| Sponsored Insurance Links: | Car Insurance | | | Van | | | Home | | | Bike | | | Travel | | | Breakdown | | | Convicted Driver Insurance |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent Car: Skoda Octavia Greenline
Posts: 6,326
|
216GTI or 220 Turbo
Hi all I have a 216 GTI which I love to bits its very very quick and drives like a dream I was just wondering what the 220turbo is like in comparison power wise? As I have been thinking about getting the coupe but i dont know if I would be better off investing the money in a few tweaks for the gti
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links | |||
Advertisement | |||
|
|
#2 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Plymouth, Devon Car: Other Manufacturer
Posts: 18,050
|
0-60 6.2 seconds
150mph + if you can get the 216 to do this then hats off to you!! |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Crewe, Cheshire Car: Rover 200 (-95)
Posts: 170
|
220 Turbo all day long
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2005
Car: Rover 200 Coupe
Posts: 13
|
I dont think you can really compare these two cars, the 220 coupe turbo would eat the 216gti for breakfast. for a couple hundred pounds you can make them around 220bhp and they will keep up with the likes of impreza's, Evo's and M3's
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Kent Car: Skoda Octavia Greenline
Posts: 6,326
|
Hi thanks for the responses I figured as much just wanted to see how much of a difference there was between the two
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Crewe, Cheshire Car: Rover 200 (-95)
Posts: 170
|
Probably a good 85bhp difference lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Supporter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gloucestershire - Cotswold Cockney Car: MG Montego Turbo; Rover 25; R620ti x2 & MGZS 120+ x2
Posts: 17,020
|
Quote:
The reverse is also the case. After weeks driving my T16 turbos, when I then jump into my ZS which is mainly driven by my wife, I have to mentally readjust until I again get in the swing of things. There's far more to getting the best out of a car than merely flooring the throttle pedal. Chalk and cheese....until I got a turbocharged car and used it regularly, I much preferred normally aspirated cars. Not now.... turbos forever..
__________________
. So, now you wanna buy a BMW .... Huh! No natural class ... ![]() Normally aspirated engines suck. They really do. Good job turbocharged engines blow and suck. That's better. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Car: MG ZS180 (saloon)
Posts: 136
|
Yes the 220 Turbo is faster but it has got a very weak engine compared to the likes of an M3 or Evo and loves to leak oil. The reason there aren't a great deal of 220 turbos around is they blow up for fun. I'd stick with your 216gti if you like reliability, Honda/ Rover engine there is no comparison really now is there....Forgot to mention it will cost you a whole lot more to run as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire Car: Other Manufacturer
Posts: 3,479
|
Quote:
![]() you obviously don't know the T-series!!! More reliable than an M3!!! Mine didn't leak any oil!! If it wasn't reliable it wouldn't have had been tuned in excess of 500bhp!!!!!! ![]() Expect more praise to follow for the T-series after me!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Doncaster Car: Rover 200 mk3 turbo
Posts: 2,604
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire Car: Other Manufacturer
Posts: 3,479
|
I had coupe turbo for 5 years, 100,000 miles and did lots of track days and stll was as smooth as syrup, infact I got a BM coupe sport afterwards and even tho it was a straight six the turbo seemed as smoother and definately quieter, infact the person who bought it couldn't believe it had done the mileage it had - he thought more!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | ||
|
Registered User
|
Quote:
Quote:
Whole lot more? only thing i can see is the fuel and the oil changes every 6k miles. Not really 'a whole lot more' is it? Steve - turbo owner for almost 3 years. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Registered User
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire Car: Other Manufacturer
Posts: 3,479
|
you'll find a lot of M3s with extended warranties as the VANOS is a common problem to go and not cheap!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Supporter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gloucestershire - Cotswold Cockney Car: MG Montego Turbo; Rover 25; R620ti x2 & MGZS 120+ x2
Posts: 17,020
|
Quote:
The T16 Rover engine is one of the finest 'ordinary' production engines of the past two decades. To save following folks wondering why, the only 'mod' on my various T16s is this: ![]() Thus, I do what I can to illuminate the huge number of less well informed out there. There really is far too many .....
__________________
. So, now you wanna buy a BMW .... Huh! No natural class ... ![]() Normally aspirated engines suck. They really do. Good job turbocharged engines blow and suck. That's better. Last edited by MGJohn; 24-11-2005 at 16:45. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Rover 220 Turbo Coupe - 1995 - Packet (Uneven) TURBO Boost | RichMann | Coupe | 8 | 19-11-2006 12:15 |
| 220/420 turbo engine complete with loom and turbo + other parts | chrismm27 | For Sale | 11 | 29-10-2005 11:42 |
| 216GTi hubs Vs 220 disks...... | 214 Si Mod'd | 'R8' Rovers (aka Wedges!!) | 5 | 01-07-2005 19:29 |
| Turbo Conversion for a 216GTI DOHC 16v | Digital | 'R8' Rovers (aka Wedges!!) | 2 | 13-06-2005 13:40 |
| Will front brakes for a 220 GTi Turbo fit a 620 turbo? | Zangzub | Rover 600 | 2 | 06-09-2004 18:41 |