canned_heat 0 Posted January 15, 2006 As per title - is there much between these two engines? Is the 2.0 always worth getting over the 1.8? Power is similar in both but the 2.0 has more torque so I'm assuming the 2.0 16v is marginally quicker? Cheers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VR6 0 Posted January 15, 2006 The search will help you :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canned_heat 0 Posted January 15, 2006 cheers, tried searching a bit but then got bored and lazy :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
G 0 Posted January 15, 2006 My friend has had both. He said the 1.8 16v is quicker off the line but the 2.0 16v is better from about 40mph and is generaly a nicer drive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vr6storm 0 Posted January 15, 2006 also the 1.8 16v ideally prefers optimax as opposed to normal U/L that the 2.0 16v runs happily on Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bcstudent 0 Posted January 15, 2006 This was definitely discussed at length in another thread. I'm gonna go look for it... *EDIT* 95 pages of hits...I really can't be bothered. My choice would be the 2.0 if I had my time again, mainly for the reasons listed in the other posts in this thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
veedub 0 Posted January 16, 2006 2.0 16v every time!! More torque and a much better drive!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mrbeige 0 Posted January 16, 2006 2.0 16v - more torque, so less need to rag the nuts off it ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gradeAfailure 0 Posted January 16, 2006 I'd go for the 2.0 as well as you don't get the late-spec interior in the 1.8... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
