216GTI or 220 Turbo - MG-Rover.org Forums
 
 
 Sponsored Insurance Links: Car Insurance  |  Van  |  Home  |  Bike  |  Travel  |  Breakdown  |  Convicted Driver Insurance
 
Go Back   MG-Rover.org Forums > Model Specific Forums > 'R8' Rovers (aka Wedges!!)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 21-11-2005, 13:58   #1
evilgangsta
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
evilgangsta is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 21-11-2005, 14:03   #2
geeza76
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!!
geeza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2005, 14:04   #3
220SLi16v
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Crewe, Cheshire
Car: Rover 200 (-95)
Posts: 170
220 Turbo all day long
220SLi16v is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2005, 14:16   #4
ROSS SANDY
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
ROSS SANDY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2005, 14:21   #5
evilgangsta
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
evilgangsta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2005, 14:24   #6
220SLi16v
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Crewe, Cheshire
Car: Rover 200 (-95)
Posts: 170
Probably a good 85bhp difference lol
220SLi16v is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-11-2005, 17:41   #7
MGJohn
Supporter
 
MGJohn's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gloucestershire - Cotswold Cockney
Car: MG Montego Turbo; Rover 25; R620ti x2 & MGZS 120+ x2
Posts: 17,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilgangsta
Hi thanks for the responses I figured as much just wanted to see how much of a difference there was between the two
You will have to learn how to drive a turbocharged car to get the best out of it if you've not driven one before. It's a different technique and will take time to do that if you've been driving a normally aspirated car for a long time.

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.
MGJohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2005, 14:09   #8
Jiminey
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.
Jiminey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2005, 14:14   #9
Dave turbo
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire
Car: Other Manufacturer
Posts: 3,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiminey
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.



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!!
Dave turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2005, 14:21   #10
dj_wymo
Registered User
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Doncaster
Car: Rover 200 mk3 turbo
Posts: 2,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiminey
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.
They only blow up for fun if there abused, usually!
dj_wymo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2005, 14:26   #11
Dave turbo
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!!
Dave turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2005, 15:57   #12
Steve220
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Elgin, Scotland
Car: Audi A4
Posts: 10,968
Send a message via MSN to Steve220
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiminey
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.
Pistons are weak, but they blow up because the majority of the owners that have them don't know any of the safetly margains of the car and just wind the boost up as far as they can and stick a cone air filter in the OE airbox position where most of the heat of the engine is

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiminey
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.
Maybe where you are, but there are loads around here. They don't just blow up for fun, if you abuse the car, it'll die. If you abuse an M3, it'll die. I've seen so many turbo owners rag their cars from cold, a major killer, as well as not letting them cool down for a minute or 2 before turning them off after a hard blast.

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.
Steve220 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2005, 16:21   #13
ash7990
Registered User
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sussex
Car: Rover 400 (95-99)
Posts: 1,136
Send a message via MSN to ash7990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve220
Pistons are weak, but they blow up because the majority of the owners that have them don't know any of the safetly margains of the car and just wind the boost up as far as they can and stick a cone air filter in the OE airbox position where most of the heat of the engine is



Maybe where you are, but there are loads around here. They don't just blow up for fun, if you abuse the car, it'll die. If you abuse an M3, it'll die. I've seen so many turbo owners rag their cars from cold, a major killer, as well as not letting them cool down for a minute or 2 before turning them off after a hard blast.

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.
i agree...
ash7990 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2005, 16:30   #14
Dave turbo
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!!
Dave turbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-11-2005, 16:39   #15
MGJohn
Supporter
 
MGJohn's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gloucestershire - Cotswold Cockney
Car: MG Montego Turbo; Rover 25; R620ti x2 & MGZS 120+ x2
Posts: 17,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiminey
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.
I have found exactly the opposite! On all fronts!

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.
MGJohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:12.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ShowCase, Vendor Tools vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.