Probably a good thread to those of you who had owned 16VT and 20VT. Basicaly, I am thinking of getting rid of my Prelude 2.2VTI and purchasing 16VT or purchasing 16VT and then getting rid of the Prelude. Do you think that 16VT is the right way? I am thinking about maintenance/running cost & reliability. I know tech differences between those two but have never owned a 16VT before. Also, how much am I looking to pay for a nice example of 16VT?

16vt has more low down torque, Although the 20vt has more grunt higher up.

also theres only 20 or so more hp in them and the 20vt cost alot for in terms of maintenance, like the 16vt cambelt is £300 all in the20vt has to have the engine dropped to do the cambelt and thats £450.

i don't even know were to begin telling you how wrong the above statement is

really? lol what i was told so...... i never been in a 20v so wouldnt know, set me straight sam

well ill stick my nose in maintenance and repairs cheaply is the 16vt but the 20vt is alot newer and i must say 80% of broken fiats are 20vt's in the threads and as for torque and grunt mine has low mid and high although the 20vt are easier to get parts for and the 16vt has 1 less piston to worry about and alot more easir to work on such as cam belts you can do those DIY as for the 20vt must be a garage unless you are very good and i mean good, such as clutches and i quote from my local garage "the 16vt is alot easier than a laguna to do"

my opinion is go and test drive both

195 vs 220 = 25bhp

the 20vt does not need the engine drooping out to do the belts, some jigging about is required but it can be tilted to get at them in situ

im not going to make any comment on the low down torque, i don't have any numbers to hand,

this thread had been done a fair few times, have a look in the buying/selling advice section. there is lots of advice and pointers

unless were talking pure numbers, anything else is opinion, and thats all open to interpretation. go and find a couple of frendly owners near buy and make up your own mind

isnt the 16vt more thirsty, and I thought id read somewhere on here that some places refuse to work on 16vt's ? if parts are easier to find for a 20vt, surely this makes them cheaper than 16vt parts that are hard to get hold of ? the reason that its mainly 20vt that are reported as breaking down, is surely to do with fact there are alot more 20vt owners on here ?? You cant tell I own a 20vt at all can you .......I agree with the going to test drive quote though, see what you think and make your own mind up

16vt is a tad more thirsty give or take a mpg there about same,

all i have to say is the lancia delta integrale won the WRC 7 times with this engine

seriously go for a test drive

If you do a search, this topic has been done to death in the past!

I've had both, now driving a 20VT, miss my 16VT, could happily live with both and it's on the cards for later this year or early next year to get another 16VT to live alongside my 20VT.

Both have there good and bad points, both are superb value for money, both are stunning cars to drive and look at, best thing to do is drive both and make your own mind up I guess.

16VT's are rarer, and even rarer in decent condition, there is something to be said for finding and keeping one in A1 condition, well worth it.

20VT's are common, but plenty of dogs to be bought!

Check out the buyers guides, read through some of the previous 16 v 20 VT threads, drive a few and buy wisely, both will make you grin from ear to ear when running right.

Just look for corrosion on the older examples of both, the extremities are the worst areas, the bumper mounting points, rear arches and inner rear arch - boot floor meeting points seem to be common problems now, the sills are also weakening on some cars.

Gareth

PowerItalia don't do 16vt any more, given you live in E London, I'd say that is an excellent reason to get a 20vt

Yes that engine, plus tuning and the all important 4-wheel drive!
Also what RICH says is true, about there being alot more 20VT owners on here than 16VT owners.

Lot more 20vt sold - 4 years of sales, versus 2

I've never driven a 16v but I'd like to compare the handling as the 16v can't be so nose heavy.Good handling is just as important as power when assessing the real world pace of a car.It makes me laugh when owners of 70000 mile coupes are more intent on chiping the motor before fitting new dampers or brakes.
On the 20vt's side the way the engine delivers it's power is so addictive.And it's ability to overtake slow moving lines of traffic is ....nice.Also its not half bad on a motorway cruise.
The iceing on the cake is the 20vt howl...sold !

Defo Sandytim the 5 Cylinder....

I thought the 16v Turbo engine was a derivative of the Evo2 engine - which never won the WRC Dons anorak - 6 time WRC winners in 87(8v HF4WD), 88&89(8v Integrale), 90&91(16v Integrale) & 92(16v Integrale Evo1).

16v and 20v coops are both excellent! Only way to decide is to drive good examples of both.

On the cam belt change front I think the interval is quite a bit shorter on the 16VT than the 20VT.

I'd just buy the best coupe I could near me and not worry about 16 vs 20.
Turbo is mandatory of course.


Needless to say, because I own a 20vt, they are better.

agree with that but personally I'd be willing to travel for the right car!

Hi guys i will put my Honest opinion in.
Its been mentioned above..

If you want something modded and tidy your looking for around 2-2500 grand
300bhp above your over 3k.
I wouldnt bother as to the fact its 20v or 16v.
Sure standard they are slower but usually if a 16vt thats good and looked after turns up its very rare its gonna be standard.
So the power issue becomes not an issue.
I have my Coop up for £2650 sure its a bit high compared to many 16vt's but how many are there about like mine? i only ever see fccuked 16vt's on PH or AutoT.
They should fetch more money i have had plenty of interest in mine. Reason i still have it is because im really in 2 minds if i really want to sell it now.
Regarding Which is better....
The only real addition is the 5 cylinder noise. it does sound great. full stop.
Other than that.... if you find a decent modded 16vt you get everything a 20v provides maybe more due to the saving in 1. Insurance. 2 maintenance. 3. Parts.
The reason parts are cheaper for the 20vt is only from the forum as there are a lot ore 20vts about thus u see more breaking.
If i was to choose any of them it would be an L.E..... unless i had Le seats in my 16vt

I like both of them.

I would say that the 20VT has more low down torque, better fuel economy and sounds better.

reliability wise they are probably about the same. The reason why there are more 20VT's breaking down is that there are more 20VT's on the road. By a very large margin.

I prefer the 16VT all of a sudden power delivery personally though, and the fact that you actually have space under the bonnet to do work on the car yourself.

I have had one of each now.

i have owned both and still have a 20vt they are both great to drive but i prefer the 20vt because of the extras ie brembo brakes slightly more powerful engine. You should not think of the cost side of things ie cambelt clutch brakes, its italian you will always need to spend money. Go and test drive a few and see what you think, i bet if you got in one and did not no what engine was in it you could not tell the difference, some run better than others.

To my mind the 16vt will endure because the engine has such history, designed by Lampredi and no matter how you look at it maintenance on the 20vt is more costly, there's extra weight and you could offer me any 20vt bar an LE and I wouldn't swap my 16vt, it's the right engine for the coupe. Can you imagine if they'd developed it throughout the coupes life?

here here i ike that tim old boy the 16vt engine is the best and it is a lancia delta integrale evo2 engine that engine may not have won the wrc but the engine has racing heritage which the 5 pot doesnt.

my opinion may change at the end of the month and may not if sam is kind enough to let me torture his beloved 20vt and compare to my 16vt.

and i have read somewhere that mitsubishi evolutions originally designed there engins around the 16vt engne correct me if im wrong or dreamt this,

fuel consumtion is about the same on both models the 20vt has smaller cc injecters but has a 3 bar fpr and the 16vt has larger injectors and a 2.5bar fpr and they both share the same fuel pump so they even each other out

turning circle wasnt it better on the 16vt compared to the 16vt and the brembos wil fit the 16vt for around £200 conversion providing you have the right alloys for the job

all out battle they very simular but if you get a good 16vt keep it for life and the same can be said about the 20vt there are alot more dogs out there jonnys was a prime example ill not go into details

have a test drive mate and you will defo be joining the 16vt crew and as there are about 600 16vts left you are joining a very limited crew at that

i understand the points about history, and i drove both when i was searching just over 4 years ago - i chose a 20vt because it felt more "alive" somehow, and more in tune with todays expectations in a car.

if i wanted something to hark back to history for my daily driver i'd have had something like a volkswagen beetle. the 20vt won hands down for me - maybe i just drove 2 sluggish, ill-maintained 16vts but they certainly had the history to back them up.

now, i have a 20vt plus, which i consider to be the best option for me because of the enhancements over the basic 20vt, but without the porn-star looks of the LE

I currently have both a 16vt and 20vt (porn star ) LE and I think symonh2000 is absolutely spot on for me with his summary:

"I like both of them.

I would say that the 20VT has more low down torque, better fuel economy and sounds better. (A lot better in my opinion)

reliability wise they are probably about the same. The reason why there are more 20VT's breaking down is that there are more 20VT's on the road. By a very large margin.

I prefer the 16VT all of a sudden power delivery personally though, and the fact that you actually have space under the bonnet to do work on the car yourself."

Yep, you did drive a couple of bad ones! The 16VT "feels" faster than the 20VT as standard, it feels more urgent, free revving and responsive.
I miss that a lot.

I drove around 15 20VTs before finding the one I drive now and I'm sure the guys on the forum who's cars I drove will confirm my comments on every test drive "doesn't feel as fast as my 16VT". One or two exceptions, especially MattM's Scotts green, which was slightly modified, but standard, the 16VT felt quicker, it's the way the power is delivered and the way the engine revs.

Anyway, best thing as a few of us have said is to drive several of both, really. If you listen to opinion on here you will buy a 20VT as there are more 20VT owners on here and most of them have never driven the 16VT so the bulk of comments will be in favour of the 16VT. Best bet is to listen to the constructive comments and criticisms of people who have lived with both, or still do and let your test drives decide.

I've driven both, and a fair few of both, I've also owned both so can honestly comment on both. Drive both, let the drive decide and whatever you decide upon, I hope it's a good one.

Gareth

if i was to buy again i think it would be a very hard choice if i am honest.
16vt seam to be rarer and have a sort of underdog side top them as people think they won't be quick like a 20vt but lets face it they can be made to be very quick.
handling wise i am sure the 16vt would handle better due to less weight over the front but not as nice sterring due to not having a quick rack like the 20vt.
brakes the 20vt wins with the brembos but in honesty the brembos aren't that good and feel spongey so a aftermarket kit would be best.
interior the 20vt is more modern but the 16vt better laid out.
look wise nothing really in it between standrad 16vt and 20vt apart from the weels but then aftermarket wheels are easir to get on the 16vt and 20vt wheels bolt straight on.
the l.e and plus is a different sorty and look better standard.
noise its all 20vt i am afraid.
working on the car it has to be 16vt not the 20vt and this point i would have bought a 16vt for this reason alone.
mpg is better on the 20vt so if you do high miles like i do then consider this but both aren't amazing but live able.

if i wasn't doing so many miles id have a 16vt but with the motorway miles i am doing a 20vt suits better.
be different and get a well sorted 16vt.

Owned both, 20VT's the better car In my opinion. Engine less laggy, sounds better, Brembo's, nicer dash, Nicer alloys.

Thanks guys, I will certainly have to test drive a 16VT. I've owned a 20VT not so long ago so I know how it performs.

PS anybody near East London willing to take me for a spin/test drive in his 16VT?

I own a 16vt, while my dad has a 20vt (both yellow! We're hard to miss )

I personally prefer to 'kick' of the 16v's turbo; as people have already said, it makes the car feel faster all of a sudden.
It's more of an event when overtaking, rather than a maneuver

I also prefer the 16v's dash and heater controls (Despite not being climate, and strange as it sounds, the door handles feel a bit more special. Simple things I guess though

However, the sheer sound of a 20vT, particularly when above 4,500rpm with the jet engine wooooooooosh, makes it a tough call.

In terms of handling, I personally feel that the 16v is not as sharp; it feels more wallowy and 'big', whereas the 20v is more precise. But that could possibly be slightly worn suspension on my 16v? I don't know...
However, at least in the 16v you can parallel park