^^^^ completely disagree.
The 16v, is just as able bodied as the 8v in everyday situations. You all only seem to be viewing it from the point, "oh well the power is higher up the rev range in a 16v" errrr...... so what??? So you cannot drive a car like that normally without having to be on the power all the time???
That would mean all of you would prefer a 1.0 Fiat sh!tychento.
instead of a 2.5l V6 audi bi turbo, because all of the grunt is lower down the rev range.
It's nothing to do with where the grunt is and how high the torque band is, its purely on how you drive. I can happily pooter around in my valver without the need to put my foot down, and still keep up with everyday traffic. Saying that i can also stomp on the accellerator at every given oppertunity and drive like a complete tw@t. By the same token i can do exactly the same in a 8v.
If you want a comparison between engines the only thing you will be looking at is economy vs maintenance costs. On that score i would say that the 8v engine is the better one, slightly more economical because of the gearbox it is mated with, and it has a slightly lower rev range, thus giving it a more economical edge. Maintenance is pretty painless aswell, unless something electrical goes on a digi then you have to get the multimeter out.
16v engines, slightly more thirsty as they are always wanting to go higher up the rev range, and the box is geared to do so. Maintenance, again pretty painless, apart from when you need to get to the head. Being all mechanical then they are slightly easier to work on i find. Saying that i can still obtain about 40mpg on the motorway on mine and around 25-30 mpg around town (when it works)
So really the engines are on a par with each other, depending on what you want. I personally would go for a 16v each time, but then i like to slag mine down the strip. If i just wanted a pokey GTi i would go for the 8v. It's purely driver descretion and what it is needed for.
