Cream, you need a lighter foot or a better torque spread map sir!
my 2.4 10v had over twice that mileage when i sold it, in perfect working order and never broke anything mechanical at all.
Full intercooler hard pipes, turbo to tip straight through pipework, custom air intake and map by Nigel at angeltune, who knocked it back a tad so that the C & G Clutch would hold under any driving scenario.
It was the Mutts Nutts, utterly reliable (except for an engine pillar mount!), never ever ever missed a beat or broke a sweat, brilliant car that i miss to this day, and the miss's curses me for selling, she adored it.
I came home with a facelift 1.9 jtdm 16v Veloce Sportwagon, and she didn't utter a word for days,
kinda nice and peaceful, but i got sick of cereal and dirty underpants! ha ha!
as for mpg, the difference is totally negligible in my opinion.
if i drove the 2.4 on its low down torque, short shifting through the box, it would get me within a couple of mpg of the revvier natured 16v's, no problem.
and handling wise, yes the 2.4 is a heavier lump, but i can again say the the difference it made was negligible.
however, i did improve the 2.4 with some 18's and 40 profiles, so in fact i didn't notice any improvement by going to the lighter but stock 16v when we did change.