Which is faster

Lalumi

Lalumi

Lalumi

Associate
Joined
14 Apr 2007
Posts
83
Between the 1.4 Petrol engine and a 2L turbo derv, ive been reading that the derv has a lot more torque can anyone explain what that means? had a look around but cannot understand it. i know the turbo derv would be faster at higher speeds but what about the lower speeds from 0 - 30 ect.. a 2.0L derv or a 1.4 petrol. Mg Zr engines btw

Thanks
 
Also two friends have had head gasket issues with the rover engines, in 1.4 and 1.6 form, I think this is an issue throughout the whole K-Series petrol.

If you re going for the 1.4 make sure there is no "cream" on the oil, and that it hasn't had a recent oil service to hide the fact.
 
rickchild said:
Also two friends have had head gasket issues with the rover engines, in 1.4 and 1.6 form, I think this is an issue throughout the whole K-Series petrol.

If you re going for the 1.4 make sure there is no "cream" on the oil, and that it hasn't had a recent oil service to hide the fact.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the K series had a dodgey head gasket, my girlfriend's Rover 200 1.6i being a prime example, luckily for her though she bought it after it had blown and had been replaced with the landy gasket which is stronger and doesn't blow.

I'm guessing the OP is after a traffic light GP car from the sounds of things. The 1.4 will pull well enough (compared to other 'GP' cars), but overall not that well, the D will not pull too well and will sound like a D, whether you change the intake or put a bean can on the back.

InvG
 
Windle said:
Quicker than walking.

Also, he asked which is 'faster' ie one better than the other... should read it first.
Click to expand...

I read it perfectly well thanks.
He's after 0-30 times which means TLGP. Unless he's aspiring to beat 1.2 Corsas with 500kg of bodykit and subs, it's pretty moot.
 
[huzeeee];10231710 said:
I would go for the petrol, 105 bhp is enough to kill yourself with and the revvy little 1.4 lump is fun to thrash.
Click to expand...

its not that much fun, it doesn't shift very well. the zr is heavy car. i had one for a bit, and they are not fast.
 
The torque of a diesel pulling you out of a bend whilst still in 3rd/4th is amazing, certainly more fun then trashing its nuts off in 2nd like you will be doing with a crappy normal aspirated petrol engine
 
GeX said:
its not that much fun, it doesn't shift very well. the zr is heavy car. i had one for a bit, and they are not fast.
Click to expand...

I know it's no sports car, but they're still faster than a 1.6 Focus - and I can't see why a 1.6 isn't classed as not shifting well...

-RaZ
 
GeX said:
my 1.2 fiat cinquecento can easily embarass a 1.4 ZR.
Click to expand...

Really? the cinquecento is 13.4 to 60 and the mg zr is 10 ?

and in reply to the OP question I used to have a rover 200 with the same engine in it, they are not really quick by any means and with a choice between the two now I would go for the diesel but it is a fun revvy little engine :)
 
it's actually 13.8, but you'll note i said 1.2 cinquecento.. the origonal engine is 1.1
 
2 litre turbo diesel I would have imagined. I've owned 2 1.4 injection engined cars, and one 1.7tc, and regularly driven a volvo 1.9td, and either of the td's were quicker, the volvo 1.9 being quite a bit quicker. I would go for the td :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom