2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Big lumps of metals and spanners. Including servicing and fluids.

Moderators: User administrators, Moderators

hightop ratty
Trader
Posts: 290
Joined: 05 Oct 2012, 12:05
80-90 Mem No: 2717
Location: Port Talbot
Contact:

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by hightop ratty »

i've been offered a 2.1 injection (i hadn't realised it was plug & play only in the engine bay - & adding an electric fuel pump).

a little concerned about the age of the electrics (not a lover of these new engine management by computer m'larky) - my 4 yr old Qashqai variable valve thingy needed replacing after only 2 years from new :-(

hightop ratty
Trader
Posts: 290
Joined: 05 Oct 2012, 12:05
80-90 Mem No: 2717
Location: Port Talbot
Contact:

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by hightop ratty »

Cheers Itchy feet (in all fairness you are the man to listen to - as you have both engines & lots of experience :-)

The trouble & strife is wondering whether to just go with the 1.9 (we only do about 3k miles a year), (especially as she is concerned about a 2.1 blowing another con rod) - happy wife = happy life ;-)

Other option is to buy s/h (& possibly some new bits from brickwerks - they have the pistons & con rods :-) - do you have any contacts for any good used crankshaft / camshaft & any other bits my rebuilder will need - he doesn't mind doing a 2.1 rebuild but simply doesn't have the parts (& mine is totalled so not re-useable :-(

I'm looking at circa £1.7k (1.9) to 2.1k (if a 2.1 was avail) to change my engine at the moment (taken out, recon & put back in ready to go :-)

What would I be roughly looking at buying most parts s/h for reconditioning ? (how long is a piece of string ?!?!)

User avatar
itchyfeet
Registered user
Posts: 12427
Joined: 23 Jul 2007, 17:24
80-90 Mem No: 12733
Location: South Hampshire

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by itchyfeet »

Andrew Simmons at Campershack had some 2.1 cranks recently.

Cam is either a new one from VW classic but very expensive at over 300 quid and a wait for delivery ( and not all gear sizes available) or people fit the CB 2252 available from VW heratige, its a 3 bolt air cooled hydraulic cam so need a 3 bolt gear (VWH sell) and matching Aircooled oil pump, oil pump may stick out a bit more and foul engine cradle, some washers can be used to add clearance. You need a new set of Hydraulic cam followers too.
(looking at doing this myself with the next DJ I build)

WBX cams come with a variety of cam gear sizes, Aircooled have just one size so could have backlash which there is nothing you can do about (a bit noisy)
1988 DG WBX LPG Tin Top
1989 DJ digijet WBX Holdsworth Villa 3 Pop Top
itchylinks

hightop ratty
Trader
Posts: 290
Joined: 05 Oct 2012, 12:05
80-90 Mem No: 2717
Location: Port Talbot
Contact:

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by hightop ratty »

Thanks itchy

One to think about for the future (& make note of the bits needed).

We're going for the rebuilt 1.9 (or lose our place in the queue) so hopefully will be back in the camper before the end of the camping season (luckily managed to take the little un camping in the scudo van a few times trading at shows, so at least he has been camping, but want to take him camping proper in the camper in 2017 - or there''l be a year missing in the camper memories photo album for 2017.

If the 1.9 doesn't deliver the goods (my 1st one did from what i remember & that was on its last legs) - i'l be back to the drawing board & sourcing a 2.1 (or the parts to get one done :-)

User avatar
Ian Hulley
Registered user
Posts: 12659
Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 08:08
80-90 Mem No: 1323
Location: Wirksworth, Derbyshire ... or at t'mill

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by Ian Hulley »

hightop ratty wrote:What are the actual (approx) gains in power & torque that are possible using the 2.1 (on pierburg carb) as opposed to 1.9 (on pierburg carb) I know this was asked early on in the post - i've re-read all 24 pages of another thread in the last hour (but it looks like better low end grunt, with more power going up hills, & fewer gear changes to do so - which I guess is reason enough).

There is a very significant difference between a 1.9DG and a 2.1 DJ using the same carb, jet set-up and same timing setting.

hightop ratty wrote: The reason I ask is my engine rebuilder doesn't have a 2.1 case that he can rebuild after all (he thought he did, but it came with a job lot of other engines etc, but after measuring up has passed on the sad news tonight that it is in fact a 1.9

Really ? Not exactly a 'specialist engine builder' if he doesn't know that a 1.9DG case IS a 2.1 DJ case ... the difference is the crank and pistons.

hightop ratty wrote: Are there any other 2.1 engines out there (either rebuilt or with known history), that I might be able to buy, rather than go down the 1.9 route (which will work fine i'm sure, but will always have the nagging doubt I should have gone for the big one :-)

They do crop up but the age-old principal of 'You snooze you lose' really does apply ... known-good ones are few and far between and very seldom reach the point of being advertised.

Ian
The Hulley's Bus
1989 2.1DJ Trampspotter
LPG courtesy of Steve @ Gasure

User avatar
a1winchester
Registered user
Posts: 1084
Joined: 30 Jul 2009, 22:09
80-90 Mem No: 7187
Location: Spilsby Lincolnshire

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by a1winchester »

I know I am used to driving my own van (1.9DG with 4 speed box), but I find it powerful enough and fast enough for my style of motoring. I have been up some fairly steep inclines on the North York Moors, and didn't have any problems.
I don't know why you need extra power unless you are particularly heavily laden. I would be interested to know.
These vans are never going to be performance vehicles, especially with the aerodynamics of a giant brick.
I can keep up with most HGVs and even overtake some when I get bored with their rear ends. That's good enough for me. :ok
1990 Autosleeper Trident. Water cooled 1.9L DG + 4 speed manual box

hightop ratty
Trader
Posts: 290
Joined: 05 Oct 2012, 12:05
80-90 Mem No: 2717
Location: Port Talbot
Contact:

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by hightop ratty »

Ian Hulley wrote:
hightop ratty wrote:What are the actual (approx) gains in power & torque that are possible using the 2.1 (on pierburg carb) as opposed to 1.9 (on pierburg carb) I know this was asked early on in the post - i've re-read all 24 pages of another thread in the last hour (but it looks like better low end grunt, with more power going up hills, & fewer gear changes to do so - which I guess is reason enough).

There is a very significant difference between a 1.9DG and a 2.1 DJ using the same carb, jet set-up and same timing setting.

hightop ratty wrote: The reason I ask is my engine rebuilder doesn't have a 2.1 case that he can rebuild after all (he thought he did, but it came with a job lot of other engines etc, but after measuring up has passed on the sad news tonight that it is in fact a 1.9

Really ? Not exactly a 'specialist engine builder' if he doesn't know that a 1.9DG case IS a 2.1 DJ case ... the difference is the crank and pistons.
Sorry - my post badly worded (originally he was hoping to make the best using some of my engine parts, & another 2.1 engine he thought he had - it had been possibly rebuilt at some stage, and did not have engine number markings).

hightop ratty wrote: Are there any other 2.1 engines out there (either rebuilt or with known history), that I might be able to buy, rather than go down the 1.9 route (which will work fine i'm sure, but will always have the nagging doubt I should have gone for the big one :-)

They do crop up but the age-old principal of 'You snooze you lose' really does apply ... known-good ones are few and far between and very seldom reach the point of being advertised.

Ian
To be fair to my engine rebuilder - the problem is he doesn't have any 2.1 parts available, but has loads of 1.9 (he thought he had a 2.1 and he could use the internals for my engine which he had bought as part of a job lot of engines a while back - as my internals (and engine case) are bent / broken & totally scrap - my con rod snapped at 70mph on the motorway so the engine didn't have much chance when it made its break for freedom :-(

User avatar
123-jn
Registered user
Posts: 588
Joined: 28 Mar 2013, 19:50
80-90 Mem No: 12161
Location: Bromsgrove Worcstershire

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by 123-jn »

There really is no difference between the 1.9 and 2.1 a late 1.9 case is great , the only difficult bits are the pistons , crank and cam which I thought you had? Bearings tappets ,heads valves are all the same, oil pumps, rods, thrusts all readily available. The 2.1 is so much better I would hate to go back to 1.9. And if there really are no late 1.9 cases and early case can be clearanced by hand to accept the 2.1 crank or using the same programme with a tweek that they use for the air cooled jobs. My 2.1 is in an early case with early bearings. In fact I am after another 2.1 crank to rebuild into another 1.9 case that I have with MV pistons.
123-jn Autohomes Komet 2.1 DJ AUTO 1989 (closed loop LPG pierburg 2E3)
- Citroen C4 Picasso 1.6 HDi

Florence the Komet
Registered user
Posts: 48
Joined: 03 Apr 2017, 17:14
80-90 Mem No: 15792
Location: Oxford

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by Florence the Komet »

As an aside, can anyone outline for me the rationale/benefits of running a 2.1 (DJ) on carb? I thought the injection system was a desirable aspect of this engine?! I've searched the wiki and forum for this but am finding it hard to search as 2.1 brings up so many posts but no definitive 2.1 engine thread that i can find... I've picked up from this thread that it gives more torque, but im not feeling short on torque having just pulled a fully-loaded hightop up Norway's fjords without flinching. Im building up to changing all the fuel lines, and i suspect this would be an easier task without the injection system? But dont want to mess about with what seems like a great engine without good cause. If this is covered somewhere a link would be much appreciated!
Thanks in advance people :)
1989 WBX Petrol 2.1 DJ 5-speed

User avatar
Ian Hulley
Registered user
Posts: 12659
Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 08:08
80-90 Mem No: 1323
Location: Wirksworth, Derbyshire ... or at t'mill

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by Ian Hulley »

Florence the Komet wrote:As an aside, can anyone outline for me the rationale/benefits of running a 2.1 (DJ) on carb? I thought the injection system was a desirable aspect of this engine?! I've searched the wiki and forum for this but am finding it hard to search as 2.1 brings up so many posts but no definitive 2.1 engine thread that i can find... I've picked up from this thread that it gives more torque, but im not feeling short on torque having just pulled a fully-loaded hightop up Norway's fjords without flinching. Im building up to changing all the fuel lines, and i suspect this would be an easier task without the injection system? But dont want to mess about with what seems like a great engine without good cause. If this is covered somewhere a link would be much appreciated!
Thanks in advance people :)

The Pierburg 2E3 carb when in good condition is a superb piece of kit on a 2.1DJ. The main advantage over injection is that there are so fewer things to go wrong ... we run on LPG and swapped onto a 2.1DJ when our original 1.9DG needed an exhaust, sprang numerous pipework leaks and leaked oil. While it was out it made sense to upgrade it. The carb was never touched and ran on gas perfectly until last October when I had it replaced for a new one by Mr Shaw as having done almost 300,000 miles it no-longer liked running on petrol. Now it runs smoothly and (ok, relatively) powerfully on either fuel.

Personally I wouldn't junk the injection system if it's reliable just to save the fuel line job, they need doing periodically anyway whether it's injection or carb. :ok

Ian
The Hulley's Bus
1989 2.1DJ Trampspotter
LPG courtesy of Steve @ Gasure

Florence the Komet
Registered user
Posts: 48
Joined: 03 Apr 2017, 17:14
80-90 Mem No: 15792
Location: Oxford

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by Florence the Komet »

Thanks Ian that's really helpful.
I think I will leave it as injected then, but set the timing for 95 fuel as it was hard to ensure supply when travelling recently, and I don't mind losing a few HP if it protects the engine from harm through wrong fuel. And then i'll consider a Pierberg down the line if the injection system packs up. Thanks again.
1989 WBX Petrol 2.1 DJ 5-speed

hightop ratty
Trader
Posts: 290
Joined: 05 Oct 2012, 12:05
80-90 Mem No: 2717
Location: Port Talbot
Contact:

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by hightop ratty »

I finally picked up my rebuilt van with 1.9 petrol engine the other day - currently running in :-)

I think the guy at my VW garage thought my van was going to be a permanent fixture :-)

Took a bit longer as was waiting for engine rebuilder (holidays / & very busy with stuff) - happy with the end result though which is the main thing, and my van hibernates a bit over the winter anyway - also sorted out a few niggles & rusty front steps are now safe to step on again / new ball joints etc for the MOT - would have been nice to drive her home on 1-1-18 (34 years to the date from registration date) - but too busy with panto & tax returns - now there's a combination ;-).

A loose sump plug was spotted on final inspection & sorted (phew - that could have been blown engine no 3 - & that's just in the camper !)

Running in at the minute (done 100 miles so far), so all still a bit tight & taking it easy on the A roads for now.
Power seems ok with the 1.9 so far - hard to tell properly yet, but not disappointed :-)
Will update once she's loosened up a bit :-)
The main thing is Ethel is back on the road to make memories, after an 18 month lay up - wagons roll !!! :-)

User avatar
kevtherev
Registered user
Posts: 18830
Joined: 23 Oct 2005, 20:13
80-90 Mem No: 2264
Location: Country estate Wolverhampton Actually

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by kevtherev »

I am surprised you "haven't noticed much difference"
When I changed to a 2.1 on carb the difference still makes me grin!
From a wheezy 70 odd horses to a banging 100 plus horses made mine drivable in all scenarios.
AGG 2.0L 8V. (Golf GTi MkIII)

hightop ratty
Trader
Posts: 290
Joined: 05 Oct 2012, 12:05
80-90 Mem No: 2717
Location: Port Talbot
Contact:

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by hightop ratty »

I did find I needed to drop a gear on a steep hill with the 1.9, but not sure if that's me taking it easy with running her in - where with the 2.1 I could just power through (gruntier).

Used to drive it like I stole it on the 2.1 - probably going to take it a bit easier with the 1.9 if only to save on another rebuild (not sure the Mrs patience can take another), but lets see for the minute.

If money was no option i'd have gone for another 2.1 (who knows in the future), but for now am happy Ethel is up & running - & ready for action :-)

User avatar
ghost123uk
Registered user
Posts: 6857
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:15
80-90 Mem No: 2585
Location: John in Malpas, in the very S. W. part of Cheshire.
Contact:

Re: 2.1 or 1.9 - which is most reliable ? (both running on carb

Post by ghost123uk »

hightop ratty wrote:(a specialist vw engine rebuilder is doing the rebuild)
There are very very few specialist VW WBX rebuilders in the uk these days, and "we" know most of them (all 2 of them in fact). Who was it?
I ask because of the scarcity of them, another one to turn to would be good.
Got a new van, but it's a 165bhp T4 [shock horror] Accurate LPG Station map here

Post Reply