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
God you are comical, you are going on your experience of a bloody 8v, i cant be bothered with you anymore and echo what claw has said above. You keep changing what you are saying in all your above posts and are just spouting bull**** as you have no proper experience of either car so you arent really in a position to comment. Can a mod please close this as its bull**** and a pointless thread now.
 
you do not know anything about cars.

your comparing a 1.2 8v from a mk2 punto i take it? to a GP. GP is much much heavier by around 150kg+.

and then your adding that you havnt even drivin a tjet.

ill let you into a little secret. a diesel engine is much heavier than a petrol engine. and it derives its power differently than a petrol engine also.

learn a thing or two about car then you can come backa nd play with the big boys.

www.howstuffworks.com will help you.

are you retarded? thats why i think a t-jet will be underpowered, because it ways a sh!t load more than a mk1 punto turbo which weighs a lot less and was out ages ago.

maybe underpowered wasn't the right term, but a 1.4 new turbo car should be have more than 120bhp!
 
God you are comical, you are going on your experience of a bloody 8v, i cant be bothered with you anymore and echo what claw has said above. You keep changing what you are saying in all your above posts and are just spouting bull**** as you have no proper experience of either car so you arent really in a position to comment. Can a mod please close this as its bull**** and a pointless thread now.

i wasnt comparing a tjet to an 8v.

i was getting at the fact they are heavier than mk1s.

and when a mk1 punto turbo 1.4 can have 10 more bhp than a t-jet, why can't the t-jet have a bit more?
 
mk1 punto GT engine is heavy as hell (cast iron block)

and it isnt 10bhp less. all t-jets RR'd have an avg 135bhp and 155lbs/ft (more torque than a gt so mroe pulling power).

learn your facts you silly little boy.

EDIT- there is also 3 punto GT's. so which one are you comparing it to

GT1?
GT2?
GT3?

all differnet power outputs numpty.
 
Last edited:
mk1 punto GT engine is heavy as hell (cast iron block)

and it isnt 10bhp less. all t-jets RR'd have an avg 135bhp and 155lbs/ft (more torque than a gt so mroe pulling power).

learn your facts you silly little boy.

EDIT- there is also 3 punto GT's. so which one are you comparing it to

GT1?
GT2?
GT3?

all differnet power outputs numpty.

silly little boy and numpty lol?

calm yourself down

you sad old man :p
 
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.

You really do talk (type) a lot of cr*p! :rolleyes: ....but there's a few useful facts there too. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
i voted for the diesel.

they are totaly different cars but i can see why the tjet is thought to be underpowered, i was up for buying one but after the test drive i did not think it was so good.. wasnt as fast as expected so i got the 1.9 tdi and plan to remap it.

anyone know of any good places near durham or that will come out to the car?
 
just looked thru the specs of the cars together as am bored!

the tjet is 120 nd the mjet is 130 but feels a lot faster

maybe the tjet shud have more power i thought it was 150 but maybe that was the brava??
 
Mjet feels faster because of the torque. Take it to red dot for a proper remap. Not places like angel tuning.

As i have already said, the Tjet cant have more power as that would render the abarth pointless. The bravo has the same engine as the abarth but thats because its a different car completly.
 
We are laughing at you for thinking you know what your talking about when you really dont. Last thing from me as i cant be arsed with you any more.

lol just read your post "have we got past your level of knowledge" it wasn't you that said anything knowledgable.

knowing a few things about fiats and power outputs isn't exactly knowledgable.

but anyway yeah, your a joke mate, i'm just doing this to wind you up now TBH dont say it hasn't 'cos i know it has lol.

call me all you want people opinions dont mean much to me, specially on the internet.
 
Might not be iyo but when you are trying to say stuff about them and you have sweet FA idea about them like you then its quite easy to get past your level of knowledge as you have shown with some of your answers.

Likewise call me what you want i couldnt give 2 flying ****s of your opinion on me. Nah you havent wound me up, just given me a right good laugh at you trying to prove some of your points and failing.
 
are you retarded? thats why i think a t-jet will be underpowered, because it ways a sh!t load more than a mk1 punto turbo which weighs a lot less and was out ages ago.

maybe underpowered wasn't the right term, but a 1.4 new turbo car should be have more than 120bhp!

I don't think you quite understand the t-jets purpose. The t-jet isn't a fiesta ST/corsa VXR/Punto GT/ Clio 182/ Civic type r competitor. Therefore it is not underpowered. Its a sporting, and since when has the sporting variant of fiat models been the highest performing? The t-jet is deliberately released with this power engine to be a nippy sporty car for young drivers for low insurance and running costs.

The abarth is the highest powered GP, this is the GT competitor, and with 155bhp and 185bhp variants, its hardly that underpowered for some of the competition.

You may aswell be comparing a mk2 punto 1.2 16v to an uno turbo. Different cars and variants built for different purposes.
 
Back
Top