An impressive level of disagreement has developed since I thought I'd made my mind up! 
My understanding of the 6 gears is that is was introduced in the 1.2 engine for the reasons explained above. But the 1.2 engine IS seriously underpowered for a family saloon/hatchback and therefore flooring the accelerator and a strong tailwind is required to get the speed above 30mph. Thus the benefits of the extra gear ratios are utterly negated by the feeble 80bhp output. That's why Fiat replaced it with the 1.4 and that does seem to have done the job in balancing refinement and performance with economy to an acceptable level for those of us who simply want to get from A to B without having to thrash every rev. out of a 1.2 to arrive at the newsagent's before it closes, having set out at 6am. Or want to get there without having to phone Ocean Finance every time we turn the key in our 2.4 litre (per mile) Arbath.
The 1.6 engine, from my five years experience of it, is that it is a very sturdy and reliable lump, provides decent acceleration and is quiet and refined if driven sensibly through the gears. It is rather thirsty, but I find it hard to believe that the greater the cc the better the fuel economy in a petrol engine, as this goes against everything I've read about Stilos, and cars generally. You almost invariably pay for the extra 'VOOOMMM' of a 1.8, 2.0. 2.4 and upwards through the petrol pump. That's surely why so-called 'gas guzzlers' cost a fortune to tax as well as fill up these days.
I'd happily have another 1.6. If money was no object I'd love the luxurious pull and wastefulness of an Arbath. If I wasn't set in my ways I'd give a diesel a spin. And the 1.2 may well be the cheapest to run, but frankly I'd rather walk than fight its gearbox!
A good all-rounder sounds good to me!
My understanding of the 6 gears is that is was introduced in the 1.2 engine for the reasons explained above. But the 1.2 engine IS seriously underpowered for a family saloon/hatchback and therefore flooring the accelerator and a strong tailwind is required to get the speed above 30mph. Thus the benefits of the extra gear ratios are utterly negated by the feeble 80bhp output. That's why Fiat replaced it with the 1.4 and that does seem to have done the job in balancing refinement and performance with economy to an acceptable level for those of us who simply want to get from A to B without having to thrash every rev. out of a 1.2 to arrive at the newsagent's before it closes, having set out at 6am. Or want to get there without having to phone Ocean Finance every time we turn the key in our 2.4 litre (per mile) Arbath.
The 1.6 engine, from my five years experience of it, is that it is a very sturdy and reliable lump, provides decent acceleration and is quiet and refined if driven sensibly through the gears. It is rather thirsty, but I find it hard to believe that the greater the cc the better the fuel economy in a petrol engine, as this goes against everything I've read about Stilos, and cars generally. You almost invariably pay for the extra 'VOOOMMM' of a 1.8, 2.0. 2.4 and upwards through the petrol pump. That's surely why so-called 'gas guzzlers' cost a fortune to tax as well as fill up these days.
I'd happily have another 1.6. If money was no object I'd love the luxurious pull and wastefulness of an Arbath. If I wasn't set in my ways I'd give a diesel a spin. And the 1.2 may well be the cheapest to run, but frankly I'd rather walk than fight its gearbox!
A good all-rounder sounds good to me!
Last edited:
