2.2 dti or 1.9 cdti?

**garyvectrac** · 8th March 2013, 20:54

hi all,
i currently own a 2004 vectra sri 2.2dti, i do love the car but so does my dad as its an auto so hes going to have that due to having a bad leg, im thinking of getting a manual and am wondering wether to go for another 2.2dti which i found very reliable, economical, pretty quick and a real pleasure to drive or a 1.9 cdti (120 or 150) of similar year. which engine do you all prefer?, my friend has a 2005 facelift cdti 150 and has spent a small fortune on it with things like cat, egr, turbo, exhaust filter thingy. there seems to be hundreds of cdti's but very few dti's. please help wouldn't want to give up my baby for a cdti that is going to cost me a fortune or am i just being too cautious. thanks in advance

**garyvectrac** · 8th March 2013, 21:35

bump

**jonny22** · 8th March 2013, 21:58

I'd go for the cdti, newer engine and the 150 model mapped will be miles quicker if you think the dti is nippy, just make sure you get one with all the common problems fixed

**CBak109** · 8th March 2013, 22:00

I've got a 120 CDTi and no problems here and can't complain on the nippy-ness front either :-)

**stevoxsi** · 8th March 2013, 22:20

150 cdti is the best imo. By exhaust filter I assume you mean the dpf, which the hatch manual won't have. Love mine! Can get into the 60mpg range too when in granny mode!

**Signum-Steve** · 8th March 2013, 23:13

2.2 DTI its a proven lump which runs at about 140 BHP with the airbox mod and a de-cat. Its bullet proof unlike the 1.9cdti 147bhp which has far more reliability problems.

**john_k_sri** · 9th March 2013, 01:38

THe 2.2 DTI is no match power/torque wise for the 1.9CDTI 150.

**Z80** · 9th March 2013, 03:38

The DTi is almost unbreakable, but the CDTi is more fuel efficient, more responsive at low rmp, and more powerful overall (though an EDS-remapped 2.2 DTi might develop more torque). You'll also get a more recent car.

On the other hand, a lot of people say a remapped 1.9 CDTi 120 is more reliable than a 150. The 16 valve 150 bhp engine seems to be more fragile. Now I'm not a specialist...

**john_k_sri** · 9th March 2013, 11:50

Originally Posted by Z80

The DTi is almost unbreakable, but the CDTi is more fuel efficient, more responsive at low rmp, and more powerful overall (though an EDS-remapped 2.2 DTi might develop more torque). You'll also get a more recent car.

On the other hand, a lot of people say a remapped 1.9 CDTi 120 is more reliable than a 150. The 16 valve 150 bhp engine seems to be more fragile. Now I'm not a specialist...

Good summary that, mate. Saab did a limited 2.2 Ttid (DTI) run with a 6-speed box and revised gearing and that was a lively one allegedly.

**garyvectrac** · 9th March 2013, 12:29

cheers guys, now ive given both a cdti 120 and 150 a go and performance wasn't that different, mine seems pretty quick dont know if its because of the auto box but it really moves, as for reliability i cannot fault it. timming chains aswell, my pal had a 2.2 dti which was remapped, cone filter and full straight through exhaust and that kept up with my old signum petrol turbo. think ill definatly go 2.2dti just a shame theres not many out there that havn't done a million miles. might go for a signum aswell. so if anyone knows of a signum 2.2 dti man or auto pref design or elite under 100k (may even consider vectra estate of same varient) please let me know.