently reading:
General Twin turbo 1.9 JTD

The Beard

Prominent member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
5,135
Points
839
Location
Manchester
Looking at the FPT website I clicked on the heading for the 1.9 JTD twin turbo motors and noticed something. If you click on the individual thumbs then look at the uppermost address above each image, images 3 & 4 say 1.9 JTD while the first 2 say 2000 JTD. Is this some sort of hidden message as to a new version of this engine? Is this something the rest of the world already knows about? Am I the last to know? Or am I simply going through the dellusional phase of my mid-life crisis? After all, I have bought a 150 mph bike and an electric guitar in the last few years. What? Time for my tablets already? Alright nurse, I'm coming.
 
I don't think you should read too much into those filenames (I seem to recall they call the 1368 engine for 1370).
But Fiat is working on 2 new diesel engines (2,0l and 2,5l) both derived from the current 1,9l and 2,4l engines but probably heavily re-engineered (basically brand new engines), when they come is not certain.
 
Hopes dashed and then raised in one go. Thanks for the late Christmas presie Santa. I suppose it was inevitable that the engines would have to go up slightly in size as virtually everybody every other maker has done the same as emission regulations get tougher.

Thanks for the info, bud.
 
There was quite a detailed appraisal of this engine in Quattroroute magazine and you might be able to find it on the web (if you can read Italian). Although I've posted this before, I'll give it another go. Instead of having one turbo for one half of the engine and a second for the other, this motor has one smaller turbine for lower revs and a bigger one for the higher end. The principal being that if you want low speed response from a turbo, the amount of gas moving down the exhaust would not be sufficient to turn a big one, giving turbo lag. So, give it a small one. The problem then is that it wouldn't produce sufficient power and torque to give the car good performace. In addition to the small one, give it a bigger one as well that takes over at a certain point in the rev range. However, I don't have a clue how the engine knows which one to use and when. I can only presume the ECU handles it within pre-set limitations.
 
Variable vanes?

It's a compromise, but 2 turbos working together is better.

and more expensive, more to go wrong!

i wonder if they've done it because due to other changes the exhaust temp has gone over 800c and there are no VNT turbos suitably sized that will take that temperature.
 
and more expensive, more to go wrong!

i wonder if they've done it because due to other changes the exhaust temp has gone over 800c and there are no VNT turbos suitably sized that will take that temperature.
Does that mean 800 centigrade with the variable turbo? That's pretty warm and does it run cooler with twin turbos?
 
no, reading the pdf that santa posted it mentions a higher exhaust temperature on the twin turbo engines of 800c, which is beyond what i think current (apart from one on thee 2007 911 Turbo) can take. I think the current upper design limit is aorund 700c for most VGT units.

From a performence point of view, porsche have used a twin turbo setup - but both chargers are the same size, but incorprate VGT.

This brings me back to my origonal point about stepping backwards, it has been done i think because there are very limited production VGT turbos - none suitable for a 1.9 Diesel engine with an exhaust temperature of 800c. If using a mis matched twin turbo setup with no VGT was a better performence option, then porsche wouldn't have spent so much on getting a pretty much 'one off' turbo charger for their car. Its all about the costs.
 
I think it's a case of horses for courses. My Panda MJT has, for me quite adequate performance. Although its 0-60 acceleration isn't startlingly better than some other 1.2/1.3 petrol engines, the extra torque is really useful for overtaking on rural roads and on fast single carriageway roads, it makes relatively short work of overtaking slower traffic. There's little point in getting involved with fast cars, but then it was designed as a city car, although it can make reasonable progress on these roads and still return 62mpg. If you want more outright performance, then you are probably looking at a bigger car, e.g. a Bravo, in which case the 1.9 MJT puts forward a good case for brisk overtaking with good economy. If you try and put this engine in a GP, that's a lot of weight to put in the front of a small-ish car. Comments from owners of 1.9 GP owners welcome. A 1.6 MJT may make more sense in this car. If you look at 180/190 bhp larger cars, then the performance comes at a relatively high price in fuel. In those cases, the twin turbo MJT must come into its own.
 
Back
Top