GPS 1.4 T-JET or GPS 1.9 M-JET

Currently reading:
GPS 1.4 T-JET or GPS 1.9 M-JET

GPS 1.4 T-JET or GPS 1.9 M-JET

  • 1.4 T Jet

    Votes: 63 59.4%
  • 1.9 M Jet

    Votes: 43 40.6%

  • Total voters
    106
i test drove both when i was looking to buy, and i dont know much about the technical side of the cars but when i drove them both the t-jet just felt nicer to drive and abit more reponsive. to me the untrained person that is tho! puls i dont do a huge amout of miles to be in such need of a diesel, and with the costs of diesel getting higher than petrol is it really that more economical? not trying to start any thing just a personal thought! i genuinlly what to know if they are much cheaper to run!
 
Cost of petrol isn't exactly dropping.

If you're happy with power at cost of efficiency get a big or turbo petrol.
If you want ecconomy at the sacrifice of performance get a small petrol.
If you want performance and ecconomy get the multijet.
 
I do not own a GPS MJet or TJet but do an average 12,000 miles per year with the majority on the motorway.

With the price of fuel do you think it will be justified in getting the M-Jet??

Aha i see now why you put it to the vote! What do you have at the moment (just curious)? I would say with the mileage you are bordering on Mjet mileage. I normally say diesel if you are doing about 15000 miles a year and your not far off that. As your journeys are made up mostly of motorways i would say Mjet, not that the TJet would not be good on motorways im sure but you would get better economy from the Mjet.

As our cilla would say "Its off to our graham before you make your mind up". Graham: "will you choose blind date No1, Tjet, the new kid on the block or will you choose blind date No2 the tried and trusted Mjet with plenty of tuning potential, better economy and plenty of in gear torque. The decision is yours"

Test drive them both before making your mind up. Make sure you go on a good trip and test both cars on the same run.

Good luck with your decision n1ck (y)
 
A few years ago (apparently) 37% of new cars bought in the UK were turbo diesel's.

Its actually near 50/50 nowadays :eek:

- They pull better

Not nessesarily, Compare a 2.0TDI with a 2.0 Petrol Turbo the difference in gearing makes them on par with each other.

- more economical

I totally agree although the amount of millage you need to do now to justify it is increasing all the time :bang:

- less damaging to the environment

Don't believe government propaganda :p. Less Co2 Compared to a similar sized petrol engine yes, but look at all the other s***e it puts into the air a petrol doesn't emit or in a lot smaller amounts.

- You always get someone powering past you on the motorway in a "2.0 TDI" audi or VW

This is true but only because I drive a N/A 1.4 Petrol Punto and even so he doesn't get past till about 90-100mph :devil:
 
Its actually near 50/50 nowadays :eek:

Not with Fiat in my experience.It was around 10 to 1 in favour of petrol.



Don't believe government propaganda :p. Less Co2 Compared to a similar sized petrol engine yes, but look at all the other s***e it puts into the air a petrol doesn't emit or in a lot smaller amounts.


:

:yeahthat:

Petrol cars only eject powdered coal when they are seriously buggered.
 
As our cilla would say "Its off to our graham before you make your mind up". Graham: "will you choose blind date No1, Tjet, the new kid on the block or will you choose blind date No2 the tried and trusted Mjet with plenty of tuning potential, better economy and plenty of in gear torque. The decision is yours"

PMSL :D

M-Jet all the way (y)
 
Aha i see now why you put it to the vote! What do you have at the moment (just curious)? I would say with the mileage you are bordering on Mjet mileage. I normally say diesel if you are doing about 15000 miles a year and your not far off that. As your journeys are made up mostly of motorways i would say Mjet, not that the TJet would not be good on motorways im sure but you would get better economy from the Mjet.

As our cilla would say "Its off to our graham before you make your mind up". Graham: "will you choose blind date No1, Tjet, the new kid on the block or will you choose blind date No2 the tried and trusted Mjet with plenty of tuning potential, better economy and plenty of in gear torque. The decision is yours"

Test drive them both before making your mind up. Make sure you go on a good trip and test both cars on the same run.

Good luck with your decision n1ck (y)

DON'T LAUGH... At the moment i drive a 1997 Vauxhall Corsa 1.2.

I will test drive them both before i buy but i think i'm swaying to the MJet before i've test driven, but i shall give them both a go and see.

Like i say the majority of my miles are on the motorways up and down the M56 and M60 clocking up about 40-50 miles a day.
 
I quote Augusto @ Red Dot Racing "You will beat anything 220bhp petrol"


Was having browse through this thread and I can't believe this quote.

Lancia integrale EVO 215bhp 0-60 5.7secs, one of the quickest cross country cars ever made, less than the 220bhp quoted you think some remapped tractor is quicker :confused:

Honda integra Type R only a paltry 187bhp, often quoted as one of the best FWD cars ever built, low 6's 0-60 near 150mhp top end, only has 135lb ft torque poor little thing.

Fiat Coupe 20V Turbo 220bhp, and again dam quick.

The list is endless of cars that have same/less than the quoted 220bhp petrol car that would obliterate a remapped Punto diesel.

And even 2L TDI VAG stuff is not that quick, had many a laugh in my turbo Cinq easily getting away from said TDI's, they were especially slow out of corners.

When it comes down to it, diesel cars do not deliver the visceral delights of a petrol engine. They often do not handle as well as diesel engines weight far more than petrol equivalents, look at kerb weights of similar models in range often the petrol is some 100-150kgs lighter, and as most of these cars are front engine fwd the weight distribution is very poor when adding even more weight up front.

Diesel engines are also much more expensive to produce, this cost is generally passed onto customer, so cars more expensive to buy, servicing is often more expensive, the added weight and the torque rich characteristics of diesels means tyres have a much harder life, so need changing more often, is some cases they last half as long on lighter, freer spinning petrol siblings.

And with diesels costing now about 15p a liter more the extra cost of buying car, running said car, you would need to cover something like 25+K miles a year over about 3 years to make it even worth while. In fact that Martin Lewis the money saving expert guy said pretty much that the other day on TV, diesel only make sense to very high mileage drivers, so don't believe the marketing hype from manufacturers.

Plus 5TH Gear showed that even the Polo Blue Motion did only a true 46mpg over a week, no where near the 76mpg quoted by VAG. they are not actually as efficient as you are lead to believe. A diesel is only 18% efficient a petrol 17%, this is the amount of power produced during the cycle, the rest is wasted in producing heat.
 
Plus 5TH Gear showed that even the Polo Blue Motion did only a true 46mpg over a week, no where near the 76mpg quoted by VAG. they are not actually as efficient as you are lead to believe. A diesel is only 18% efficient a petrol 17%, this is the amount of power produced during the cycle, the rest is wasted in producing heat.

Blue Motionclaimed MPG is balls. I do however get between mid 40 to low 50 from my 1.9 150 multijet. Confirmed by tank fills. Got a source for the efficiency info? Diesels are much cooler running than petrols - much more than 1% cooler. Petrol has warm air by end of the street. I'm half way across town before I can get heat out my Bravo and all the turbo diesels I've owned before it.
 
Diesel/petrol they are all at end of day a variation of an internal combustion engine, they are not efficient with the vast amount of energy produced being heat.

If they didn't produce so much heat, then there would be no need to cool the engine, hence radiators.

Until someone comes up with a better way of propelling a vehicle we are stuck with a pretty anarchic solution that is the internal combustion engine.

I personally could not bring myself to drive a diesel and i do 15K a year and yet it still makes no sense to me whatsoever to change that view.
 
Was having browse through this thread and I can't believe this quote.

Maybe someone is making wild unsubstantiated performance claims?

Ofcourse you would have to be pretty silly to believe a claim like that. Look at the Bravo T-Jet and M-Jet both have the same bhp the M-Jet has much more torque. Yet the T-Jet is the slightly faster. How in the hell could a 180bhp Diesel beat anything petrol with 40bhp more without a massive weight difference?
 
Blue Motionclaimed MPG is balls. I do however get between mid 40 to low 50 from my 1.9 150 multijet. Confirmed by tank fills. Got a source for the efficiency info? Diesels are much cooler running than petrols - much more than 1% cooler. Petrol has warm air by end of the street. I'm half way across town before I can get heat out my Bravo and all the turbo diesels I've owned before it.

I'm not sure exactly what the efficiency figure quoted means, but cars generally are not at their most efficient until they are at their optimum working temperature. In a petrol this happens relatively quickly, and in a diesel this is generally very slow. This is why people who buy nice economical diesels and then do lots of short journeys without the car warming up suffer very poor fuel economy.

I've seen mention of the remapping the M-Jet - surely the T-Jet will also be remappable in the near future?

Chris
 
Last edited:
DON'T LAUGH... At the moment i drive a 1997 Vauxhall Corsa 1.2.

We've all got to start somewhere n1ck. Besides, corsa's hold a special place in my heart cause my mum, who's no longer with us these days, loved corsa's, so much so she had three over a period of nine years, bless her!

I also strated with a mk1 fiesta many years ago.

For sure the only way you will now which one you want is by test driving them both. I suppose it all depends on how long you think you are you going to keep the car too. My car loan is over five years and there is nothing to suggest that i won't have the car longer as i love it that much and have no idea what i would i get in place of it.

I can also justify having a diesel too as i do no less than 18K a year. The good thing with mine is that money wise i only owe 7.5K on it as i traded in my 52 plate stilo.

Make sure you go for a long test drive so you can get a good feel of the car.

Don't forget to keep us updated n1ck (y)
 
numbers are more like 30% petrol and 40% diesel. HCCI could bring petrol upto diesel efficiency.

had a quick read up on this.

A diesel is only 40% efficient at something like 1800rpm, once you go above this efficiency drops drastically due to the high pressures found within diesels engines, and as you have to go above this to get enough air to pump the turbo diesels very rarely work at peak efficiency. This is why on modern turbo diesels if you use the performance available they are no where near as efficient as you would be lead to believe.

Whereas a petrol engine is about 30%, but this is an average as it has a throttle butterfly its pretty inefficient at low speeds and actually improves at higher speeds peaking at about 75% efficient at about 4500rpm.

The more you in crease the compression ratio, the more efficient it becomes and with the advent of FSI petrols where fuel is injected directly ito combustion chamber cooling the engine at same time, higher compressions can be used and when added to higher octane fuels the efficient is rising all the time.

I know someone who keeps a fastidious record of the fuel he has used in all his cars over last 10 years, he keeps it all on spread sheets on his PC. And what is surprising from it all is that over a 9month period a Audi A3 1.9 TDI average 36mpg, and over same period of 9 months in a Seat Leon Cupra R he got 28mpg, now for only 8mpg more on same journeys over same period of time I know which car I would have as the performance advantage of the Cupra is massive. The majority of his journeys were an 11mile trip to work in rush hour then return, with some weekend driving. From his findings it only made sense if you did lots of motorway driving as the benefits of diesels are when you can sit on part throttle off boost at low rpm where it is efficient, then he could get mid 50mpg, diesels do come into there own then. Both cars were brand new as company cars renewed every 9 months.

I would say that if you do lots of miles and longer journeys and don't mind the noise, buy a diesel, if you do lots of shorter journeys prefer a nicer sound and better dynamics buy a petrol.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top