Suggested buying an Alfa at a party, didn't expect answers
Discussion
stuart-b said:
Where has the love for Alfa gone?
It's evapourated, a bit like the Alfa range? MiTo or Giulietta?They're rare, you need someone that knows their onions to mend them and the parts are pricey. Some people just want a car that gets them from A to B.
Sorry, I forgot the 4C. Lotus were there almost 20 years ago. It's a halo model that doesn't really move the game on.
OpulentBob said:
This repeated s
te that Alfas are poorly screwed together is a Top Gear-ism that needs to die. Or, keep it up, carry on driving Golfs, A3s and french ste, and leave the under-reputationed cars to those in the know.
My Alfa never failed me once either and was well screwed together, but I never really gelled with it for some reason. The best part of the journey was walking up to the car because it was beautiful, but once inside and driving it lost its appeal. Having said that I sold it on to a friend and he's still got it as he loves it.te that Alfas are poorly screwed together is a Top Gear-ism that needs to die. Or, keep it up, carry on driving Golfs, A3s and french ste, and leave the under-reputationed cars to those in the know. We had an alfa. A very nearly new phase 3 916 spider. We figured that it was nearly new, warrantied, the stories were Clarksonism BS, we had the luxury of some disposable income at the time, a generous company car scheme and really, assuming worst case scenarios, how bad can it be? We ran it for 47K over 2 years.
It looked pretty and was quite nice to drive, although I found the seats very uncomfortable.
It was that good that I will never, ever consider another one even if it was free. It was genuinely, completely, totally disastrously awful.
It genuinely boggles my mind how anything can be made so poorly.
Clearly there are good ones and bad ones.
It looked pretty and was quite nice to drive, although I found the seats very uncomfortable.
It was that good that I will never, ever consider another one even if it was free. It was genuinely, completely, totally disastrously awful.
It genuinely boggles my mind how anything can be made so poorly.
Clearly there are good ones and bad ones.
scdan4 said:
We had an alfa. A very nearly new phase 3 916 spider.
...
...
It genuinely boggles my mind how anything can be made so poorly.
Interestingly, the phase 3 (and the later phase 2) cars were built by Pininfarina, whereas the phase 1 and early phase 2 were built by Alfa....
...
It genuinely boggles my mind how anything can be made so poorly.
For the 916 GTV, anyway - I'm assuming the Spider was the same
TBH as much as the Alfa is a pretty car, and the engine I admit is very tempting, but Id be off looking at Integra's if a FWD coupe is what youre after.
Or I'd put about a bit more to the budget and get a good 350z, Boxster. Id get a Boxster if I'm honest, 6 cylinder sports cars with a great reputation as a drivers car. And If you look around, are within budget.
I don't think the cooper S was a silly suggestion, they're meant to be a rather drivers car, always heard good things about them. And seen as your going FWD anyway not really that weird a suggestion, they're meant to be a really good to drive and are about 200kg lighter than the chubby Alfa.
Or I'd put about a bit more to the budget and get a good 350z, Boxster. Id get a Boxster if I'm honest, 6 cylinder sports cars with a great reputation as a drivers car. And If you look around, are within budget.
I don't think the cooper S was a silly suggestion, they're meant to be a rather drivers car, always heard good things about them. And seen as your going FWD anyway not really that weird a suggestion, they're meant to be a really good to drive and are about 200kg lighter than the chubby Alfa.
I had a 2005 156 2.4 JTD MJet veloce estate for a bit.
Looked exactly like this
It was the best looking worst car I've ever owned. Lots of niggly things about it were just st and it broke down once leaving my wife and then baby stranded in the snow.
Piece of merde.
Sold it for more than I paid though which was a first!
Looked exactly like this
It was the best looking worst car I've ever owned. Lots of niggly things about it were just s
t and it broke down once leaving my wife and then baby stranded in the snow. Piece of merde.
Sold it for more than I paid though which was a first!
Edited by dave_s13 on Wednesday 23 April 19:56
ORD said:
I've never understood the Alfa thing - relatively pretty but flawed cars. I find it hard to get my head around the idea that a car being flawed (i.e. a bit bad) gives it "character". If an Alfa is worse than a Golf, it is a pretty average car. We romanticise poor engineering and build quality!
If that's how you have rationalised it then I am not surprised it makes no sense. It's not the flaws that give it character. I don't know anyone who ever fell in love with a car because it had a hole in the sill or the windscreen wipers only worked if you hit a bump or the second gear synchro ate itself. We like the cars in spite of all this st, not because of it. Having said that, there may be some masochists out there but from what I can tell they seem to prefer MGBs 
I used to put up with all the reliability problems of my old GTV because when it was running it was just so involving to drive compared to anything else I've ever driven.
EDIT: Oh, to the OP's original question about where the love has gone, as far as I can tell it has been this way since at least the '80s. Even when I was growing up in SA, which apparently is the largest collection of Alfa fanboys outside of Italy itself, the same reaction would be received if one expressed a desire to own an Alfa. It you announced that you were getting married there, a popular response was "if I wanted problems in my life I'd buy an Alfa." Conversely, announce that you are purchasing an Alfa and the reaction would be "if I wanted problems I'd get married..."
It's been that way for years, at least since the '70s Italian rust scandal and the Datsun 120Y. Nothing new there.
Edited by Alfanatic on Wednesday 23 April 19:59
Oh dear, so many misconceptions here. Firstly, full disclosure, I'm an Alfaholic. I have had 4.
Firstly, the whole flaws equal character thing. They do not. Alfas have flaws certainly, but they ALSO have character in abundance. That's the consequence of being designed for both driving and sensorial pleasure. Oher manufacturers have cottoned on to the fact the a wonderful exhaust note stirs the soul more than a tiny, flat one. Hence exhausts being 'tuned'. Alfas have always known this.
Second, reliability. Of course they are statistically less reliable. But that's a relative point. It's compared to Mazda, BMW's etc..etc… My 50 year old Alfa has never once let me down. And it's a delight to drive. So the possible trade off with unreliability is worth it. To me at any rate.
Looks. Entirely subjective. Some people like 'em, some don't.
The overall point I guess is that Alfa and Ferrari shared a genesis together. They were built with the same mindset. Today much, but by no means all, of that remains. And I doubt too many people here would dismiss Ferrari's as being "flawed". In many ways, Alfa's desire for volume was its downfall; it's very, very difficult to satisfy the masses and remain purist.
If an Audi does it for you then, please, enjoy it. But it's bonkers to dismiss a very particular car brand that you haven't owned, haven't driven and don't understand.
Firstly, the whole flaws equal character thing. They do not. Alfas have flaws certainly, but they ALSO have character in abundance. That's the consequence of being designed for both driving and sensorial pleasure. Oher manufacturers have cottoned on to the fact the a wonderful exhaust note stirs the soul more than a tiny, flat one. Hence exhausts being 'tuned'. Alfas have always known this.
Second, reliability. Of course they are statistically less reliable. But that's a relative point. It's compared to Mazda, BMW's etc..etc… My 50 year old Alfa has never once let me down. And it's a delight to drive. So the possible trade off with unreliability is worth it. To me at any rate.
Looks. Entirely subjective. Some people like 'em, some don't.
The overall point I guess is that Alfa and Ferrari shared a genesis together. They were built with the same mindset. Today much, but by no means all, of that remains. And I doubt too many people here would dismiss Ferrari's as being "flawed". In many ways, Alfa's desire for volume was its downfall; it's very, very difficult to satisfy the masses and remain purist.
If an Audi does it for you then, please, enjoy it. But it's bonkers to dismiss a very particular car brand that you haven't owned, haven't driven and don't understand.
corporalsparrow said:
The overall point I guess is that Alfa and Ferrari shared a genesis together. They were built with the same mindset. Today much, but by no means all, of that remains. And I doubt too many people here would dismiss Ferrari's as being "flawed". In many ways, Alfa's desire for volume was its downfall; it's very, very difficult to satisfy the masses and remain purist.
Id strongly argue against that, Enzo was always a power man, Alfa went the other way with light small capacity cars. Throughout the 50s when Ferrari were punching out big v12s racers, Alfa had a 700kg 1.3 racers. In the 60s they were racing with 2litre v8s (later 3litre v8s and 3litre flat 12s) with the tipo33's rather than the big 5litres of Ferrari. Their LeMans GT class entry was the TZ cars, cars that weighed half as much as the GTO. So Id say that whilst they were both birthed as racing marques, their approach was very different than Ferraris despite Enzo cutting his teeth with Alfa as it were.I don't really understand what you mean by your Ferrari/flawed comment though, Ferrari were always making GT cars at a high price, Alfa shifted from that Post war and made more mainstream sporty cars with the Giulietta base - after the 70s they stopped making class leading sporty cars. The flaws in Alfas (that I care about) have always been in the driving, and most Ferraris have been pretty awesome on that front recently! Reading old mags from the 50s/60s, Alfa were the drivers choice, beating BMW in what we now see as their own game of supersaloons, its hard to imagine a 3dr Alfa beating the next M3! Why? Alfa are no longer a sporting brand. Simple. But now with the 4c, and the news the next 3 series rival will be RWD things are massively looking up. The next Spider should be very good if its base sharing with the ever praised mk4 mx5. So I am very optimistic about the future of Alfa!
Alfa started to drop in the 70s, before then their racing activity had meant they made some seriously sporty cars, not to mention some serious trophies in their cabinet, Lemans 4 times in a row, their F1 cars won Farina and Fangio their titles in 50 and 51, the World sports car championship in 75,77 and dominated the touring car championship with the GTA.
There was a rather telling article in Octane on the Alfa GTA, and how many of the engineers left when things stopped being about perfectionism and more about cost cutting by the controlling powers. After that Alfa essence from the 30s started to bleed away. Massively sad, these are the people who made a road version of a Leman prototype racer, and they cant even make a class leading hot hatch? Massive shame. But then I think its important to remember that the Alfa of the last 30 years really isn't the same Alfa that were dominating international racing or making class leading sports cars. Might as well have had different names.
OpulentBob said:
This is why you don't understand it - because you've assumed they are poorly engineered and poorly built. Ever driven or owned one? 
I had a similar era 6-pot 156, one of the really "fiat-y" ones. It started every single time at temps of up to (down to?) -14. Nothing fell off. Ever. For a 2.5 24v V6, average tanks of 27mpg were great. It was more reliable than the Mondeo I had before the 156, and the (7 year younger) Saab that I have now. It gave me 60,000 miles of joyous, trouble free motoring, and it was no garage queen. It lived outside, drove on and off building sites all day long, and cost me £2000 to buy. It regularly had boats on the roof and back seats full of tools, toys, kids or general st.
This repeated ste that Alfas are poorly screwed together is a Top Gear-ism that needs to die. Or, keep it up, carry on driving Golfs, A3s and french ste, and leave the under-reputationed cars to those in the know.
OP buy one, they're great, the engine is a peach, and it's not a VAG, a TDi, or any form of "economybluelinegreenfin" special.
Agreed. A friend of mine's entire family are Alfa nuts - they have things like SUDs, 75 V6s, GT Juniors, plus an SZ between them. Seems like the cars are as good and bad as any other car really. They don't suffer any monstrous problems.I had a similar era 6-pot 156, one of the really "fiat-y" ones. It started every single time at temps of up to (down to?) -14. Nothing fell off. Ever. For a 2.5 24v V6, average tanks of 27mpg were great. It was more reliable than the Mondeo I had before the 156, and the (7 year younger) Saab that I have now. It gave me 60,000 miles of joyous, trouble free motoring, and it was no garage queen. It lived outside, drove on and off building sites all day long, and cost me £2000 to buy. It regularly had boats on the roof and back seats full of tools, toys, kids or general s
t.This repeated s
te that Alfas are poorly screwed together is a Top Gear-ism that needs to die. Or, keep it up, carry on driving Golfs, A3s and french ste, and leave the under-reputationed cars to those in the know. OP buy one, they're great, the engine is a peach, and it's not a VAG, a TDi, or any form of "economybluelinegreenfin" special.
Plus an ex G/F's brother had a V6 156, which, like yours, was a fairly well used and abused daily drive. It never went wrong at all...
Olivera said:
OP, if you have an E92 BMW then I simply wouldn't bother with a wobbly old GTV with a boat anchor slung out over the driven wheels. Stick with what you've got or buy something that really is more enjoyable to drive.
Did you drive one though? It's a lot less wobbly than a V12 XJS With the Q2 diff it is regarded as a superb chassis - and with a few subtle mods can be ~240 bhp.
Really can't see the issue
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff