Page 1 of 1

1600 v 2000

Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2018 7:06 pm
by Nigel 1953
Looking for opinions as to whether the 1.6 pinto may be better than the 2.0 pinto.

I always thought the answer would be the 2.0 and I vowed in the eighties never to have another 1.6. However, I have seen an article in a recent copy of Classic Car Buyer that recommend the 1.6 for those not needing the 150bhp of the 2.8I. The article says that the 1.6 is sweeter than the 2.0 and recommends fitting the Weber carb.

I have seen threads on the forum advising which mods to make to a 1.6 to achieve S specification and as the 1.6 is lower geared than the 2.0 & 1.6S I think it may be possible to get somewhere near to the acceleration of the standard 2.0.

Re: 1600 v 2000

Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2018 1:10 pm
by georgezippybungle
Hi.

I have had my 2.0 (now modded but that's another story) for many years.
If all is standard then the 1.6 with a VV is a bit feeble, once had one with a webber fitted and it went well enough, slightly freer revving than a 2.0 but I prefer the extra grunt of the bigger engine.
If they both have webbers then there's not much in it. The 2.0 has a 3.46:1 diff and the 1.6 is a 3.7ish:1 so is a bit lower geared.
I still use mine for long motorway trips so can't have enough power, I converted mine to EFi and haven't looked back.

Re: 1600 v 2000

Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2018 5:22 pm
by Peter-S
I had three 1.6 Capris many years ago then after a long gap acquired a 2.0. Since then I have driven a 1.6 with a 2.0 cam in it and it went well enough but I prefer the 2.0.
If you have a 1.6 already then I can see modifying it to give a little more poke would be good but I can't really see the point in buying a 1.6 to modify and make it as good as a 2.0, may as well get a 2.0 to start with and tinker with that.

Re: 1600 v 2000

Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2018 9:23 am
by D366Y
Peter-S wrote:I had three 1.6 Capris many years ago then after a long gap acquired a 2.0. Since then I have driven a 1.6 with a 2.0 cam in it and it went well enough but I prefer the 2.0.
If you have a 1.6 already then I can see modifying it to give a little more poke would be good but I can't really see the point in buying a 1.6 to modify and make it as good as a 2.0, may as well get a 2.0 to start with and tinker with that.


:agree:

I currently have a 1.6 laser and 2.0 GL (the GL is an auto but still) and I have added a 2.0 cam to the 1.6, as well as 32/36 weber carbs, and it probably has the same amount of poke as the standard 2.0 does... There isn't really a great deal of difference in the price between a 1.6 and 2.0 so I'd go for a 2.0 and then you can add more poke to that if you wanted too

Re: 1600 v 2000

Posted: Sat May 05, 2018 7:32 pm
by Nigel 1953
Many thanks for your advice guys. I have a 2.0 but would consider buying a 1.6 in the future if I came across an immaculate example.

Re: 1600 v 2000

Posted: Sun May 06, 2018 12:41 pm
by ollyw
1600 great unless the cam belt lets go!
2000 better and if it let’s go you’ll get away with it

Re: 1600 v 2000

Posted: Fri May 18, 2018 12:58 pm
by Not_Anumber
The standard 1.6 on it's own is quite refined to drive but does require being in the right gear to get the most of the available 72bhp.

Id echo what others have said. If the right car turns up and happens to be a 1.6 dont be put off and if you did want to improve it closer to 2.0 performance it would just mean a change of cam, carb and inlet manifold. (Id' probably buy the camshaft new but good 2nd hand carb and inlet manifold from one of our trusted traders should keep the cost down.)

It actually wouldnt take a much more to make it slightly quicker than a standard 2 litre if you wanted to get it to or slightly over the 100bhp. Just some mild porting and polishing on the head, tubular exhaust manifold and a mild to fast road cam in place of the standard 2 litre one.