Hi, I use a 156 2.0 and 146 1.6, both TS, but the 1.6 in the 146 is a little bit different than that in the 147 (the power/torque graphs at squadra-tuning.nl differ, favorably for the 147). The 1.6 engine is noticeably more economical, much more than the manufacturers figures suggest: the 2.0 TS does 8.5 l/100 km, the 1.6 did 7.2 l/100 km (measured once, mixed driving with intercity driving bias). The tests were done in mellow temperatures (20-28 C). The 1.6 has shorter gearing, which is good for city driving and pulling away, and is quieter (smaller volumes of fuel/air mixture burn in one go). The maintenance costs will be about the same, since the engines have the same running gear, except the variable length intake on the 2.0, and the same suspension. Weirdly, the engine temp on the 1.6 is more stable, goes to about 90 C and stays there, while on the 2.0 there are fluctuations on warm up - using new thermostates of the same brand. Good luck with the car!
P.S. Note taken about the balancer shaft on the 2.0 (the next post). I forgot about it.
Last edited by Borislav; 06-09-13 at 09:30.