Will I go to hell for even thinking about this? I was reading about the magical 20vt third gear thrust on the Forum last week and now, while in third in my Vis, I just think about what I might be missing out on. This is what's needling me at the moment :- http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1999-FIAT-COUPE-20V-TURBO-RED-/291354271092?fromMakeTrack=true . Getting back to my reality, my Vis is just about sorted now, whereas if I buy this I will be starting all over again. I've messaged the p seller about the date of cambelt change and mot advisories. I love the tan interior and I also have a thing about T plate cars . Is it just my fevered flu addled state of mind or a life affirming proposition?

I've owned all the models and yes the extra power is nice.
However, the 16v na is a better driving experience, that's why I have an na.
All depends on personal taste, I like winding country roads in the middle of nowhere, I hate life sucking motorways and straight meaningless roads.
. In my opinion NA hands down for drivers.

Just out of interest, how do you think the various models differ in how they drive?

After a holiday in Italy 18 years ago, coming across quite a few Coupes, I had to have one so I test drove a 20V and a 20VT before ordering my 20V. I found the 20V more involving but in a different (much lower) league performance-wise. This could have been because there VT seemed just too fast for modern speed limits and too easy to just point and shoot.

Mainly though, I was worried about he complexity of the turbo so went for the 20V. Reliability-wise, I'm not disappointed. The little coupe has cost me very little to run and it still runs very well. However, the lack of speed is frustrating at times when most modern diesels are faster. Considering adding a 5.0 XKR to the collection! Also complex and probably far too fast for anyone to use fully, even in Germany.

I've had a 16vt, 20v VIS & 2no. 20vts and the turbos win hands down!

Yes, they are a lot more expensive to maintain, but it's definitely worth it. You won't be dissapointed with a standard 20vt! My current 20vt has been modified to run at around 290bhp, but to be honest that was a bit much for day-to-day driving. So i've set the boost a bit lower and it's probably running around 250bhp and i'm much happier with it!

I took my 20V VIS on a big trip to Spa-Francorchamps, the Nurburgring, the San Bernardino Pass and to Monaco. It was brilliant and didn't miss a beat.................. but, i wish i'd done it in a turbo!

There isn't much difference in the handling, but you can't beat the kick of the turbo!!

The main diference is the power delivery, the turbo models I found myself waiting for the turbo as with most turbo cars no spool up no power.
Na power is always available and as its a smooth delivery it feels fast but smooth and safe.
Then there is the sound, I like the warble of the 20v, but I love the rasp of the 16v na.
On winding roads, the best in my opinion, turbo cars are constantly fighting with the traction control and the turbo is redundant.
The na models just give what they have with no restrictions and it makes for a much better experience.
These are just my opinions and not meant in any way to put down turbo models.

The 16v n/a is a "purer" drive - lots more feel and much more of a mechanical involvement with the driver. Throttle response that most 20vt owners would die for. However, its not a fast car - I once had to give mine a good thrashing to beat a Prius up a hill. I reckon the Prius driver was giving it a pasting, but that's not the point - I nearly got beaten by a bloody Prius!

20VT, even standard, is a quick car. bearing in mind how old it is, the fact that its on a par with some fairly decent current-model hot-hatches is amazing. Allow the Coupe a few modifications to bring it up to date and its still the giant-killer it was when it was launched

Personally, I find the 20vt a much easier drive - high gearing and lots of torque means it can be wafted if the mood or road conditions dictate.

For the OP - the VIS is probably the best of both worlds - five-pot engine noise, decent torque and modern behaviour. Have it remapped and its probably the best everyday Coupe still available (right up to the point where you want to go quickly, in which case, forced induction is surely the only answer.... )

Has the OP ever driven a 20VT? - If you haven't, I would suggest a lengthy test drive is required

Without a doubt the na versions are more reliable, as long as service intervals, belt changes, quality oil, is respected.
Turbo put alot more stress on components and obviously heat which is also a factor.
I've seen 16v na do 160k without any major work needed.
My 16vt was on its 3rd turbo at 115k, and 1 head gasket.
20v snapped belt at 48k, then engine failed at 98, rings went.

Pretty much on the nail.
I find my 16v ma pretty quick its all standard low miles.
I am a trained driver though, police trained. And im pretty sure I can get a 16 or 20v na across the peak district faster than I can get my old turbo coupes.
Might even make it alive lol..

I think all the old folk here know my point of view; I've owned 16NA and 20VT, driven all, including Joe's 2.4VIS and 'enthusiastically' modified 20VTs, and I have a 20VT engine in the kit car.

But the one I'm spending the money on is the 16NA for exactly the reasons pjdm quoted: it's the best car to drive. For an autobahn, 20VT - it's a GT - but for a drive across Scotland, the 16NA every time.

Your mileage may of course vary...

Depends how you look after them. Nigel's the star 240k on a 20vt on a very reasonable amount of power. Heat and stress are irrelevant, the engine is designed to be blown and therefore has components to suit. It's also 130 bhp / 100 lbs under it's maximum load before you start worrying about cranks, rods and pistons.

A turbo may be a tad slower off boost, but I can happily not rev past 1.7k rpm and change up without worry that it'll run out of puff.
As far as "and na is better low down" - I don't get this, if I'm driving hard I rev a car so am on boost, if I want to be steady I don't care about the low end power. I can still get mid 30's on the motorway if being sensible.
I think the big difference is the way the power makes the steering feel, the lower power cars feel more steady on their feet / more planted as they don't have the same ability to cause torque steer, front end fish tail and that arse nipping front end wash when you realise you've just pressed the peddle a bit too soon!

Wish I could share my experience a bit. however after buying my 20 vt the turbo broke down, only recently got it sorted and now I am going back to the garage cause after a week of driving I don't feel any turbo kick at all, not even in 3e gear. it goes fast don't get me wrong, just no kick. Think there might be something wrong again so having it checked next week. therefore sadly I cant comment cause I can't compare between this 20 vt and my old 16 vt.

Is there much difference ratio wise between the gearboxes. I'm guessing the 20vt is MUCH higher geared than the NA models.

A factor of 5:6

There is no arguing with experience.

Its 16v NA that's the best hehee.

Oh boy! That was a bit of an avalanche of info and opinions! I better make an attempt to return this to the OP's original question.

These cars are 15+ years old and I'm not sure how many people still extract the last ounce out of them. I don't, but I never have done. Also, even though the packaging looks the same, the VTs are significantly quicker cars and it looks like, from character, also rather different. I remember my test car as being "heavier" beefier, and pretty dam quick. It is too late for me to buy a VT simply because they are too old and will need too much care, for which I don't have the time (and too many other old cars to add one of unknown heritage). But just like HiraethHuw, I would like more pace. I'm going about it a different way though.

HiraethHuw, give the VT a try and see what you think. You might want both! Speed is intoxicating but the involving and "alive" way the standard cars can be made to flow through the countryside is hard to match. They are old cars but still very likable.

hear hear, better than my 20v anyway

Flea's chip for the 16NA is worth a few percent improvement in power and a smoother drive - the 4k 'step' in power is gone.

Its down to preference at the end of the day.
Lots of great opinions and info.
I drove a road today that used to infuriate me in my 16/20vt up and down the box, tight hilly bends, and yet a pleasure in the na.
Yet on a duel carriagway I miss the point and shoot.
Im sure when im heading to Milan this year I will wish I was in a turbo, until I get there
Good thread.

on a normal Sunday, you would probably be quicker on a moped, but if the roads were clear (of traffic AND cameras) a non-turbo Coupe wouldn't see which way a 20vt went over the Peak district

unless you were using the really fidgety little back lanes, a 20VT would get to use its "magic 3rd gear" a lot. The open A roads that criss-cross the Peaks are proper 20vt hunting grounds - 30-130 being the range where the turbo is most effective.

having said that, my most memorable peaks drive was in the Alfa GT diesel last year - M6 was closed at Stoke, needed to get to Leeds, so detoured over the Peaks to Sheffield and then up to Leeds - weather was truly awful, with horizontal rain and strong winds and only just above freezing, but the roads were open and empty and I was on winter tyres - great fun and proof that power isn't everything (although the GT still has a turbo, so maybe it is....)

I live in N. Devon and my previous and current mapped 20vt is excellent fun on the roads round here, steady when you want and looney when you want.
Go for it.
p.s. That is avoiding the link road etc!

The NA and turbo are very different beasts. To 40mph they are very equal (and I have a rather cool video of beating a 300bhp turbo from a standing start to 40mph). After 40mph bets are off, although depending on the road and the driver who knows!

I've owned two 20v NAs (one VIS), one 16VT and a LE 20VT. The non-VIS sounded the best of all, the LE bought most occasion to a drive, the VIS felt quicker than the non-VIS, the 16VT felt altogether different to the rest!

All amazing cars and too cheap for what they are.

Although not a direct comparison the Vis HGT Bravo (same engine as the coupe) feels quite lazy against my 20 valve turbo; it just doesn't rev as freely as I'd like for a NA, and it doesn't provide the same urgency the turbo gives. For me, the 5 cylinder suits a turbo.

What a fantastic response - thank you all. What a great forum we have here. Still don't know which car to have mind .
I most miss the power when over-taking slower traffic. But with more power would I be safer (less time on the wrong side of the road), or just over-take where I wouldn't at the moment or more cars in the line 'cos I'd be quicker? Ha!

Also, when I have over-taken, slowing down afterwards is boring - if I was in a turbo this speed would be higher. I too like challenging roads - lots of stick stirring, braking and powering out. The n/a is low geared, but that helps keep my top speed lower.
I guess then, after reading my own words, I'm an n/a owner for a reason. A fruity exhaust and a Flea map is my way forward. (Still awaiting a response to my queries on the turbo car though).
Update: Advisories _ just one for smoked headlights and cam belt changed in 2010.
I've calmed down since yesterday and London is 130 miles and lots of speed cameras and other trappings of civilisation from Hereford so I going to leave it for now.
And no, I've never driven a turbo, apart from a mis-firing Mg Maestro turbo, which felt good when it wasn't being sick. Does this count? Should I, or will it just open the door to vast expense on a new project car and in turn lead to an unhappy wife n kids?

Some important questions to answer;
1: What sort of roads do you drive on most?
2: How often do you like to 'give it the beans' and overtake?

A Turbo or N/A will both need good maintenance/expenditure to make them reliable so it really comes down to what kind of power delivery you prefer and what sort of roads you use most.

I think if you test drove a 20vt you would find the boost quite addictive.

Not sure about the Maestro, things have moved on a bit. Have you ever driven a modern turbo diesel?

Even TDs are great for overtaking. Effortless torque and mid range shove.

I like my N/A though a turbo would be nice. However, there are ultimately more costs involved in maintaining a Coupe turbo. If like me, you like a bit of speed, a Turbo won't do your driving licence much good either !

Point and shoot isn't addictive to any real driver?? Surely??

A smooth even power delivery in and out of bends for me.

I can't remember when I last overtook anyone in any of my cars its another thing that shouldn't interest a driver.

My opinions only.

My family car is a 252bhp tdi I still don't race,overtake,point and shoot. Its Driven.

I sold my vt's for a reason which is I crave the pure driving experience.

I joined the Lincs police and in 1996 became a Vehicle surveillance operative. Ad you would imagine my driving training was extensive. I guess I was taught a certain style of driving which I suppose fits in better with NA cars, and in a way im brainwashed.
But I class myself as a profesionaly trained driver and like to think I know a little bit about it

Problem is point and shoot is about all you can do with most journeys and traffic volume.
You can only do 'pure driving' as you put it on a track these days.

It is possible to get a turbo Coupe to be more than just point & shoot, but the problem is then that you're travelling so quickly that overtaking becomes a major part of the journey - if you don't overtake, you just end up being part of the traffic and you might as well be in a Nissan Micra at that point.

Just like the N/A having to be kept in the powerband to make decent progress, a turbo Coupe can be driven at high revs to keep the turbo spooled - its huge fun and because of the extra speed, the acceleration, braking and cornering forces are exaggerated.

Sunday morning drive across the peak district is usualy just man and machine and the occasional walker.
I did much of my training on a track and frankly it does nothing for me.
its way to risky overtaking on main roads these days.
My perfect road, consists of me and my car and knowone else.
Oh lots of hills and corners.

i would agree with this - its just SO nice to be able to make "good progress" without being hindered by those that are choosing NOT to make good progress...




I disagree with this, especially when you have lots of power Whilst its is great when the traffic evaporates and you're left with a clear road, its increasingly rare, so you're faced with a simple choice - sit in the traffic and waste the opportunity to have some fun on a great road or make a swift, decisive overtake and get on with enjoying yourself.

one of the many enjoyable aspects of a turbo'd Coupe is the ability to despatch slower traffic with ease. With a lot of expensive mods and double the power, it suddenly becomes very easy to get past whole strings of traffic in one go. The only disadvantage is that other drivers tend to get all high and mighty when they are overtaken and some get close to frightening themselves off the road because they have no concept of the capabilities of a decently-quick car.

IIRC from my IAM days, 'Roadcraft' positively encourages overtaking (where appropriate and safe) in order to get on with the task at hand - being a responsible motorist, I'm happy to comply...