you obviously didn't read my whole post..... i have had 4 16v's and every one of them was set up properly, with many new parts, 1 was set up on rollers. I still prefer the way my 8v drives, and as i said, i can only judge on my test roads, but the (standard, until yesterday) 8v i have now hits better speeds on these test roads than any of the 16v's i've had. It was almost as if the 16v's needed to wind themselves up before they really took off, but by that time i was running out of road. 3rd gear was always best, went on forever, but then when i downchanged to 4th the power was gone, and i had to let it wind it up again. The 8v just goes. the only advantage with the 16v i experienced, is that it revs about 1000 rpm higher, hence the higher BHP figure, but up to that point i prefer the 8v, which makes sense considering 95% of my driving is around town. It's not all about BHP. The 167bhp 1.8 16v thats talked about above, thats the same power as a 306 gti-6. My girlfriend used to own a 306 gti-6, which i always drove, and i guarantee you that would leave a 167bhp 1.8 16v for dust. I've owned many 16v's, as mentioned, so i don't consider myself 'biased' in any way. i know many 8v owners like to 'kid themselves' that they can keep up with 16v's, but i also think 16v owners get offended that 8v owners dare to think a peasant 8v can keep up with them! on another note....Cliosport 172's, 172 BHP, seems like alot. Anyone driven them? i drove one recently, and have to say i wasn' t very impressed. Lacked power until 5k, when it came on cam, but was out of puff by 6.5k! a saxo VTR was nipping at my heels!
