Alfa to launch new 159 & Brera
Discussion
Such a shame, I relly think they are missing a trick and if they are serious about taking on the germans they will need to reconsider. Look at what happened to Jaguar with their rebodied Mondeo.
Im told the forthcoming junior will share the punto platform which should be OK but unlikely to rewrite the handling rulebook in the way the Sud did. 149 upwards really needs to be RWD dont you think?
Im told the forthcoming junior will share the punto platform which should be OK but unlikely to rewrite the handling rulebook in the way the Sud did. 149 upwards really needs to be RWD dont you think?
carubo360 said:
149 upwards really needs to be RWD dont you think?
I honestly don't know. I suspect for 90% of people - probably more - it doesn't matter what wheels are driven. The rarified air of Pistonheads.com gives the impression that everyone powerslides to the shops, four wheel drifts to the office and comes home via the Nurburgring. It would be great if you could, but it's just not realistic.Put it another way - if Alfa made the cars they currently do, all exactly the same but rear wheel drive, would they suddenly be as popular as BMWs? I don't think for a minute they would. Nor if you ask many BMW drivers what attracted them to the cars would many of them say rear wheel drive. I just think it's a fixation that isn't entirely applicable to most real life car buyers.
I agree. Howevere as a fan of the marque they need to do something to appeal to a wider audience and also allow some "halo" products to come through.
BMW have the M3 which has probably sold more 318i's than anything else, but Alfa dropped the 3.2V6 in the 156 and in the wet it was undriveable and in the dry it torque steered like nothing else. Made a great sound, had an assured understated look just lacked RWD (in my opinion).
BMW have the M3 which has probably sold more 318i's than anything else, but Alfa dropped the 3.2V6 in the 156 and in the wet it was undriveable and in the dry it torque steered like nothing else. Made a great sound, had an assured understated look just lacked RWD (in my opinion).
Wombat Rick said:
[Put it another way - if Alfa made the cars they currently do, all exactly the same but rear wheel drive, would they suddenly be as popular as BMWs?
No they would not , but that would be because of the shite dealers who do not call back and can not arrange a car for a test drive , BMW on the other hand did call back , did give me a car for an extended test drive and did get the order 
Marki said:
Wombat Rick said:
[Put it another way - if Alfa made the cars they currently do, all exactly the same but rear wheel drive, would they suddenly be as popular as BMWs?
No they would not , but that would be because of the shite dealers who do not call back and can not arrange a car for a test drive , BMW on the other hand did call back , did give me a car for an extended test drive and did get the order 
I think it's only fair that you point out that was not in the UK as the UK dealer network is undergoing a major revamp with a big clear out of the old dealers (many with the attitude you have found) and the new dealers do seem very on the ball indeed e.g. I got a 24 hours test drive in the car I was interested in, have had follow up calls and generally excellent service.
but Alfa dropped the 3.2V6 in the 156 and in the wet it was undriveable and in the dry it torque steered like nothing else.
What complete and utter tosh. Never, *ever* in 85,000 miles has my fathers 156 GTA been "undriveable". Brilliant, confidence inspiring, fun, entertaining, reassuring yes, (and that includes in deepest, darkest, wettest Wales), but "undriveable"? No. And it's been driven with some gusto over the years.
People need to pull their head out of the motoring journo's árses.
What complete and utter tosh. Never, *ever* in 85,000 miles has my fathers 156 GTA been "undriveable". Brilliant, confidence inspiring, fun, entertaining, reassuring yes, (and that includes in deepest, darkest, wettest Wales), but "undriveable"? No. And it's been driven with some gusto over the years.
People need to pull their head out of the motoring journo's árses.
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 17:17
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 17:20
Wombat Rick said:
Marki said:
Wombat Rick said:
[Put it another way - if Alfa made the cars they currently do, all exactly the same but rear wheel drive, would they suddenly be as popular as BMWs?
No they would not , but that would be because of the shite dealers who do not call back and can not arrange a car for a test drive , BMW on the other hand did call back , did give me a car for an extended test drive and did get the order I think it's only fair that you point out that was not in the UK as the UK dealer network is undergoing a major revamp with a big clear out of the old dealers (many with the attitude you have found) and the new dealers do seem very on the ball indeed e.g. I got a 24 hours test drive in the car I was interested in, have had follow up calls and generally excellent service.
Well ,, i wanted a Brera but after hearing more about them on here maybe i should thank THE FECKING USLESS 
S FOR NOT HELPING ME :laught:I agree, it seems he's never driven a GTA
I'm not claiming they are perfect dynamically but undriveable in the wet is complete Bo**ocks frankly. Torque steer is only ever an issue on uneven surfaces and the TC reigns it in fairly well, you would have to be really stupid or totally inept to get into any real trouble with it.
I agree RWD would be desirable but it's not the holy grail. For me the current Alfa range is either a bit past it dynamically (147, GT) or a bit bulky (159, Brera). The lighter weight and promise of some more powerfull and tax efficient engines is a step in the right direction but I fear it won't come soon enough for me.
Regarding the dealers, I am in the process of deciding between another Alfa or BMW and so far the Alfa dealers have been equally as good if not better, at least they dont give me stupidly high contract hire figures. The BM delaers must think we ere born yesterday
I'm not claiming they are perfect dynamically but undriveable in the wet is complete Bo**ocks frankly. Torque steer is only ever an issue on uneven surfaces and the TC reigns it in fairly well, you would have to be really stupid or totally inept to get into any real trouble with it.I agree RWD would be desirable but it's not the holy grail. For me the current Alfa range is either a bit past it dynamically (147, GT) or a bit bulky (159, Brera). The lighter weight and promise of some more powerfull and tax efficient engines is a step in the right direction but I fear it won't come soon enough for me.
Regarding the dealers, I am in the process of deciding between another Alfa or BMW and so far the Alfa dealers have been equally as good if not better, at least they dont give me stupidly high contract hire figures. The BM delaers must think we ere born yesterday
SCOOTERMAN said:
but Alfa dropped the 3.2V6 in the 156 and in the wet it was undriveable and in the dry it torque steered like nothing else.
What complete and utter tosh. Never, *ever* in 85,000 miles has my fathers 156 GTA been "undriveable". Brilliant, confidence inspiring, fun, entertaining, reassuring yes, (and that includes in deepest, darkest, wettest Wales), but "undriveable"? No. And it's been driven with some gusto over the years.
People need to pull their head out of the motoring journo's árses.
When I say undriveable I am talking about making rapid progress in comparison to similarly powered RWD German competition. Having driven both the 156 and 147GTA on track and road in wet and dry conditions IMO there is no way you will be able to drive as quickly and as confidently as in other RWD competitors from our German friends. I will admit that the 156 was more stable at speed than the 147 and made a great motorway machine.What complete and utter tosh. Never, *ever* in 85,000 miles has my fathers 156 GTA been "undriveable". Brilliant, confidence inspiring, fun, entertaining, reassuring yes, (and that includes in deepest, darkest, wettest Wales), but "undriveable"? No. And it's been driven with some gusto over the years.
People need to pull their head out of the motoring journo's árses.
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 17:17
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 17:20
Edited by carubo360 on Tuesday 4th December 17:33
When I say undriveable I am talking about making rapid progress in comparison to similarly powered RWD German competition.
If you're making "rapid progress" on the road to the point where RWD will be quantifably advantageous over FWD, in conditions wherein the (perfectly driveable) GTA is supposedly "undriveable" i.e. wet, then TBH the only difference between the two is whether you'll plough through the roadside shrubbery head-on (FWD), or backwards (RWD) whilst simultaniously screaming "I am a driving God!" a la Hammond.
If you're making "rapid progress" on the road to the point where RWD will be quantifably advantageous over FWD, in conditions wherein the (perfectly driveable) GTA is supposedly "undriveable" i.e. wet, then TBH the only difference between the two is whether you'll plough through the roadside shrubbery head-on (FWD), or backwards (RWD) whilst simultaniously screaming "I am a driving God!" a la Hammond.
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 18:30
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 18:31
SCOOTERMAN said:
When I say undriveable I am talking about making rapid progress in comparison to similarly powered RWD German competition.
If you're making "rapid progress" on the road to the point where RWD will be quantifably advantageous over FWD, in conditions wherein the (perfectly driveable) GTA is supposedly "undriveable" i.e. wet, then TBH the only difference between the two is whether you'll plough through the roadside shrubbery head-on (FWD), or backwards (RWD) whilst simultaniously screaming "I am a driving God!" a la Hammond.
Well you're welcome to your comments regarding FWD and RWD and the whole driveability issue and if Alfa are satisfied with being a marginal niche franchise then it I guess it doesnt really matter either...If you're making "rapid progress" on the road to the point where RWD will be quantifably advantageous over FWD, in conditions wherein the (perfectly driveable) GTA is supposedly "undriveable" i.e. wet, then TBH the only difference between the two is whether you'll plough through the roadside shrubbery head-on (FWD), or backwards (RWD) whilst simultaniously screaming "I am a driving God!" a la Hammond.
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 18:30
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 18:31
velocemitch said:
Regarding the dealers, I am in the process of deciding between another Alfa or BMW and so far the Alfa dealers have been equally as good if not better, at least they dont give me stupidly high contract hire figures. The BM delaers must think we ere born yesterday
Interesting.Might have to pop along to my local dealer and ask for some quotes.
I've been to a broker and asked for a fully maintained 2 year / 40k mile (per year) quote on a 159 JTD Sportwagon. I nearly fell off my chair - it was over £560 per month.
If I had that kind of money to throw around, I'd buy one outright over 3 years.
carubo360 said:
SCOOTERMAN said:
When I say undriveable I am talking about making rapid progress in comparison to similarly powered RWD German competition.
If you're making "rapid progress" on the road to the point where RWD will be quantifably advantageous over FWD, in conditions wherein the (perfectly driveable) GTA is supposedly "undriveable" i.e. wet, then TBH the only difference between the two is whether you'll plough through the roadside shrubbery head-on (FWD), or backwards (RWD) whilst simultaniously screaming "I am a driving God!" a la Hammond.
Well you're welcome to your comments regarding FWD and RWD and the whole driveability issue and if Alfa are satisfied with being a marginal niche franchise then it I guess it doesnt really matter either...If you're making "rapid progress" on the road to the point where RWD will be quantifably advantageous over FWD, in conditions wherein the (perfectly driveable) GTA is supposedly "undriveable" i.e. wet, then TBH the only difference between the two is whether you'll plough through the roadside shrubbery head-on (FWD), or backwards (RWD) whilst simultaniously screaming "I am a driving God!" a la Hammond.
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 18:30
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Tuesday 4th December 18:31
I think your later post regarding the GTA's is more balanced, on the limit I'm sure the German cars are better, but this IMO has more to do with the suspension set up than whether you are being pushed or pulled. There are times when RWD can be something of a liability, having felt a 1 series go very light at the back over a slightly curving crest this weekend, I can think of one immediately!. I'm not denying RWD is ultimately more fun though but only a small percentage of the market will care either way.
On the subject of hire rates, Alfa are doing some good deals at the moment, especially on the Q4's and for a 159, 1.9 JTD lusso SW I got a quote of approx £350.00 +vat for 15K a year on 3-33 basis. This was substantially less than the BMW Stealer wanted for a 1 series coupe, but as I said they were just taking the Pi**, I reckon a decent hire company will bring the figures for the BMW under the Alfa.
velocemitch said:
On the subject of hire rates, Alfa are doing some good deals at the moment, especially on the Q4's and for a 159, 1.9 JTD lusso SW I got a quote of approx £350.00 +vat for 15K a year on 3-33 basis. This was substantially less than the BMW Stealer wanted for a 1 series coupe, but as I said they were just taking the Pi**, I reckon a decent hire company will bring the figures for the BMW under the Alfa.
Ahhh, that's nowhere near cheap enough - my employers get the Passat 2.0TDI SE for £410 / month, fully maintained, so they give us around 400 / month as a cash for car settlement. Which, I've found, is nowhere near enough to get anything even remotely comparable if you've opted out.is that taxed??, don't forget you have to factor BIK tax on the company car into the system, then offset that against how many miles you can claim at the tax free rate.
In my experience you end up in a situation where the government... not the company.. dictates you can't run a car anywhere near as expensive as a 159 on an allowance without going over the amount they can give you tax free. You then start looking into how much different cars actually cost you in tax with the new CO2 based system and unfortunately Alfa loose out again.
In my experience you end up in a situation where the government... not the company.. dictates you can't run a car anywhere near as expensive as a 159 on an allowance without going over the amount they can give you tax free. You then start looking into how much different cars actually cost you in tax with the new CO2 based system and unfortunately Alfa loose out again.
Gassing Station | Alfa Romeo, Fiat & Lancia | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff