the 1.6 8v engine isnt that much better than the 1.2 16v engine... Just its 400cc bigger and higher tax bracket because of it Same power (well close enough), less MPG...
All in all, 1.2 16v (85 elx) probably a better option IMO
Agreed. The 1.6 isn't all it should be. When all things are considered (Tax, Insurance, Fuel Consumption, Reliabilty, etc) the 1.2 16v is a better bet.
nowt wrong with the 1.6 and it will be cheaper than the 1.2 16v because it is older (the 1.2 16v replaced both the 1.2 '75' and 1.6 '90' models). The idea of a supermini with an unstressed but nippy 1.6 engine is quite appealing and it will probably be less tired than a thrashed 75 of a similar age. The 85 will probably be more expensive to buy (although I seem to remember the 1.6 is a bit juicy with fuel). I nearly bought an 1996 N-reg one in 2000, but bought a 1999 T-reg 60S instead. I suspect if I had bought the 90 I may still have it now...
I say go for it if you like it.
p.s. I would avoid the 1.7TD as they need an oil change every 4,500 miles which is surely a joke...