You might wish to consider magnification factor and enlarger setups. When you enlarge more, a 16x20 from 35mm compared to 6x7, the quality of your enlarger setup becomes much more critical. Enlarger alignment, lens quality, negative flatness, etc all becomes magnified so much more.
I sometimes photograph using Tmax 100 and process that film in replenished Xtol. I don't usually print as large as 16x20, the largest I normally make is 11x14 or 12x16. But comparatively, via my Pentax 55mm f/2 lens I can get quality that is fairly close to my Hasselblad setup with the 80mm Planar using Tmax 400 film, also processed in replenished Xtol.
It's a painstaking process, and attention to every detail has to be paid. Just focusing the 35mm negative is that much harder, to get each grain sharp.
For 35mm I use an 80mm Rodenstock lens, and for MF I use a 135mm Schneider lens.
For some things I prefer the less clean look of the 35mm print, and for others I prefer the sweet lens signature and clean crisp prints from MF. There is a difference, of course, but I never really paid that much attention to it. Grain and resolution is cool under a loupe, while tonality will yell 'LOOK AT ME!' from across the room. So I focus much more on tonality than sharpness and grain; this way I am able to make a series of work shot in both formats look coherent.