Which Jag is it? The X type uses the same TDCI engine as the mondeo which is prone to its fair share of reliability issues. DFP, something or other leads (sorry cant remember the name) at £250x4 each time. It makes the Impreza rear strut problem seem insignificant compared.

 

Other than routine servicing all our 150 CDTi has had is the injectors overhauled which I guess is normal on any high mileage diesel and we replaced the aircon radiator not because it needed to be replaced but as a precaution. For some reason Vauxhall placed the aircon radiator in front of the front mount intercooler which seems pretty stupid to me. Anyway the aircon rad gets all the crap coming through the grille and it was replaced when we fitted a Hybrid GT front mount which is now in front of the aircon.

I am not really sure about your logic and any modern diesel I have been in lately has a 5k RPM rev limit. Vauxhall, Saab, Volkswagen, BMW, Audi, Seat, Skoda, Mercedes. The list goes on.
The car benefits from an F40 gearbox with 6 well spaced gears.
The STi UK is around 265 bhp and I am not sure of the torque figure but guess it will be just over 300 ft.lbs. Here we have a car of similar weight or less with 282 bhp and 388 ft.lbs so I think it is pretty obvious why this Vectra will keep up with an STi WRX.

Modifications.
Airbox mod followed by oil breather mod and a play about with the EGR which is now deleted. None of these would have made a big difference at the time.
Purpose made decat exhaust system. I was disappointed when this was fitted as it made little difference but that was because at the time I did not realise that if you did not add fuel you did not get any more power. Tuning a diesel is completely different to a petrol.
I then got a tuning box cost £89.99 and this allowed me to raise rail pressure. I set this up on the rollers at Scooby Clinic and the car was now developing 199 bhp/335 ft.lbs.
I was monitoring air charge temperatures and these could easily be 50-60 degrees over ambient. I had also purchased a Saab 1749 turbo, exactly the same turbo on the 150 CDTi. Cost £77 delivered off eBay.
I then had the compressor cover machined to take a 56 diameter wheel from a VW LT. I already had the wheel and the machining cost £70.
We then fitted the turbo and a Hybrid GT FMIC with the FMIC in front of the air con rad with some modifications to improve air flow through the FMIC, aircon rad and water rad. At the same time I tidied up the air in to the panel filter box and the air from there to the compressor and from the turbo to the front mount.
At this point I took the car to people that were supposed to know their business mapping these cars in the South West. Unfortunately what they claimed they were going to do and what they actually did were somewhat different. I had to make a 900 mile round trip a few weeks later to get further work done on the map but even then was not particularly impressed. At that point on their rollers we had 230 bhp and 340 ft.lbs or something like that.
I then did various experiments with the inlet manifold and amongst other things removed the throttle body. I also purchased a water methanol kit from the USA and I was interested to experiment with this. A small jet gives a light feed of 50-50 water methanol in the cruise or just over cruise boost. You can actually feel this jet come in and there is no doubt in my mind that it improves economy as it must develop more power when it is operating so you don't need as much fuel when it is running. A bigger jet provides a greater flow for power at higher boost level and the whole system is mappable.
I then had the car remapped at Automark Stokesley but Mark had never mapped one of these before and the ECU was foreign to him but we extracted a good bit more power. This is the current format and I plan to have the car remapped in the near future because I am sure there is more to come. The power figure with methanol is 282/388 and 242/352 without. The car is mapped to run at 1.9 bar and I understand this is quite conservative for this engine.

I now have a spare engine from an 07 car and have already ported the cylinder head so the plan is to build this engine so it is just a simple engine change when I am ready to do it and I also have a bigger turbo which is a 17/56/60. This may be a stage too far and I will return to a 17/56 if necessary but the genuine 56 housing (from a BMW) will flow much better than my existing 49 housing machined to take a 56 wheel.

So there you have it. A voyage of discovery, very interesting and still quite a long way to go.

 

Ignoring the economics, a top spec 3 series diesel isn't anywhere near as composed or fun on the back roads of the North Pennines...

They were good back in the 80's I told my little sister to buy a Nova SXi TD and it flew, even if cornering was "challenging"... I agree the performance is very accessible, but once tramping on the combiination for revs and boost means I kill many Audi's in an over-taking situation. Partially because they are bought for their advantages, not as in my case for "fun".

400 bhp. 380 ft.lb.s and >2 bar of boost, I've just got in from a 100 miles run from Staithes and it's managed 24 mpg...

And no I won't incriminate myself with a quote of my average mph

dunx

P.S. The other car outside is dieseasel !

 

I'm saying that comparing your modded diesel to a standard STi is unfair ... modded car vs standard. Try yours against a 400hp scoob & see what happens.

TX.

Edit - not attempting to detract from your diesel of course which sounds bonkers!

 

Beware of Volvo's of a certain age... a guy at work is facing an additive tank/pump replacement at £650 and next is some other "green" device that's got to be swapped for an MOT within the year.

I can't be bothered to Google it but it's bloody expensive...

dunx

 

Indeed it is sir, but its also the only box that works properly and is mapped in much the same way as an ECU, albeit of course far more limited.
Unfortunataly, you own a car with an ECU that is pretty well locked down and forces us to use other means, and we only use the best.

 

I've recently sold my daily runabout which was a Vauxhal Signum with the z19dt, returned around 50mpg on average but was very dull. Just got myself a new Focus Zetec S TDCI, 2.0d, same suspension and brakes and tyre size and very similar bodykit as the st and it's returning about 55mpg at the moment, made a point of getting another diesel without a dpf after the big bill on the vauxhall when it went wrong.
Actually quite a fun car to drive around, will never be as much fun as the type r though which is currently having a 2.1 cdb built for it

 

correct me if i am wrong, but a diesel will happily hold at 4k rpm for 2 hours (london to birmingham or something whereas a scoob has me thinking about heatsoak for the intercooler, being a 2.5 is an engine failure imminent etc etc.

 

What you on about, mate?

 

He is RIGHTLY stating that a diesel engine is inherently stronger than a petrol one. Diesel engine components are incredibly strong, they have to be a diesel engine is basically detting ALL the time.

 

Gen iv Legacy sportswagon diesel; fantasic brakes, great handling, 40 to 50mpg. Call me biased if you want !! I`ll be visiting Mr Rawle when the warranty runs out. Love the Impreza as well, but I did`nt get it to drive more than an hour max at a time; you cant compare Imprezas with anything

 

Thanks for the translation.
I read what he was saying as that a 2.5 wasn't able to carry out a 200 mile journey from London to Birmingham due to heat soak and that in attempting to do so the engine would fail

 

Correct too, get a 2.5 engine and run it at 4k rpm for two hours solid and look at how hot it gets! I had a diesel 320d (which a few people on here may recall) and that would happily sit at what ever rpm without any problems. Not once did I have to think about heatsoak, engine failures or whether the engind could handle it.

Dont get me wrong, I love my impreza to bits - its not big power by any means, but as a few people know it isnt what i need for 40k miles a year. Do that on a scoob for a few years and then do it in a diesel car - tell me the difference.

One journey to London etc wont make it go pop, but daily commutes can't be good can it? At one stage commutes from London to York could not have been good for it either.

By no means am i an uber techie with engines, but I know when one needs more maintenance than another for similar use.

 

You'll also liable to pick up a shed load of points doing 95-100mph for 2 hrs

 

I've read many reviews that say that unless you do high mileage, a diesel will cost you more in the long run than a petrol.

This was most apparent when I had a BMW 6cyl car and I was thinking of swopping for a 320 diesel. The petrol was bulletproof and very rarely went wrong whereas the diesel with it's excellent fuel economy was riddled with common faults and basically cost a small fortune to keep it going.

I'm more than happy with my Bug WRX and I use it as a daily driver. It's strong, reliable, fun to drive, handles brilliant and I'm more than happy to pay a little bit more in fuel prices and insurance for that satisfaction. I hate spending money on a car that I find dull to drive.

 

True, very true. The drop in my mileage (down to 15k a year) defined a petrol for me - made more sense hence why I moved from the 320d to the spec D - yes I do miss the 320d because it was fully loaded and had all the toys, but for rawness the scoob is awesome - and I will miss it.

Unfortunatley my mileage is now 40k a year so it seems unlikely the scoob will handle that for the next 2-3 years (which would take it to 140,000 miles on the clock)

it really does depend on how much it is used tbh, for me:
sensible mileage = scoob
high mileage = diesel tank

What would be good (thinking out aloud here) is a Diesel STI which is bulletproof and lasts.

Does anyone know what mileage the new hatch diesels have made it upto?

 

When on any motorways (M1, M4, M5, M6 and M25 for example) I don't think I have ever managed more than an hour at most at national speed limit (or above) before hitting a fairly long stretch of road works and 5-15 mins of 45 to 50 MPH? 200 miles of uninterrupted motorway at 100 miles an hour (4000rpm in the WRX) seems beyond my wildest dreams! I think I get more heat soak crawling on motorways at 3 MPH!

 

driven Quite a few newer diesels now and I like the bmw 123 the best its a bit sporty and sorry to say it would destroy a lot or wrx,s as for all out performance , sti is a diferrant ball game though unless the diesel is chipped but for fun factor my mates wrx is leagues above it but for a fast economical , family car you have to go and buy the diesel

 

There is 3/4of us with wrxd and all similar mileages 20-25k and no problems yet with them and most of us seem to get 500 per tank 44-47 mpg which is double a petrol scooby

A diesel STi

I'm sure it will come and will be fantastic

 

I'm 1 of them.

28K and not missed a heartbeat. Currently sat on 48.3mpg on this tank, over all its nearer 45. Highest I managed 66.6mpg!

Theortically I have a range of 630 miles, hoever my backside got twitchy at 575!

 

I had a '93 ZX Volcane TD which I loved. Not as fast in a straight line as the petrol varient, but it shared the brakes and suspension so could be hussled along the "slow A-Road" type tarmac that I most enjoy just as quickly.

This was replaced by a remapped Leon TDI so I'm more than used to deezals and far from blinkered towards them.

Have had a hawkeye scoob wagon for 4+ years now. Great car. I got this as I was lucky enough to no longer need to worry about the length of commute I had, so economy was much less of a concern.

I don't think you can legitimately claim your TDI to be "slightly modded" with a new turbot etc. I'd say "modified" is fairer. I don't question that your car is quick - anything with 280+ bhp and 380+lbs.ft is going to be fast, but I'd be interested to know what your economy is like. Diesels get better mpg for two reasons - slightly higher calorofic value in the fuel, and (more apparent) because they don't require a stoichmetric mix, hence don't need a throttle - which makes their part-throttle economy far better. A diesel at full throttle does't have a huge advantage over a petrol at full throttle however......

 

Interesting discusion,I have just spent the last week driving a 2010 2.0 ltr Audi A3 Tdi sport with 6k miles,and dispite owning over 40 petrol cars since passing my driving test back in 1986,i have to admit i was impressed .
Not with the staggering performance,as it only has 140 bhp,but a healthy 256 lb/ft,but with the fuel cost. Since monday morning i have done 312 miles and the mpg is a whopping 49.6 and i have been doing a fair bit of motorway /dual carriageway spirited driving ..

But as Matty B says it is about as interesting to drive as a game of scrabble,yes it is smooth and refined and at 80 mph your doing 2,000 rpm,but the torque starts to kick in at about 1750 rpm,and by 4000 rpm your changing up . Even if it was remapped and the power/torque increased ,i personally dont think it would appeal to me as a performance tool.As a day to day car then yes, and after driving the audi ,i might even consider giving my 1.4 honda civic to my daughter now ,whilst i opt for a 1.7 ctdi 54/56 plate honda civic instead,but will still keep my impreza even if petrol goes up to £3.00 a litre.

 

I was in my Pug diesel yesterday & watched a 911 turbo just drive off they really are poor performers!

TX.

 

TX cant imagine how he got away from you , you sure you let your handbrake off..

 

A few years back one of the motoring magazines did an test on the cost of ownership on petrol and diesel mondeo and you need to do 120,000 miles in the diesel to break even with the petrol...
Our current shopping trolly / pub roller skate is a £800 rover 25 1.4 42mpg and we have done about 15,000 miles at a cost of £250 most of which is 4 new tyres.
Diesels just don't add up cost wise for me..

 

Thanks. I'll bear that in mind if I ever drive from London to Birmingham at 95-100mph for 2 hours and if I were to buy a 2.5

 

Diesel cars (especially tuned ones) obviously get great torque figures, and pull very well.

Power is only one aspect though, handling and how a car 'makes you feel' are more important to me, hence why there are no diesel Caterhams/Radicals.

Great for an every day car though.

 

4k rpm was an example in this instance. The M40 is pretty rigged with speed camera vans meaning trying to get past 80mph (on speedo) is bloody brave, especially when your job needs you to drive. Having said that, you would need to be in 6th at 4k rpm to be at 100 mph?

lol, my maths may be wrong though.

 

The car is slightly modded in that I have not had to do a lot to take it from 150/236 to 282/388.
The cost to do this has also been "slight" compared to a comparable increase in power on a WRX or STi. The main mods are a turbo that cost £147 including the turbo and delivery and modification. An exhaust system that cost just over £300 and a Hybrid GT core and some silicon pipes. Slightly modified. I don't want to split hairs if you feel it is a modified car beyond the slightly stage.
Fuel economy on a run it still does well over 50 miles per gallon calculated ie. not on the fuel computer. About town it is still doing 40 mpg or marginally more and it is still a genuine 160 mph plus car. If I go out on a test run over say 20 miles driving flat out where possible the consumption over that short distance is still in the high 30s. Generally the car is doing at least 2 x the distance possible on any 2 litre petrol turbo. Quiet, comfortable and the obvious choice if I have to do a high mileage in a day on national roads that are generally dual carriageway or motorway. Journey times from Darlington to Glasgow or Leeds, Leicester or Bristiol will not be any faster whether I go in a Subaru or a Vectra so for me it is a no brainer. For fun I have my STis but when I have work to do I can enjoy the Vectra.

 

Can't fault my Legacy diesel, plus also is a great towing vehicle, tows rallycar and trailer about with ease. Returns good mpg while towing too