When looking at Skoda/Vw of a certain era there is a 1.9 or a 2.0 litre
Which engine is/was better ?
What’s the difference ?
Did the 1.9 have injector recalls ?

Thanks

No, the 2.0 was the one that had the injector problems.

General consensus is that the 1.9 was far more reliable. On newer models (mk5 Golfs onward) the 1.9 is still used for the lower powered cars, whilst the more powerful ones are the 2.0. With older Golfs there was a 130 and a 150 PD 1.9, which seem to generally be reckoned to be the most reliable. Getting on a bit now.

I had a 1.9 TDI 130 PD, now have a 2.0 TDI 170 PD, the newer one hasn’t exploded, is appreciably smoother and faster. Hardly a representative survey though!

0.1

A world of pain 😀

1.9TDi’s a good engine, we’ve two mk5’s and both are now over 100k with no troubles at all (both are DPF too!), had a van at work that was over 250k on the 1.9 too. No personal experience of the 2.0 other than a test drive, much faster car but was warned off it by the mechanics I know.

2.0 is the more modern engine, and is much more refined.

It was the higher output (140/170hp) pd 2.0l diesels that had the injector problems. The injectors and the injector loom should have been replaced. If they have there should be a sticker under the carpet in the boot (on a skoda at least) next to the spare wheel and vehicle id sticker to say when it was done. To my knowledge the 1.9td never had an injector recal.
My 2.0 has been a good engine. Not massively economical but then I have heavy feet. The later 2.0l cr engines are supposed to be a piece better than the pd engines both in terms of refinement and economy. I think they changed from pd to cr engines around 2009/2010.

unfitgeezer – What era are we talking about? I’d definitely go 1.9, they have a lot less problems than the newer engines.

The 2.0 TDI initially was a PD engine but they had electronic injectors which allowed for better control of injection timing, and hence don’t deliver all their torque in a narrow power band. I think they are twin cam 16v too but they may not all be.

Later 2.0 TDI is a common rail engine (post 2008 in Passats, varies in other VAG cars) which is completely different and much better. As said – the injectors should have been replaced, and there was a design flaw in SOME oil pumps which should all have been repaired or recalled by now. That and the injectors gave the engine a bad rep, which isn’t necessarily warranted if the recalls have been done. I think a dealer or VOSA will probably be able to tell you.

It’s noisier than the common rail engine but a decent drive. In 2005-2008 Passats when both engines were available the 1.9 was 105bhp which really wasn’t enough for me, which is why I discounted it.

The 2 litre is a decent engine as long as it isn’t the BLB model which have issues with the oil pump.

The 1.9Tdi 130 is a bomb proof engine. I had one years ago which i bought with 130000 miles on the clock and took it to 288000 with absolutly nothing go wrong with it.

Can’t vouch for the 2.0TDi apart from heresay that its not great on reliability.

Google BXE conrod failure for 1.9’s of a certain age . I have seen the results with my own eyes . On the whole though they are a good engine .

Check the engine code on a 2 litre as well then investigate if oil pump failure is a problem .

jonk beat me to it .

1.9 bombproof ! – don’t make me laugh . Be careful & look on the log book – if the engines code starts with bse ( Google it to check , could be bxe) then steer clear . They were made with cheap con rods & they’ll fail , put a big hole in the side of your engine & cost a fortune . Happened to me , and lots of other people too ..so beware .

Conrods? How old?

Check the engine code on a 2 litre as well then investigate if oil pump failure is a problem

As I said, all engines will be either dead or fixed by now.

I’ve a 2.0 140 CR in a Golf mk6 ’09 plate. 65k miles and it still feels though it’s getting warmed up. Don’t plan to sell it (EVER!! 😉 ) as I love it (and the golf).
Had a 1.9 prior and the 2.0 is much more refined as it was previously said…

I took my Passat 1.9 from 236,000 miles to 312,000 miles before I sold it. It used no oil or water and never , ever let me down . Not bad for an engine that isn’t bombproof.
I bought another , newer Passat with 140,00 on the clock , and took that to 170,00 . That did die , but from a rounded camshaft lobe . The thing with bangernomics is knowing when to repair , or sell. I sold it rather than spend £200 on a camshaft kit for a 52 plate car. PD lump doesnt have good oil spray up in the head , you can start them with the cam cover removed and not get sprayed in the face.

Yeah, i would call 288,000 miles with only the routine maintenance pretty bombproof.

It is …but I’d be 100% certain that the engine code doesn’t start BXE too .
Steer clear of it if it does is all I’m saying.

I had a 59 plate 2.0d 140 bhp Seat.

Needed cam belt every 40,000. Limited power band and not that economical. Other than that it ran perfectly.

I have 1.9tdi BXE 105bhp Octavia which was remapped to 135bhp at 60k and is now at 160k and has been faultless.

Probably jinxed it now though!

Both 2000 Passat and 2005 Touran had 1.9 Tdi.

Engines were great and both ran upto 160k when we got rid.

The Passat was built from granite, oak and solid steel.

The Touran had been engineered down to a cost, and was made more from plastic, balsa and iffy cheap fittings.

2005-2008 2.0 VAG oil pump balancing shaft issues

avoid

I’ve got the 130 bhp 1.9tdi which is currently on 257k miles. It seems very reliable.
It’s quite a clattery diesel, although quietens down once warm and has plenty of shove.

My Wife has got the 2.0 140 tdi in an Ibiza. Power delivery is fine although it feels a little flatter than my car. I think that’s just because it is more linear.

Our experience with fuel economy doesn’t match funkydunc’s comment about poor economy above, as 55mpg is pretty easy with 60mpg on a run.

There are many variants of both engines! An old colleague had the same 1.9tdi in an A3 and it felt a lot more on/off; perhaps it was his driving style…

1.9 passat here with 132,000 miles. Remapped at 120,00 from 105 bhp to around 145. It was a bit flat until it was mapped but its an estate and needs the shove when loaded. Clutch and flywheel fitted when i bought it at 118,000.

2005-2008 2.0 VAG oil pump balancing shaft issues

avoid

WRONG

Did you read what I wrote?

era 2002 ish- 2009 ish

thanks some good advice

😀

I took my 2001 130tdi from 94k to 235k with no problems, same battery, clutch & exhaust over 7 years. I only sold it cos it needed a bit doing for the MOT, calipers were ****, the central locking was iffy & it needed some suspension parts & a CV boot.
Wish I’d kept it & done the work.

Iffy central locking on a B5 Passat is caused by a blocked drain under the battery causing water to gather and leak into the passenger footwell where the central locking/window control unit is. Simple fix – remove battery, stick finger in drain.

I’ve recently bought a 2007 passat with the 140hp 2.0 tdi engine. As mentioned, it’s more refined than the 1.9, but still relatively agricultural. Only had 39k on it when I bought it, hopefully just getting into its stride. No dpf to worry about 🙂

I had a golf with the 1.6 cr tdi engine before it, that was a lovely engine (if they can be lovely!)

Iffy central locking on a B5 Passat is caused by a blocked drain under the battery causing water to gather and leak into the passenger footwell where the central locking/window control unit is. Simple fix – remove battery, stick finger in drain.

I did that long before the central locking went dodgy. Must’ve been the after effect I guess.

From experience, the 1.9 will take a 3/1 diesel/petrol ratio without a problem. I doubt the 2.0 will, so if you’re an occasional forecourt f&%kwit then that might be a factor.

Yep my passat 1.9tdi 130 2003 plate, has been pretty bomb proof. Selling it now though with 200k ish and only had routine maintenance. If I had a bigger driveway I’d keep it! Great car.

Yeah, I never took the blocked drain bit seriously enough (not that easy to keep an eye on; how come it was only the Passat that suffered from this?). Mine rotted the brake servo jamming on the brakes and allowing rainwater to get sucked into the engine sump.

The plenum drains on a passat was on a recall I believe.

Two drain tubes in the scuttle that get blocked by leaves/muck causing the issue.

I’ve had 3 1.9pd cars. cracking engine, regular servicing will see it cover well in excess of 200k. I’ve had 2 2.0 engines. One 2.0 pd in a 2006 passat which had no issue getting to 140k and my new T5 has the 2.0 common rail engine which seems to be far more refined than the 2.0pd with a much smoother torque curve.. Reliability wise time will tell!

The door pumps go on the central locking.. common

Both my 2005 1.9 130 Passat and my 2008 2.0 140 Golf have been trouble free. The Passat went to my ex-mother in law so if it had been a rotter I would have heard about it! That had 150k on it when she had it 18 months ago and still drove really nicely. I’d have another if I still needed a bigger car. I got rid of it when I wanted something less family and more single man.

Took my passat 2001 1.9 130 pumpe duse to 180,000. Lovely car serviced with correct PD oil and until the day of doom still drove like new. Then on a roadtrip to Wales the conrod shot through the block, lost all its oil and engine destroyed.

Got a recon engine for 600£ and had that fitted for 250£. Car sold 5 years back but still going to this day.

Great mpg on a run too, 55 to 60 very easy.

WRONG

Did you read what I wrote?

You said they were all fixed or dead by now.

Unsurprisngly, you clearly haven’t actually looked at buying a 2.0 TDI from the BLB engine code era. There are many alive and kicking that haven’t been recalled/fixed/killed just waiting to throw the engine light.

Want me to link you to all of them on autotrader you rude ingrate?

Well that could well be a different issue, I meant BKP engines. Did they use BLB in VWs or just Audis, cos I’ve not heard of that one. I stand corrected.

In any case – a specific issue subject to recall isn’t quite the same as general unreliability.

Rude, yes, and I apologise, but it’d have been nice for you to refer to my original post. Ingrate – what?