2004 Fiat 2.3jtd quick question

[Overdrive]

Hi

 

Does anybody have to hand the max rev/bhp the above engine develops.

 

Thanks

[euroserv]

Hello,

 

2.3JTD 110hp @3600rpm / 270Nm@1800rpm

 

[Overdrive]

Thanks for that.

 

I keep seeing 110 bhp for the 2.2jtd and 130 bhp for the 2.3jtd.

 

Just wanted to be sure, did you get figures from handbook?

[Guest Tracker]

Perhaps you are confusing the uprated engines of the current Boxer/Ducato from around 2007 with the previous model?

 

The two are very different in shape and power outputs although I believe the engine block capacities remain unchanged.

[Overdrive]

May be so.

 

Thanks for quick replies.

 

David

[euroserv]

Hello again,

 

The 2002 to 2006 engine was as described.

 

From 2006 (the X250) there were two versions of this engine fitted to the Fiat. Panel vans got 120hp and coachbuilts got 130hp

 

Not to be confused with the 2.2 which is available in the Fiat at just 100hp while Peugeot and Citroen use this engine at 120 and 130hp because Fiat will not let them use the 2.3 The 2.2 and 2.3 engines are completely un related, the 2.3 being a Fiat Powertrain Technoligies unit and the 2.2 is a joint venture between Ford and PSA (it also appears in FWD Transits).

 

For good measure I should include that the 3.0 engine available in all X250's is also an FPT unit and in this application produces 157hp while in the Iveco Daily it has been up to 176hp.

 

Nick

 

[Overdrive]

euroserv - Thanks for detailed reply.

 

Me thinks I ought to be looking for an Iveco! I don't want anything less powerfull than our current 2.8idtd @ 122bhp.

[euroserv]

I would not dismiss the early 2.3 out of hand; the 12hp deficit and 30Nm of torque it gives away to the 2.8 are not really noticeable, and it should give better economy too. It's a good engine and would respond well to one of the 'chip' boxes that are available since it is more tuneable than the 2.8 which really needs a bigger intercooler to breathe better and that is not an easy option.

 

Nick

[Guest Tracker]

Our Starburst has the Peugeot 2.2 hdi engine and now that it has covered 30,000 miles is pulling better all the time.

 

In my view this is the best engine of all as although it is a few bhp down on the Fiat 2.3 it is arguably the smoothest, quietest and most economical engine in the range (bar the somewhat gutless on a coachbuilt 2.0 hdi) and much less harsh than either the 2.3 or 2.8 which makes it ideal for long hauls.

 

It can - and does - comfortably cruise the motorways at well above the 70 limit as indicated by the sat nav!

 

Not exactly mind blowing performance it must be said but for heavens sake it's a motorhome not a dragster and whilst I am not known for slow driving it does the job admirably!

[Overdrive]

We have just returned from our Annual 3 week Holiday 3k mile trip to Italy and back. The climb over the Alps fully loaded is a struggle for the 2.8idtd, it's not flat speed I am looking for - quite happy sitting at 100kph all day.

 

So any drop in power is a concern (well it means I need to carry less weight, ie wine not the wife don't think I could get away with that !!) (lol)

 

Our 1999 710F is 11years old and has covered 52k miles and has done the job(and still does) very well and we like the van, now have the option to buy a 2004 710F with a 2.3jtd with 15k on the clock - hence the dilema. Do I go for the 2.3jtd or wait for 2.8jtd to come up for sale.

 

 

[Mel B]

We had a 2003 Rapido 709F on the 2.3jtd engine (110 bhp) and it was a dream! Like brown stuff of a shovel! The Rapido (?) 710F should fly compared to your current engine.

[Brian Kirby]

Subject to your choice of Alpine pass, I don't think you will find the 2.3JTD any disadvantage.  You are not really comparing like with like.  The 2.3JTD is electronically injected, and was described to me as a proper little truck engine.  We hired a van with that engine some years back, and then bought one with a 146Hp version of the 2.8JTD, and to be honest, I couldn't find the extra horses.  It is also a pleasantly smooth and quiet "woofly" kind of engine, and I came to respect its abilities by comparison with its supposedly much more powerful successor.  My only reservation would be if the 710F is over 3.5 tonnes MAM, which I don't think is the case.

[Guest Tracker]

We've taken our van as far South as the Sahara and as far North as the Nordkapp loaded to within a few kg of max (weighbridge checked) and over all manner of hills and gradients and at no time have I ever felt any shortage of power?

 

So you have to change down when climbing up steep hills (it's what gearboxes are for) and suffer the resultant drop of speed for a while but for heaven's sake who not just relax and enjoy the inevitable scenery that steep hills usually involve - it's not a race after all is said and done!

 

I like a powerful car for obvious reasons but I don't drive the van the same way that I drive the car and I simply don't need masses of bhp - I'd rather have sensible economy and more refinement from the oily bits.

 

I would pit my 2.3 against any 2.8 or 3.0 for time over a 300 mile run as it has much more to do with driving style and reading the road that ever it does about ultimate torque or bhp.

 

The 2.2 or 2.3 are both fine engines with a very good compromise between traffic lights grand prix starts, decent economy and long distance capability.