Diesel conversions - could they help save the BX ?

[Jack]

Hopefully I have now found a club member who will appreciate driving one of the last BX valvers with all the toys. If everything goes to plan, this is scheduled for a diesel conversion which got me thinking of all those valvers that have been wrecked just for the engine. Also a couple of years ago, I came across a local workshop that breathed new life into Morris Minors not only by renovating them but also replaced outdated parts and fitted whatever (new modern) engines etc that customers cared to specify. Some cars were then displayed at classic events and they seemed very happy with the number of orders taken. (Not that I want one, just that the business idea is interesting and beneficial for attracting new owners)

Might it help if "BX diesel conversion kits" were put together and offered on Ebay? And are there enough thirsty BXs in good condition languishing for want of an economical engine?

[patersom10]

as long as it has a BIG turbo

[Kitch]

Personal opinion - you remove the engine from a 16v, you remove the character and the 'soul' if you can call it that.

Diesel engine in a dead GTi 8v, I can see the logic. Diesel engine in a valver? Nope (sorry Vanny ), I just can't see why you'd do it.

[Dollywobbler]

I can't really see the point. As Kitch says, the whole Valver experience is down to the engine. I once got 40mpg in mine too, so it's not like it's seriously thirsty.

[Kitch]

I can't really see the point. As Kitch says, the whole Valver experience is down to the engine. I once got 40mpg in mine too, so it's not like it's seriously thirsty.

It's true. They're not refined, but mine often nudges 40mpg on a long journey if I keep it below 3500rpm, and being that it's so noisy, keeping it under 3500rpm is usually preferable anyway

In fact, the estate was a 1.9D n/a, and that would do 50mpg, if I applied the same tactics. 10mpg for all that increase in performance & fun? Hardly worth it!

[mat_fenwick]

Plus, most people who have BXs aren't doing high mileages in them nowadays anyway. Most of my mileage is on twisty mountain roads so I don't get a great figure from the TD, but only got around 25 mpg from the 16v engine in a 205!

[Defender110]

/\ I agree with all of the above and think there isn't a market for diesel conversion. As the BX becomes a classic most classic car owners prefer the smoothness and more refined drive of the petrol engine to the economy of a rattily diesel and therefore I think there is a possibility the petrol BX will become more popular and sort after than the diesel BX in the long term.

[citsncycles]

I think it could be a workable idea, but no yet. There are still enough cars out there that if someone wanted a TZD with most of the toys, they'd find one eventually. Also, the value of the cars are not yet high enough to warrant the cost of the conversion. There was someone doing something similar to tractions years back, using an XUD9 engine and Skoda Estelle 5 speed gearbox, but that was when you could pick up a resto project with a knackered engine for a few hundred quid while useable cars were several thousand - the price difference made the work worthwhile.

[Tim Leech]

Easier to just buy a BX diesel!

[Kitch]

Easier to just buy a BX diesel!

Well that's the main reason not to, and aside from everything I said before the 16v isn't as good a cruiser as a TD. If you're foregoing the 16v engine and switching to diesel, you're losing all aspects of sportiness. If you've done that, you've got a firm ride and a diesel engine. If you went to the trouble of replacing the anti-roll bars etc and spheres to make it ride like a normal diesel should, you might as well have started with a normal diesel

The other point to remember for 16v owners, is that there are specialists making parts from scratch for the engines because of the following and rarity they carry. Silicone hose kits, spark plug covers, manifolds, engine mounts.....you name it. None of that stuff happens for the diesels - when they're gone they're gone, so to speak. So in the long run the 16v and diesel may be on an even footing on what is termed 'servicable'.

But the main reason is just no. They're different tools for different jobs, and never the two should mix

[Vanny]

As I think the only member here stupid enough to have done it 6 times, I think I can firmly state that putting a diesel engine in a valver is completely pointless!

Even a 1.9TD with front mounted intercooler.

Fine, yes it can do 70+ mpg, yes its relatively easy to do, but it's pointless. You don't have the raw power to make the most of the hardened suspension, so you end up with a BX with absolutely no magic. If you want to build a diesel BX, start with a 8v GTi, actually no don't the 8v GTi is perfect as it is. Start with a hurricane or a TZD.

Valvers don't get scrapped for engines any more, they get scrapped because they're rotten, and getting hold of the later 16v engine isn't difficult or painful to the wallet any more.


I was very glad I became old enough to afford the insurance on a valver with a petrol engine!

[kiwi]

My own view is that Diesel ownership is not that economical unless as Mat pointed out your doing the mileage. It looks good on a bit paper you got twice the economy of a petrol but when you start to number crunch its not that good.

For myself I worked it out I need to travel a minimum of 10,000 miles per year to even match the petrol for basic costs e.g Fuel and On Road Tax costs. Not really such an issue fo you in the UK though I would think.

[Thread Bear]

The forced TZD 1.7 does have a trick up its sleeve. Its a very good loadcarrier and towcar for lightweight car transport, like racing cars, and smaller caravans. It will still return very good economy with reasonable speed and comfort. There is not a BX to compare for this, as driven to use its characteristics, the diesel is in its element. Diesels in my book are like steam engines. They perform far better when loaded. This is precisely what a valver is not for. Its evolution into differing markets. A fighter and a bomber, if you like.
The diesel can be classed as not a challenge to drive. The smaller cars require more roadcraft, therein is another challenge. I could see an argument to alter them to diesel but equally there are valid arguments opposing.
Once again my classic head says that while there might be diesel units with no home it would pay to stockpile them. I doubt that they will be fitted to cars that will become of a value to have parts made. What happens is suddenly the spares dry up and many of the cars left get broken and the few survivors left establish value by rarity. Look at CX Safari diesels, a handful left of a damned fine car. OK the CX has its issues which the BX might dodge, but it is only by being recognized and respected as what a good car it is, does it avoid the same fate. The Valver is the clear trick car and offers the sort of thing Classic Cars popularly do, being the well spec'ed performance model. The values will rise, not least as owners are building in quality to their sometimes worn examples. As to the lesser models. Depends if folk like the BX experience. Seem to be a lot of folk selling and taking newer cars, so perhaps the daily drive is still the more important issue in most folks life, how can it not be with money tight. We might not yet be at the turn of the corner of more cars being cherished over those being driven out. Dangerous times for tired BX.

[Defender110]

We might not yet be at the turn of the corner of more cars being cherished over those being driven out. Dangerous times for tired BX.

Indeed.

[gilly45]

well I am the one putting the diesel in the 16v and I don't see y so meny people say no to doing it I wil be use it every day and for shows so will be a lot less on fule for me