Ok

I keep reading about how much of an improvement the 2.0 diesel is over the 1.9.

So will someone clarify this fact? Is it quieter, more refined, more effecient, more powerful, more driveable, etc? Is it a new engine or just a rebored, revamped 1.9 unit?

Lot's of people slating the 1.9 but this engine has been good for many years and been used across many brands so it can't be that bad?

So, to all the 1.9 detractors, it's just a revamped engine.


New Bravo 2.0 MultiJet More Power, Less Fule, Lower EmissionsFiat has just extended its popular Bravo mid-size hatchback range with the introduction of a more powerful yet more economical and lower emissions engine, demonstrating the Group’s commitment to the production of increasingly environmentally-friendly cars. The 5-door Bravo range will now benefit from a new 165 bhp 2.0 MultiJet unit which features a diesel particulate filter (DPF) and is type-approved to Euro 5 standards, ahead of the 2009 deadline.

The new version, available in Sport and Dynamic specification, is not just ‘greener’ – it further underscores the liveliness, flexibility and driving pleasure that have always been features of the Bravo. Fiat’s new 2.0 MultiJet is a logical evolution of the 1.9 MultiJet, which it will progressively replace. Main benefits are greater performance (torque increased to 360 Nm, and power up to 165 bhp), reduced emissions (down to just 139 g/km) and lower fuel consumption (53 mpg over the combined cycle).

Compared with the 1.9 MultiJet, an increase in cubic capacity has been achieved by increasing the cylinder bore; while a reduction in compression ratio has made it possible to achieve a substantial reduction in NOx levels. A new type of low voltage spark plug allows starting with the minimum pre-heating time.

Compliance with Euro 5 is guaranteed by the use of a close-coupled DPF that is standard on both versions, and by an advanced exhaust gas recirculation system (EGR) with all its sub-components packaged into one small element (EGR module).

Despite a significant reduction in fuel consumption and emissions, the Bravo 2.0 MultiJet boasts category-topping performance: top speed is 134 mph and acceleration from 0-62 mph takes just 8.2 seconds. Economy is further improved with long service intervals that confirm the impressive reliability achieved by Fiat’s MultiJet engines.

The new 2.0 MultiJet is another example of class-leading products that have been introduced since the Bravo’s launch, which make the model a benchmark in its category in terms of style, substance and state-of-the-art technology. Others include the introduction of the powerful T-Jet turbocharged petrol engine range, the remarkable 1.6 MultiJet diesel engine, and the introduction of the innovative Dualogic sequential gearbox.

Is the 2.0 a multijet 2? I have heard this about the new Giulietta 2.0 140BHP, not sure about the Bravo's however. The multijet 2 can control the injection of fuel independant of revs and loads so is (allegedly) smoother and more flexible.

Not sure if it is classed as an Mjet2, however the 165 2.0 appeared just as Alfa were putting together their '2nd Gen Common Rail JTD's, (170BHP in the 159 initially) so maybe.

Also I always thought the 2.0 was a bored out of the new 1.6

Anyway, I've got one, and after it's little sputtering problem got a software upgrade (mine was a relatively early 2.0) it's a gem of an engine.

1.9 All day long. No dpf on my engine, No regenration Problems, simples.
Roadtax Slighty more £ 15 quid a year on 1.9 but a higher insurance group on 2.0.
53mpg on 2.0 compared to 50mpg on 1.9 But if 2.0 regenerating all the time you will never get 53mpg in a million years.
2.0 Not a multijet 2 engine yet.

2.0 all the way!!

Since fiat released the update the DPF issues seems to have been fixed (hopefully) so no more stuttering.

saying that I haven't driven a 1.9 so can't compare, I'm just a bit bias

r16pab said:

1.9 All day long. No dpf on my engine, No regenration Problems, simples.
Roadtax Slighty more £ 15 quid a year on 1.9 but a higher insurance group on 2.0.
53mpg on 2.0 compared to 50mpg on 1.9 But if 2.0 regenerating all the time you will never get 53mpg in a million years.
2.0 Not a multijet 2 engine yet.

Click to expand...

I have no regen problems with my 2.0 and yes you do really get 53mpg!

The 2.0 is a more modern, fuel efficient, more powerful engine so there really is no debate, its by far the better option.

If you have never driven one you cant really comment on the regeneration, it happens but not all the time and you dont even know its happening.

r16pab said:

2.0 Not a multijet 2 engine yet.

Click to expand...

Seems real weird that the 165 in the Bravo isn't Multijet 2, yet Alfa claim the 2.0 170 is. I thought they were the same engine with a slight bhp tweak.

A few reviews of the 2.0 170 M-Jet Gulietta by people who have test driven it say it still feels abit corse compared to VW's offerings, which doesn't say much for the M-Jet 2 upgrade.

I think the Multijet engines are as follows:

Multijet (1):
1.3 75bhp - Panda, Punto Evo, Qubo
1.6 120bhp - Punto Evo, MiTo, Bravo Dualogic

Multijet 2:
1.3 85bhp - Punto Evo Dynamic Eco
1.3 95bhp - 500, MiTo
1.6 105bhp - Bravo, Giulietta, New Doblo
2.0 140bhp - New Doblo, Giulietta, 159
2.0 170bhp - Giulietta, 159

Not sure:
2.0 165bhp - Bravo Sport

Would be interesting if anyone else knew otherwise, as it seems abit all over the place!

When i bought my Bravo last year I took a quick test drive in both the 1.9 and 2.0 multijets. The 1.9 was not standard, it has a red dot racing remap and sports springs etc and it felt much better then the 165 to drive. Seemed to be quite a bit of turbo lag on the 2.0. Im guessing that is down to the remap though and the 2.0 remapped would be pretty much equal. I couldn't justify the extra £2500 wanted for the 2.0 although it did have the lovely looking leather interior.

But is it worth 5 insurance groups higher for the 2.0 sport.
group 20 for 1.9
group 25 for 2.0
( http://www.parkers.co.uk/insurance/groups/by-model.aspx?model=1607 )
Everybody will always have they own choice.
Dpf is no good for people who dont travel a lot of miles, or just do town driving.

I admit I'm no expert, but I've never 'noticed' a turbo lag on the 2.0, going on everyday driving - like pulling out of junctions and realising the car was coming quicker than I thought, it's never left me short of power.

On the noise issue, I do remember thinking when I first bought the car it had a quiet engine and insulation, but I was comparing this to the Punto Sport 130 1.9 Mjet I'd been driving for the 3 years before that. On reflection it is not as quiet as I first thought. I especially noticed this when driving across the country with my brothers Saab 93 1.9 TiD, half in my car, half in his. The Bravo however did have more power and acceleration than the Saab. Actually in general I thought the Saab was great, nicely refined, glad they didn't go under as a company.

I've not driven the 2.0, but my impressions of my 1.9 16v after 56000 miles are:
1. Goes like s*** off a shovel when on boost
2. Goes like a knackered Massey-Ferguson tractor when off boost
3. Started out pretty quiet when new, has got considerably noisier with age and mileage. Still much more refined than the 2.0 TDi in my mate's Scirocco which has done less than 30k, though.
4. Driven normally = 48 to 50 mpg
5. Driven very gently = 55 to 57 mpg
6. Driven quickly = 42 to 46 mpg
7. Not had any trouble with the DPF. User manual effectively recommends giving it a good seeing-to through the gears every now and then so a healthy diet of full-bore overtakes seems to have kept mine happy!

Given that it's a much more up-to-date injection and management system on the 2.0 I would be disappointed if it isn't an improvement in all these areas.