rover turbo vs fiat turbo

-Alex- · Post by **-Alex-** » Thu May 11, 2006 7:55 pm

Cheers John I didn't know that

I knew the 6speed Fiat had no real advantage but those cars do have some of the nicer extras should anyone be considering a purchase

Personally I think I'd get a bit tired of it, as you say - the 5 speed Rovers that I have encountered have been just about spot-on, particularly in the Maestro Turbo

Post by **SubCat001** » Thu May 11, 2006 8:50 pm

Personally I really like the Fiat coupe turbos. Engines are good, chassis is good and looks are an aquired taste.

symonh2000 wrote:The Fiat is Built by Pininfarina, NOT by Fiat so build is excellent, if you think build is poor you should look at one....

Sorry i've seen plenty and the build is average at best.

symonh2000 wrote:The gearbox is up to the job and more, no chewing Diff bearings....

Shame the viscodrive diff is nowhere near as good as the torsen IMO.

symonh2000 wrote:They are far more tuneable, 300bhp+ is easy on 16valve and 20Valve models...

Seen plenty of powerful Fiat turbos and none of them where a match for the Rovers on the same day.
What do you mean by tunable?? Granted with standard internals the T series is limited though sort the bottom end out then there is nothing in it. As many on here have demonstated.
Also of interest both the 16V & 20v models require over 1 bar of boost to achieve their respective power figures.

symonh2000 wrote:and does not eat head gaskets

If you've had problems with T series head gaskets? then they've not be fitted properly.

symonh2000 wrote:The Fiat looks better IMO, the Rover looks very conservative, similar to a normal 200 at a glance. Fiat looks good in red with big wheels..

IMO the Rover looks better. The Rover coupe is and always has been a very handsome car. Even those in the press that hated it have always said so. The Fiat is marmite car, some people hate it some absolutely love it. Personally i like it.

symonh2000 wrote:Sorry about this Rover Guys..

Sorry for what?? After all its only an opinion not fact. Here's a fact though spend a few quid on the Rover and it will be better than most.

bjrespect · Post by **bjrespect** » Thu May 11, 2006 9:32 pm

imo i think the rover is alot better looking i think the fiat looks out of proporsion i think the back looks to high and i dont like the way the bonnet is

114gta · Post by **114gta** » Fri May 12, 2006 11:57 am

Fiat everytime, hands down IMO. They are quicker than a Rover, sound really ace even standard and have really nice interiors. From my limited experience the diff is good too, no traction loss atall driving hard out of a corner in second. Just leaves the tyres smoking....

C2K · Post by **C2K** » Fri May 12, 2006 12:33 pm

Don't write off 6 gear boxes straight away just because it counts to 6. The extra 6th gear can be fantastic for cruising. There's nothing to say it's not a tad shorter geared than ours for 0-100 punch with a phenomenal 6th gear. Ratios and final drive figures handy anywhere?

114gta · Post by **114gta** » Fri May 12, 2006 12:47 pm

T'was only the later models that were 6 speeds anyway.

symonh2000 · Post by **symonh2000** » Fri May 12, 2006 2:33 pm

The 6 speed version also has a slicker gear change than the 5, maybe this is also a reason to get a 6 speed. It wasn't just the plus and LE models that had this box, the regular 20valve turbo also had it after 1999.

Post by **Fordimus Prime** » Fri May 12, 2006 2:43 pm

I've always thought those fiat's are ugly mo fo's, but they're stonkingly quick. if memory serves, arent they suposed to have the quickest 0-100 time for a fwd car?
5 cylinders too? those weirdy french types, always have to be different!

Mad sounding cars too- from outside they always sound like tearing cloth when on boost

symonh2000 · Post by **symonh2000** » Fri May 12, 2006 4:57 pm

Fordimus Prime wrote:I've always thought those fiat's are ugly mo fo's, but they're stonkingly quick. if memory serves, arent they suposed to have the quickest 0-100 time for a fwd car?
5 cylinders too? those weirdy french types, always have to be different!

The 0-100 time for a 20 valve turbo is 14.5 seconds apparently.

Anyway since when has Fiat been French?

Post by **Fordimus Prime** » Fri May 12, 2006 6:41 pm

im just being daft again. france/ italy, bah its all on the continant somewhere

BrackenFox · Post by **BrackenFox** » Fri May 12, 2006 6:52 pm

Um, I'm pretty sure they weren't built by Pininfarina, just designed there and built by Fiat. Build quality varies hugely, later ones being quite solid, earlier ones are mostly pretty shoddy to be honest.

The good ones are very good, but most I've driven really aren't that special. Mine was bloody terribly put together, put me off Italian cars for life. However, my friend's late 20VT Plus is very solid and smooth.

I think it's like most things, a matter of taste. If I had to put up with a good example of a 20VT as a daily drive, I wouldn't complain too much, well, except going round corners, when seriously I'd pine for the Vit.

symonh2000 · Post by **symonh2000** » Fri May 12, 2006 9:59 pm

BrackenFox wrote:Um, I'm pretty sure they weren't built by Pininfarina, just designed there and built by Fiat. Build quality varies hugely, later ones being quite solid, earlier ones are mostly pretty shoddy to be honest.

The good ones are very good, but most I've driven really aren't that special. Mine was bloody terribly put together, put me off Italian cars for life. However, my friend's late 20VT Plus is very solid and smooth.

I think it's like most things, a matter of taste. If I had to put up with a good example of a 20VT as a daily drive, I wouldn't complain too much, well, except going round corners, when seriously I'd pine for the Vit.

I am pretty sure they were built by pininfarina, as I have seen a photo of their factory with peugeot 306 cabriolets alongside of all things. Pininfarina also designed the interior. The exterior was done by Cetro Style at fiat under Chris Bangle (of BMW fame..) hence why it does look a bit odd to some people.

MGR_Petrolhead · Post by **MGR_Petrolhead** » Fri May 12, 2006 10:11 pm

Is it true that the cambelt has to be changed frequently on the Fiat coupe, or have I mistaken this to something else?

rover220 · Post by **rover220** » Fri May 12, 2006 10:24 pm

symonh2000 wrote:It has to be the Fiat every time.

The Fiat is Built by Pininfarina, NOT by Fiat so build is excellent, if you think build is poor you should look at one..

The gearbox is up to the job and more, no chewing Diff bearings.

They are far more tuneable, 300bhp+ is easy on 16valve and 20Valve models.

Servicing is reasonable as there are lots of specialists. I have seen 20 valve cambelt changes for Â£400.

Handling in standard form is a different league to the Rover, being much better.

The engine sounds better and is smoother (both versions, and does not eat head gaskets.

The Fiat looks better IMO, the Rover looks very conservative, similar to a normal 200 at a glance. Fiat looks good in red with big wheels

However the Rovers are cheaper. The above may be why.

Sorry about this Rover Guys..

you sound slightly bitter to me

Podman · Post by **Podman** » Fri May 12, 2006 11:00 pm

all the specs for the different coiupe models can be foudn here http://www.carstats.co.uk/results.php?m ... offset=190

rnash2002 · Post by **rnash2002** » Fri May 12, 2006 11:03 pm

Podman wrote:all the specs for the different coiupe models can be foudn here http://www.carstats.co.uk/results.php?m ... offset=190

Good find

Podman · Post by **Podman** » Fri May 12, 2006 11:10 pm

I use that site all the time, CAN be very handy. Most things are in there although exact models aren't always stated.

Post by **SubCat001** » Sat May 13, 2006 12:21 pm

TBH if I where looking at getting a 90s coupe now and i was to follow my head I'd buy a Corrado VR6. Easily the best chassis in its class, fantastic engine, good looks, massive tuning potential an they hold there price incrediabley well. Though if I were to follow my heart i would still have bought the Rover. The Fiat falls somewhere in the middle of those two for me.

Post by **IrishRover** » Sat May 13, 2006 12:32 pm

Fordimus Prime wrote: im just being daft again. france/ italy, bah its all on the continant somewhere

Daegos/Wops/Frogs whatever. Damn foreigners

220Si · Post by **220Si** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:26 pm

SubCat001 wrote:TBH if I where looking at getting a 90s coupe now and i was to follow my head I'd buy a Corrado VR6. Easily the best chassis in its class, fantastic engine, good looks, massive tuning potential an they hold there price incrediabley well. Though if I were to follow my heart i would still have bought the Rover. The Fiat falls somewhere in the middle of those two for me.

I'm with you on that one james

guess what I'm looking at next

symonh2000 · Post by **symonh2000** » Sat May 13, 2006 11:36 pm

I picked my Coupe Fiat up today. I agree with the corrado being a good car, but it does look more old fashioned than either the Fiat, the honda prelude or the Rover Coupe. And if the Fiats held their value like the corrado I wouldn't have been able to buy mine for Â£1250.. Oh and the corrado is slower than the Fiat/Rover also.

Post by **SubCat001** » Sun May 14, 2006 12:03 pm

symonh2000 wrote:I picked my Coupe Fiat up today. I agree with the corrado being a good car, but it does look more old fashioned than either the Fiat, the honda prelude or the Rover Coupe. And if the Fiats held their value like the corrado I wouldn't have been able to buy mine for Â£1250.. Oh and the corrado is slower than the Fiat/Rover also.

Like i said the fiat fits inbetween the two for me. The Rover may not be the best car by a long way, but its the first car that i've bought that i desired from my youth. With the corrado its a fantastic package. It may not be the fastest but the chassis is never overwhelmed and while the looks may seem old fashioned, its classic VW.

On a side note have you any pics of the coupe?

220Si · Post by **220Si** » Sun May 14, 2006 7:57 pm

hi symonh2000

yeah get the pics up!!!!

Whats the main differences between the 20vt and 16v? just the extra cylinder?

I'm seriously looking into a 20VT Plus.......apparantly very quick and economical!

Si

-Alex- · Post by **-Alex-** » Mon May 15, 2006 1:49 pm

Difference is about 25bhp, 20lb/ft and 0.6 secs 0-60 (6.2 vs 6.8 for the 16v)

Top speed of the 16v says 140, 20v will top out at 155mph don't know if its limiter or out of revs.

All book figures of course, good knows if they are real-world or not

Scott · Post by **Scott** » Mon May 15, 2006 1:54 pm

well went for a quick spin in it, its the 4cyl 16v turbo one. in red if it matters.

Its pretty pokey. Power delivery is a bit later as the turbo is a t3, but its a heafty shove when it happens, not stupid though.

i like the dash, really like it.

youll have to take me out again when its all upto spec

jarewo · Post by **jarewo** » Mon May 15, 2006 2:43 pm

did they change the turbo from the 16v-20v? as ive got a 20v turbo here and its a tb2810

Imran · Post by **Imran** » Mon May 15, 2006 2:47 pm

The 20VT look bulky and heavy.... would thought they will understeer a bit as they have a fairly hefty block up front.
The 220 Coupe looks better IMO,however, the engines do sound beefy on the 20V's...
They are quite cheap now too

would like to see how they do on the track

symonh2000 · Post by **symonh2000** » Mon May 15, 2006 10:52 pm

The 20 valve turbo has a smaller turbo, so less lag, but bad for tuneability. The 16 valve is slightly under tuned as standard IMO the integrale is 210bhp but does not have a cat. An evo cars chip and 3 bar fuel pressure regulator will up it to 240bhp at 1.2 Bar of boost, and it will leave a standard 20VT behind. Both engines are pretty tuneable, the 16 Valve can make 350BHP with correct intercooling on standard pistons, you just need to port the head slightly and fit a Tipo 16 valve Exhaust cam apparently. The 20 valve just needs more intercooling and a chip, as well as a hybrid turbo.
The reason the car didn't feel stupid quick Scott is cos it was spinning the wheels, trying to get the torque down. Ill take you out in it again when the tyres are replaced as the one fitted are a bit stuffed. I wouldn't say it was heavy up front to be honest, it handles really well, I read when it came out it was supposed to be one of the best front wheel drive chassis ever produced, but that was in Parkers... It certainly corners well with no torque steer.
At the price I paid (Â£1250) I aint going to complain too much though..

I will post some pics shortly by the way.

bjrespect · Post by **bjrespect** » Mon May 15, 2006 11:43 pm

nice one for that review/info what ever people think about both cars at the end of the day there both different and a better choice than an rst or a cav turbo bit more class imo but its defo got to be the proper coupe the rover anyday always wanted one and will have a turbo version in november

MGJohn · Post by **MGJohn** » Tue May 16, 2006 1:11 am

There was a nice condition red Fiat Coupe parked near my car in the firm's car park today. The yellow one not far away.

They look OK and I had a close look at them again. To my eyes, they have a good purposeful look about them with a nice stance both of which the Rover coupe has too. What they don't have much of is that 'elegance' of line which the Rover certainly has in abundance.

Anyone noticed that many more modern 'latest' designs (rearranged tin = new cars ) lack elegance..? The BMWs of say 1990-1995 have that certain elegance - something the latter "Banglemobiles" now lack in spades... They do have bulk and angles ...as in bangles... even the BMW grill misses the point now as they gone a bit 'slitty eyed' and tear drop shaped... Bring back the angel eyes I say .. not that I'd ever want to actually buy one ,,,,,, far too ubiquitous ... I don't do ubiquitous .....

.