General Performance difference between 1.4 petrol and 1.3 mjet

[Aresby]

The two types of engine drive very differently too.

The diesel just keeps going whichever gear you're in (unless you drop below the magic, non-turbo 1700 rpm) whereas the petrol engine drives like, well, as you would expect a petrol one to drive.

On the motorway my 1.3 90 is very good; plenty of torque for moving into the outside lane in 6th gear at, say, 60 mph. You would still have to change down to 5th (or even 4th) if the revs drop below 1,500 rpm if you want to do a swift getaway. But the power delivery is smooth enough.

I previously had a 1.6 Astra (03 plate). Prior to that another 1.6 Astra. Prior to that a normally aspirated 1.9 Peugeot 107. And prior to that, a 2.0 litre Astra GTE.

Of all those cars my Punto 1.3 resembles for general driveability it's the Astra 2.0. Obviously not as quick but pretty flexible and, thankfully, economical.

I've just ordered a 1.6 Mjet 120 in the hope that I'll have a clone of my current car but with an engine that does not have that turbo lag when moving off from a junction!

 

[V8 EATER]

lol, its the 90bhp version that suffers awful turbo lag, not the 75bhp one.

and you are comparing tuning a n/a petrol engine with tuning a TURBO diesel engine.

what? and you say that because you have?

I have the 75hp and have driven the 90hp for over 2 months as a rental car through work. my car has 30k miles and the rental had 50k.

now I can easily say yourr wayyy off with your statement and suggest you go drive a 90hp before you missinform others.

fiats goal with almost every added hp and part was to reduce lag therefore I cant even judge how you even thought of saying that!

the 75 hp has a conventional turbo meaning it has a turbine that will only spool at a certain gas pressure unlike the 90hp that has a variable stage turbo that has vanes inside(search vnt turbo) that allow the turbo to be in boost at almost any rpm,gas pressure and is very very more potent and suffers close to no response issues unless your expecting the poor 1.3 to act like a 2lt!

and to the part of modifications,well the initial question was to compare the two motors and I did and in the most logical,factual way,I couldnt care less that the 1.4 is n/a soo bad who cares the fact is that the 1.3 has more potential for alot less.

 

[Tris Harris]

what? and you say that because you have?

I have the 75hp and have driven the 90hp for over 2 months as a rental car through work. my car has 30k miles and the rental had 50k.

now I can easily say yourr wayyy off with your statement and suggest you go drive a 90hp before you missinform others.

its you minsinforming others, not me

fiats goal with almost every added hp and part was to reduce lag therefore I can even judge how you even thought of saying that!

Fiat's goal was not to reduce the lag, it was so they had an engine in the gap between the 1.3 75 and the older 1.9 engines- it is almost as powerful, yet the emissions are much lower

the 75 hp has a conventional turbo meaning it has a turbine that will only spool at a certain gas pressure unlike the 90hp that has a variable stage turbo that has vanes inside(search vnt turbo) that allow the turbo to be in boost at almost any rpm,gas pressure and is very very more potent and suffers close to no response issues unless your expecting the poor 1.3 to act like a 2lt!

I have driven both the 75bhp and the 90bhp 1.3 m-jet.

75bhp- not bad around town, certainly better than the 90 as it doesnt need as many revs to get you going, but is a bit stretched at motorway speeds.

90bhp- not brilliant around town, lots of turbo lag so you have to be in a lower gear in traffic so you can keep up with traffic (ie keep the turbo spooled up). Very good on the motorway i thought for such a small engine, plenty of torque and much better than the 75 at the top end.

I know how a variable geometry turbo works thankyou, but i didnt know the 90bhp engine had it- certainly doesnt feel like it has.

 

[charcoalgrey]

I have the 90hp but with 5 gears (2007 56) maybe this makes a difference to the lag in the 6 gear but I've not driven one of those so I don't know. What I do know is that there is considerable turbo lag; pulling away from a junction / onto a roundabout can be quite scary if I forget to rev high enough, to get the turbo kicking in. Now I've owned 4 cars and driven a few more than that, petrol and diesel, so this isn't that I don't know how to drive

Once you are on the go though it's lovely. It can pull in 5th from 60 with no need to drop down. Motorway driving is pleasant as it cruises happily.

I maintain around 57mpg on frequent short journeys in London and this raises to 62mpg on a long motorway journey.

I have the option to get a substantial improvement to bhp/torque with a remap but I don't need it. (just now)

But they only sell the 90bhp new on eleganza. If you want a new 1.3 active or dynamic it will only be the 75. The 75, which from what I've read, does not suffer from as much lag as the 90 despite the 90 having the variable geometry turbo and when I test drove one I didn't notice it as much, but I'm no expert.

stay safe (boring :devil: ) go petrol

 

[punto_matt]

Im sure the 90 is just different mapping?

 

[charcoalgrey]

This site has some information that pertains to the conversation:

http://www.autozine.org/html/Fiat/Punto.html

&

This site notes the difference between the turbo's in the 75 and 90:

http://www.italiaspeed.com/new_models/2005/fiat/grande_punto/engines.html

75 fixed geometry
90 variable geometry

 

[Tris Harris]

Im sure the 90 is just different mapping?

nope, different turbos as said

 

[charcoalgrey]

what? and you say that because you have?

I have the 75hp and have driven the 90hp for over 2 months as a rental car through work. my car has 30k miles and the rental had 50k.

now I can easily say yourr wayyy off with your statement and suggest you go drive a 90hp before you missinform others.

fiats goal with almost every added hp and part was to reduce lag therefore I cant even judge how you even thought of saying that!

the 75 hp has a conventional turbo meaning it has a turbine that will only spool at a certain gas pressure unlike the 90hp that has a variable stage turbo that has vanes inside(search vnt turbo) that allow the turbo to be in boost at almost any rpm,gas pressure and is very very more potent and suffers close to no response issues unless your expecting the poor 1.3 to act like a 2lt!

and to the part of modifications,well the initial question was to compare the two motors and I did and in the most logical,factual way,I couldnt care less that the 1.4 is n/a soo bad who cares the fact is that the 1.3 has more potential for alot less.

https://www.fiatforum.com/grande-punto/77309-1-3-multijet-90-turbo-lag.html

 

[Aresby]

I have the 90hp ... What I do know is that there is considerable turbo lag; pulling away from a junction / onto a roundabout can be quite scary if I forget to rev high enough, to get the turbo kicking in...

Once you are on the go though it's lovely. It can pull in 5th from 60 with no need to drop down. Motorway driving is pleasant as it cruises happily..

I second this.

I find it's not just pulling out though; if you slow down at a roundabout, even in 2nd gear, and discover you have a window in which to continue on your way, you will be needing new trousers as the engine fails to kick in and that number 9 bus bears down you. It's at times like this that my daughter's 1.3 Ford KA runs numbers round my GP.

Still wouldn't swap it though!

 

[sammiboo]

I'd give a 1.3 mjet a wide berth had a panda 1.3 mjet as a courtesy car twice now and it struggles to move that in a meaningful way also theres always that moment at rounderbouts where you put your foot down to pull out and the engine says..."not now thank you i'm busy" so in a GP i'd dread to think although doubt the 1.4 8v would be much better either but at least it should have an even spread of torque and power.

H has the panda 1.3MJ I have the GP 1.3MJ 6 speed and my car is far better to drive than the panda. The panda is 70bhp and my GP is 90bhp, My car might be bigger but when I drove the panda i noticed the lag and i dont really notice the lag in my car. I bought the 1.3 after owning a 1.6 bravo and i am more than happy with it

 

[Aresby]

... I have the GP 1.3MJ 6 speed and my car is far better to drive than the panda. The panda is 70bhp and my GP is 90bhp, My car might be bigger but when I drove the panda i noticed the lag and i dont really notice the lag in my car...

Listen up, guys, this whole thread is verging on the ridiculous!

Either the 1.3 90 has turbo lag or it doesn't. Mine definitely has (new trousers needed weekly) and even when new trousers are not needed I do need to remember to get the revs up a bit before pulling out (at which point it does so with alacrity).

What I don't understand is all these posts stating words to the effect that "I don't really notice any turbo lag". There is NO way you wouldn't notice it in my car (even my family wonder what the hell I'm playing at crawling out of junctions sometimes).

So, the real question is: are there different versions of the 1.3 90 out there (either 5 or 6-speed, doesn't change the turbo setting [or does it]).

Final thought: those saying "No (or little) turbo lag": have you had a re-map done?

 

[elganza86]

I tested the 1.4 8v and the 1.3 90bhp before ordering mine. The 1.3 90 had terrible lag on city roads like at roundabouts but was great on the open road. The 1.4 had the best range of performance overall. I had a 1.3 75 courtesy car and that was much better than the 90bhp. In the end chose the petrol because the fuel savings didn't outway the cost of the engine (would have taken 12 years for it to pay for itself!)

 

[steve119]

Sorry, but is it me?

Folk here are comparing the 90 BHP MJ to the 1.4 8v?

I could totally understand them comparing the 90BHP to the 1.4 16v 95BHP, or the 1.3 75BHP MJ to the 1.4 8v 77BHP!

sounds a bit daft to me!

 

[fenton_jd]

Petrol

1.2 8v - GP Series 1 only
60mph = 14.0's
96mph
65bhp

1.4 8v
60mph = 13.2's
103mph
77bhp

1.4 16v
60mph = 11.4's
111mph
95bhp

1.4 16v Tjet
60mph = 8.9's
121mph
120bhp

1.4 16v Abarth
60mph = 8.2's
129mph
155bhp

1.4 16v Abarth Essesse
60mph = 7.5's
133mph
180bhp


Diesel

1.3 16v MJet 75
60mph= 13.6's
103mph
75bhp

1.3 16v MJet 90
60mph= 11.9's
109mph
90bhp

1.9 8v MJet 120 - Elegnaza 5Door model only (GP S1)
60mph = 9.9's
118mph
120bhp

1.9 8v MJet 130
60mph = 9.2's
124mph
130bhp

1.6 16v MJet
Dont know the stats top of my head

 

[V8 EATER]

reading some replys after my post I came to a conclusion that I shouldnt be a part of this conversation due to the fact that yes the UK does have some odd differences.

first of all Iam in Turkey and these guys do not have a 1.4 16v nor do they have a 5speed 90hp 1.3 version. all they have in 1.3 and 1.4 form is the 75 & 90 1.3mj and the 1.4 8v 77 hp and the 90hp only comes in 6 speed.

I mentioned the comments here yesterday with some mates and one of them being a little mechanically inclined noted that the 90hp has a problem with its turbo. apparently the vanes used within the variable geometry actually can get cloged up with poor diesel quality and be stuck in high boost position= very noticeable lag. he also said that longer gearing will make the problem very worse which a 6 speed gas shorter gears.

so according to him if one were to compare a 90 hp 5 speed(longer gears vs 6 speed) that has cloged up vanes(vnt turbo) using poor diesel will obviously get turbo lag but if one were to compare the 75hp to a healthy 90hp 6 speed using the same quality diesel on both and still say the 90 is worse sure as hell doesnt know what he is talking about! he says its physically impossible for the 75 to be any stronger/responsive at low revs when compared to a variable turbo which is also a ball bearing turbo. he says the tech behind this turbo is soo impressive that the latest 911 turbo engineers spent years and millions trying to utilize the same tech in there petrol super car!

here is one example the earlier 911 turbo using a very expensive conventional turbo would get its peak tq by 2700rpm which is very impresive however the latest 911 turbo using the vnt turbo gets its peak tq by 750rpms lower at 1950rpms with more added tq too.

 

[punto_matt]

Porsche have put so much money into it they have patented it on Petrol engines to try and prevent other companys using it.

 

[charcoalgrey]

The 5gear 1.3 90 is rare here, most of them had the 6gear.

https://www.fiatforum.com/grande-punto/77309-1-3-multijet-90-turbo-lag.html

These comments point to turbo-lag issues which I assume, unless otherwise stated, relate to the 6 gear.

I'm guessing that there must be a difference in the engines between those sold in Turkey and those that made it over here up until Feb 07.

There is definitely a difference to the 1.3mjet 90 that is now sold in the Elegenza version over here as its CO2 output is 119.0g/km in comparison to the original 122g/km.

I'm sure you and your friend are Savvy motor enineers, but if a great many people state they have experienced a very noticeable amount of turbo lag, your vociferous comment that he:

sure as hell doesnt know what he is talking about! .

is a worthless statement.

I suggest we are discussing an engine which is set up in a different manner.

 

[V8 EATER]

The 5gear 1.3 90 is rare here, most of them had the 6gear.

https://www.fiatforum.com/grande-punto/77309-1-3-multijet-90-turbo-lag.html

These comments point to turbo-lag issues which I assume, unless otherwise stated, relate to the 6 gear.

I'm guessing that there must be a difference in the engines between those sold in Turkey and those that made it over here up until Feb 07.

There is definitely a difference to the 1.3mjet 90 that is now sold in the Elegenza version over here as its CO2 output is 119.0g/km in comparison to the original 122g/km.

I'm sure you and your friend are Savvy motor enineers, but if a great many people state they have experienced a very noticeable amount of turbo lag, your vociferous comment that he: is a worthless statement.

I suggest we are discussing an engine which is set up in a different manner.

sorry to state this but its your own link that makes your point pointless!

there are 1.5 pages there of people crying over turbo lag while the other half of the 2nd and 3rd pages are full of people who clearly state they recognize no turbo lag so what are you getting at?

the problem is just personal or mechanical in my opinion.

personal as in almost 90% of the guys who said they noticed a lag also stated they were previous owners of 2lt astra's,2.5lt vans,1.9lt alfa's and so on,well how on earth do expect a poor 1.25lt engine to haul even close to those?

the mechanical can be either clogged up emission parts,egr,turbo vanes,manilfolds,piping which is clearly a known thing in the uk since there are several pages of write ups to how to clean those.I my self even got scared mine is dirty due to this site but from almost all the diesel owners I talked to no one ever experienced these problems here!

the best way to figure out which engine has more grunt at low rpms is to do a stock to stock dyno comparison,maybe someone has one or can find one off the net and forums for us.

 

[charcoalgrey]

ok, if personal opinion then there is no argument when it comes to personal opinion.

If mechanical, then isn't this what we're talking about? My car had 4000 miles on the clock and it had the same lack of intent below 2000rpm as is does now. The clogging up surely shouldn't have happened that early...? Or maybe even on cars with very little mileage like those given to Auto-Journalists.

Back to personal.

http://www.carsinaction.net/ViewArticle.asp?cat=97&art=851

There’s no getting around this diesel’s advantage if substantial long distance driving on typical South African roads is on your agenda. On the downside, this oil-burner does suffer from launch failure – a common malady that renders turbines unable to procure enough air at low revs to provide the boost needed for a clean pull off.

If you can live with the turbo lag, the Grande Punto 1.3 Multijet ranks highly in the desirability stakes.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=74037
http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=62787
regarding the 90bhp 1.3 16v but used in the vauxhall astra and corsa. Same engine as the punto.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.evecars.com/what-car-full-review.aspx?RT=764

WhatCar review - "The gutsier 90bhp 1.3 diesel suffers from too much turbo lag"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/road-tests/road-test-fiat-grande-punto-506544.html

"The 90bhp 1.3 MultiJet diesel, whose 148lb ft of torque is mighty impressive for such a little engine, is a smoother, quieter unit, but it still pulls well, albeit with some response lag, while the turbocharger spins up to speed."

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I acknowledge that WhatCar Magazine and the Independent Newpaper (UK) are disreputable publications but please don't hold this against the evidence.

I haven't owned a car that was 2.0l and for that matter the biggest engine I've owned was 1.5l. I'm just stating a point that it's not just "whiners" who have experienced hesitation in progression prior to turbo initiation on the 90bhp 1.3mjet.

 

[Aresby]

Interesting, independent proof you have dug up there. Confirms what people have been saying here really.

I still love the GP and over the last 3 years I've obviously got used to compensating for the turbo lag: change down to 1st gear as you approach the roundabout (as 2nd gear will definitely not get you off the starting line, even if you are still moving a bit) and get the revs up to 2,000 rpm before setting off from a standing start. 2,000 rpm is not a lot and doesn't make the car sound in any way thrashy IMHO.

Still a bit odd that quality control (they do have some at Fiat, I take it) didn't reject this turbo lag as being unacceptable and either fit a different turbo charger, increase the native engine size (as they have now with a 1.6) or remap the ECU to try and compensate (if it can be done at all).

Given that the 1.3 75 does NOT suffer turbo lag (to anywhere near the same extent) then it would seem it's the turbo that's "at fault".

I'll let everyone know whether the 1.6 has nailed this issue once and for all when I get it!