hi all,

a friend of mine is tempted to get a 16vt.

having a 20vt myself ive got a rough idea of coupes, and am going to go coupe hunting with him at some point.

however, is there anything specific to look out for on the 16vt's which could indicate a problem????

is oil consumption similar etc???

i realis cambelt change is less of an issue, as its a bit cheaper than on the 20vt if he had to do it soon after buying the car, but thats about all i know!

many thanks!!!!

Why is he looking for a 16 when 20s are now so cheap?

Cam belt is more of an issue on the 16v/vt as they are far more fragile and need changed more frequently......

But you dont have to remove the engine to get to it....

I know I have a 20v n/a but everyone always discounts the 16vt, after I'd got my 20 I looked at the insurance differences and a 16vt was cheaper to insure than my 20v and substantailly less for me than a 20vt and I'm 30, possibly down to this and easier to home maintain as well.

must admit though nothing sounds as good as a 5 pot on song.

Rubbish! Put a good system on that Twin Cam engine and you'll disagree with yourself on that one!

Anyway, 16VT points are as follows.....

Cambelt - needs to have been done ideally in the last 20k or will need doing within one year. Although it's only about £300 all in with all the tensioners etc.

Oil pressure - Should be no more than halfway down the dial when nice and hot.

Pretty much everything else is the same checks as the 20VT. The brakes are very good on the 16VT with more feel than the 20VTs Brembos, so if they don't feel as good as your 20VT then they may need attention.

They don't use as much oil as the 20VT, but make sure whats been used is good and they are more prone to silly little leaks, although not critical, these will ruin your drive and make the car smell like a scrap yard!

People will tell you they are more prone to electrical gremlins, I would say this is not true from experience, the only issues I have ever had with mine were age related, wishbones etc, these effect the 20VT too, obviously.

The indicator stalks in particular seem to keep their self canceling feature, a problem on a lot of newer coops it seems. I've driven 4 16VTs, all had self canceling indicators!

Good luck with the search, nice looking black one on Autotrader at the moment down London way.

Gareth

there aperntly not as good on the fuel as the 20vt but if fuel is a issue then your looking at the wrong car

the power is a kick in the back with the 16vt and not as progressive as the 20vt

i sufferd no oil leeks or electrical issues with my 16vt

the dash center consel looks slightly dates and is very differnt to the 20vt but some chrome can sort that out

breaks are great but i would recomend fast road pads

and insurance, number one reason i have the 16vt it saved me 400 quid a year

a well stage 1 16vt will easly outperform a standerd 20vt and feel much more levely

I prefer the dash on the 16VT myself, always looks tidy, doesn't wear or scratch anywhere near as bad either, personal choice that one though!

Oh, and they aren't good on fuel at all, especially once played with, although Dinks chip seems to make this a little better believe it or not!

G

i liked my cash after i got the rings on it

http://www.pbase.com/samsite999/image/99610508/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/samsite999/image/99610509/original.jpg

god i miss that car, but soon ill have another one

dink chip as above did realy help with fuel...on a run it was fine, around town it was...so so so bad

I like both the 16VT and the 20VT I have owned both models. Each has it's good and bad points.

If anything I prefer the 16VT slightly overall as it is easier to work on and can be made just as fast as a 20VT. Although I personally think the 20VT sounds better.

This is really interesting.My perception (mainly based on what I read in the fccuk forum and as a coop novice) was that the 20v was a better car all round than the 16v and consequently I'd never considered buying one. From the above comments its not nearly so clear cut.
Thankyou,you have opened up a whole new aspect of this car.
Jeff

i have had both, now own a 16vt, feels so much quicker once the turbo hits you, and i mean it does hit you.
but it has had a few more mods than my 20vt.

It seems that the 16VT handles much better as well. Not so prone to understeer

To be fair, there is so little in it really. I've driven dozens of 20VT's now in my hunt for a good one to add to my current 16VT. The most noticeable difference between my 16VT and the 20VT is the power delivery, the 16VT "feels" faster for sure. However, the 20VT feels less like a turbo charged car and feels like the power is more easily available. There is so little in the performance really, nothing if we're honest. The 16VT (not just based on mine) seems to have much better brakes, much more feel for sure, the Brembo's look fantastic and really should be better, and although they stop the car well on most of the cars I drove, had very little feel to them.

not so sure about handling though, I've read lots of comments about one handling better than the other etc, I can't feel any major difference, mine was a bit boaty when I got it to be honest, new wishbones etc etc sorted this out and it now has a Koni/Eibach set up which transforms the car. The standard 20VT is the same, if all the bits have been changed and are in good shape, it will feel great, if they are in need of sorting, it will be boaty, and like the 16VT in the same condition, feel awful to drive quickly, with all sorts of odd handling traits, like pulling when accelerating, diving to one side or another when braking etc.

It all comes down to choice.

My findings, in summary are this.......

20VT - the better long distance driver, more GT than the 16VT. Better on fuel than the 16VT. Updated dash and door cards, dash is down to taste, I prefer the 16VT dash. The biggest difference is the engine, although no quicker out of the box in real time, it's easier to extract power out of it up to a point and it sounds great, which I think is the biggest seller for most people!

16VT - More pointy squirty! However, drinks fuel! Feels faster, without doubt feels quicker through the bends, but I feel this is actually just down to the slighty weighty rack with better feel, point to point, as standard, I doubt there is any difference point to point. The 16VT engine is, I feel, less maintenance intensive, and ultimately stronger, but depending on your personal taste, doesn't sound as good. However, with the right exhaust system, the Lampredi Twin cam howls like a good'n and sounds very racy, listen to old vids of the Integrale competition cars on You Tube for proof!

So, take your pick, bugger all in it, really. I've now driven enough of both to have a very informed opinion. The 16VT is cheaper to buy and to be fair, from the evidence of reading through posts on here through the year, cheaper overall to run, possibly the better daily driver if you can live with the sudden turbo rush and it's thirst for fuel! The 20VT is more refined, without doubt a better long distance engine, quieter at motorway speeds for sure with a much smoother feel and power delivery.

Anyway, the world is your oyster at the moment, both 16VT and 20VT are at rock bottom price wise. I've looked at dozens of 20VT's recently with a view of buying a keeper, but have yet to find a good one, although there are a few possibilities being considered, a couple from the forum and a local private sale. Not so many around at the moment, I think a lot of people are holding back until after Crimbo as trying to sell a car over the festive sealing is a tad pointless really! I think we'll see a large increase in cars being listed on the likes of AutoTrader and eBay after the holidays.

Anyway, best of luck in your search, just pick the best car you can find for your money and don't worry which flavour it is, you'll enjoy it whichever you end up with!

G

To add to the above!

Just something I've noticed from the dozens of car I've viewed over the last few months.

As a rule so far, the modified cars I've viewed have been a better buy than the standard ones, it seems that MOST of the standard cars I've viewed (and these were mostly non club cars) have been maintained fine, but, a lot of the important "big" jobs, cambelt being a good example, weren't done. A lot of non club cars were still being maintained to the book and an example of this is the cambelt, which we all know should really be done every 36k instead of Fiats suggested 72k (or 74k, can't quite remember). Plenty of cars I viewed were advertised with statements like "cambelt not due for 20k" when really it was well overdue the 36k we now know is safe.

Most of the moddified cars however were in one way or another connected with this forum or the club, had all the big jobs done, and more and were generally, more together service wise. The moddified cars all seemed to have had more preventative maintenance carried out where as the standard ones were just maintained as required.

This of course hasn't been the hard and fast rule but it's simply what I've found from all the viewings so far, with a few exceptions.

When looking through the history as well, if the cambelt has been done recently, try to establish if the aux belts were done at the same time, if they haven;t been, it's not so good. If an aux belt fails, it can take your freshly replaced cambelt out and result in a dead engine!

Use the buyers guide on here and look at as many as you can, keep the big jobs in mind, any cars needing the big jobs straight away or very soon should be priced accordingly, if they aren't haggle like mad or walk away.

Happy hunting!

Good posts Spee. I couldn't really disagree with any of what you said.

even more interested now in the 16v but have a couple of questions :
is the engine on the 16v more accessible than the 20v or is it just the cambelt change which is easier;
driven carefully within the speed limit/s( which I'm sure is how most forum readers drive !)is there much difference in fuel consumption?

Jeff

There is more space under the 16VT bonnet. The 20VT engine is longer so sits up closer to the chassis rail on the cambelt end, hence why the engine needs to be moved to get at it. The 16VT doesn't suffer from this. Most of the other jobs are a simlar level of difficulty, although the turbo is easier to get to on the 16VT.


As for fuel consumption My 16VT was worse on fuel than my 20VT. I would guess around 5 mpg worse on average. However when it was chipped the consumption improved to near enough what I get with the 20VT.

im sure the 16vt is a lot more improved in fuel once you fit a superchip. dink Evocars etc.
i do agree the 20vt sounds better, have an aftermarket on mine but still the 20vt has a different tone.
the 16vt console is better imo. and i think cambelt is less of an issue and led to believe easier to do,

The Dink chip does improve matters over standard I understand, I have run the EvoCars chip and that does improve the MPG a little, but I can't live with the awful cold running problems that are a side effect of this chip so it's back to standard. I still believe, even with a chip fitted, it's still not as good on fuel as the 20VT, especially around town! Speaking to some owners of the 20VT, they are getting 350 miles on a tank of fuel, I can only dream of those figures, with a combination of town and motorway as my weekly commute, I'm lucky to get 250 to a full tank of fuel.
Cambelt is more prone to odd failures on the 16VT for some reason, I set my change time to 2 years or 24k, it's not the job it is on the 20VT so is worth being safe with this job. The former owner of my 16VT must have thought the same, it had the Cambelt changed twice in 8k! It did only do 8k in 5 years though!

G

I'm pretty impartial! I'm not a slave to either car, I currently drive a 16VT and have driven loads of 20VT's both standard and modified now and currently trying to buy a keeper in 20VT flavour. I just love the Coop! I don't think I could live with an N/A though, drove a few of these during my search and for all their good points, they just aren't fast enough! Don't get me wrong, if I hadn't done the turbo, that would be different. I think I'd just find that as the car is stunning to look at, looks fast standing still, it would be a shame (for me) to get the N/A and have modern turbo diesels giving me a run for my money on the motorway!

I do get tired of all this 20VT vs 16VT stuff so I try to give a fair comparison whenever I see a window of opportunity!

G

I am pretty impartial too TBH, as I have had one of each. Each has its own good and bad points.

I personally couldn't live with a non turbo either. Althoug they are great cars I would always miss the power of the turbo.

Having done a bit of work myself on my 16v its not too bad a car to work on, timing belt is not really a massive job on it, no more so than any twin cam engine.

I've only had brief spins in both a 16vt and a 20vt and personally I prefer the way the 16v drives, feels a bit more mental :). 20v is the faster car though and probably a bit more practical for everyday use.

Then there's the fact that I can't get insured on a 20vt but its no problem on a 16vt.

Mainly down to personal preference which you choose.