I don't think the diesel has hesitation as such, just a small amount of turbo lag which is common on any turbo engine.
The graph I showed is power at the wheels which roughly equates to the flywheel power you've had.
Looking at that graph again, I notice it holds over 200Nm of torque (at the wheels) from 2000rpm - 5000rpm (3000rpm). 3000rpm = is around 46% of the entire rev range.
I can't find my graph of torque at the wheels but I've attatched what mine has shown at the flywheel. From 2000rpm - 4800rpm I'm holding over 175lb-ft torque, thats 3800rpm's or 79% of the rev band. Roughly, I'm having 16% transmission losses so lets knock 16% off that torque = 147lb-ft at the wheels. 147lb-ft = 199Nm (
), so it's holding over 199Nm for 79% of the rev range.
I'm still a little confused tbh.
What dyno's have you had your's on CF?
So you're saying that it delivers 90% of it's peak torque for a good part of the rev range.
Ok, peak torque on the example I've shown is 213Nm, 90% of 213 = 191.7Nm. It has over 191Nm for approx 4300rpm (1600rpm - 5900rpm) which is aprox 80% of the rev range.
So for 80% of the rev range the 2.2 will be pulling more than 191Nm torque.
The diesel I have shown you (with an older/smaller turbo, 500cc and a cylinder less than the 2.4) is pulling over 200Nm for 79% of it's rev range and judging from the dyno, doesn't even know what <200Nm is.
Jesting aside, I do kind of understand what you're saying. The diesel I've shown holds 90% of it's peak torque for around 1200rpm, or a measley 25% of it's rev band. Even so, at any given point of the rev band it will be pulling more torque and power than the 2.2JTS I've shown and this is only the 1.9 variant.