Mk3 or Mk2b HGT

Currently reading:
Mk3 or Mk2b HGT

MK3 or HGT?

  • MK3

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • HGT

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

smokeysworld

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
549
Points
91
Okay so here's my position....decided that come feb/march time I'm gonna trade in the punto for a 3door model but here's my dilemma...I could get the brand new Mk3 in 1.2 flavour or I could go for the Mk2B HGT version to have that bit of grunt....I have my own ideas and opinions on which one to get and am already favouring one over the other but I just want you guys unbiased opinion and the pro's and cons of each. obviously price is a barrier so mk3 sporting and above are out of the question, just the pors/cons of these 2 models.
Cheers guys
 
I havent looked into the mk3 all too much but if i had the choice I would go for the Mk2 Hgt, if you are comparing it to a bog standard mk3 (and you kno what Fiats bog standard is like.... electric windows are extras lol) then Id deffo go for the Mk2 HGT, but as I say I dont know all to much about either of the cars, the Hgt is goin to be a more powerful car as well, although my opinion may be wrong :lol:
 
I would go for a Mk2 HGT (not the 2B as I don't like the looks).

They're a fantastic hot hatch. Not as fast as stuff like a Clio 172/182 but IMO just perfect for a backroad thrash.

Things to watch out for are timing belt failure - recommend getting it done every 36k - and Cam variator failure. That doesn't stop you using the car and you wouldn't notice any drop-off in performance but once it's repaired you can feel the difference.
Also, on mine at least, the water pump failed at about 65k but this might've just been an isolated incident.

If you did get one and were going to use it for some high speed/twisty road work I'd suggest a mild front brake upgrade - I went for TarOx grooved discs and pads plus 5.1 brake fluid as the brakes started to go off after 3 or 4 miles of concerted thrashing.

I'm still often tempted to get another one.
 
I would probably go for the mk3, the HGT isnt supposed to be that good and remember now the mk3 is out the mk2.5 will depreciate faster/more severe, if it has to be the HGT go for one second hand from a dealer so someone has taken the biggest hit of the losses first
 
Het great responses so far....most seem to have a similar idea to me (should have added a poll) as I'm swaying towards the HGT for all the extra and power, depreciation is not my biggest worry to be honest as I will be keeping it a good few yearsand doing a few things to it so it will be a longterm project. if it were the HGT then I would still try to source a delivery mileage version as I dont really want it used as the last owner probably will have razzed it too! but keep the opinions coming please as the more the better and Simon/Martyn if you can add a poll feel free :lol:
 
it is nice..... :?
its going to be tricky...got a bit of time to think so thanks for the input so far...
 
Go for a 2b HGT multijet, will be a far better car if you got it remapped compared to the petrol unit. :wink:
 
will this not be a costly extra when the petrol is already better performance? surely the money would be better spent on upgrading the petrol one? I have no expetise in this!
 
The 115BHP JTD engine in the Stilo can be remapped to 155BHP, or 170 with a filter and exhaust change. I would expect the HGT JTD could be done to the same level as it is basically the same engine (although possibly with a different turbo?).
However I don't think you can get the same performance satisfaction from a diesel as you can from a petrol.
I rarely go above 3000rpm in the Stilo as there is no extra performance but to me a large part of the real joy of taking a car out for a good thrash is revving the engine hard through the gears.
This is easily more achievable with a petrol engine.
 
hgt....................and kit it out with all the novitec stuff.

maybe one day we all might have a 350 bhp punto like them eh :D
 
lol, just want enough oomph to annoy the chavs that drive round here!
anything more is like handing me a death certificate!!
 
I dont anything the wrong way, thats what this post is for...everyone's opinion!
what makes you feel the mk3 1.2 will be fast(er) when compared to the HGT and when you say the HGT didn't feel quick...was it quick though? I'd assume it should be quicker off the line against the sporting and similar spec golfs/206's etc?
 
no sorry i ment the mk3 1.2 isnt really a faster car in comparison to your current one. the hgt didnt feel like it was a fast car other than that i dont really know how to say it. i was expecting it to be rapid as its a 1.8 in a wee car but i was dissapointed. it did feel faster that a 1.2 16v sportig but compared to a similar priced hot hatch i would say its not as quick, take the closest matched golf say it's a 1.8 turbo or the 206 gti which is a 2.0 16V they are both quicker and feel quicker IMO than the hgt
 
I think the speed of the HGT is quite deceptive.
I was always surprised how quickly it got to 110mph from 60 or 70.
As I said in my original post though it's not as quick as a Clio Sport.
I'm sure that it is actually slightly quicker than the 136BHP 206GTI (from magazine tests) but I don't think it's right to compare it to a Golf turbo - they're about 10 times the price (and 10 times as likely to break down).

When I first got mine I promised myself I'd get the Novitec supercharger and taller 5th gear fitted when it came out of warranty. Unfortunately it had done 67k by then, the timing belt had broken and I didn't think Uncle Arnolds engine repairs would hold up to the extra strain.

If I do get another one I'll be looking for the conversion straight away :D
 
Back
Top