Mk2 VTR (90BHP) vs Mk2 VTR (100BHP)

[Robin91]

I'm looking at a VTR which is a Mk2 on a 2000 plate, however it has the cat on the bottom rather than on the manifold.. I believe this means its only got the 90BHP engine rather than the newer 100 BHP engine, is this correct?

If yes, how much slower are they in the real world? and on parkers it claims 36MPG for a MK1 VTR against 42MPG for a MK2, are they really they much worse on fuel?

Cheers fellas

[djmartin]

yes its a mk2 body with mk1 engine in!

mk2 engines are 98 bhp not 100 bhp.

[Predator_R32]

try a search

but the 90bhp isnt much slower than the 98bhp and the mpg is all about how you drive