RE: Shed of the Week: Alfa Romeo 166

[GJR68]

Don't know where the article get's the idea V6 Busso's use oil...they don't. The Twinnies however do.......like it's going out of fashion.

[boyse7en]

I've had a 3.0 V6 Super for 11 years now, putting about 60k on the clock in that time.
It's swift, sounds great, and doesn't use oil.
Apart from normal service items it has needed a new MAF, new lambda sensor, new front wishbones and bottom arms, a couple of replacement door locks, an electric window motor and thats about it.
Never let me down on the side of the road. never failed to get home, and never yet had to use the AA/RAC to sort it out.
On the negative side it likes a drink (average 21mpg) and the beautiful Rosso Corso paint has faded badly and the lacquer is peeling off badly.

I'd buy that one today if it wasn't in NI

[only1ian]

A complete leather interior can be had for sub £400 i would swap out the velour and waft around in a comfortably preworn replacement until the preverbilal cows that made it came home. Good shed if you have a specialist nearby.

[AlMaher]

Now that is funny, Volvo man saying an Alfa is uninspiring!!! Ha!

[AC43]

Pickled said:

X5TUU said:

That's because the picture is not raw it's been enhanced with all kind of messy HDR, Ambiance and Saturation interference

No HDR on that photo - just a tweak of contrast, and it had just been washed and waxed

Exactly. It's sprezzatura on wheels, that one. Makes me want one even more.

[only1ian]

J4CKO said:

VolvoT5 said:

No, it doesn't even have leather ffs.

I think it is time for SOTW to have a mix up, perhaps increase the budget to £1500 or something...... The last few choices have been incredibly uninspiring.

I dont get the complete fascination with Leather seats, completely ignoring the Alfa and V6 bits.

Budget airlines have leather seats, it isnt the epitome of class these days.

Alfa interior leather of this age was a thing of real quality!

[unsprung]

article said:

once described his 166 as having more electrical problems than North Korea

[beautifulbusso]

Ive always liked the 166, I've thought about buying one several times but found the car far to big than what I needed. I think my ideal spec would be a facelift 166 Ti with the 3.2 Busso engine though

I also own the great grandfather of the his 166, the Alfa 90 and I have noticed that the traits of the 166 are found in the earlier 90.

Pics of the 90 if anyone is interested....

[Spindoctor]

I had one of these from new, bought as a company car so when the £26k list price became about £13k resale value a year later I wasn't too bothered.

But it was a joy to drive - manual, 2.5 V6. The interior(non-leather in my case and therefore no risk of ice-shocked buttocks on winter mornings) was great, it looked fabulous from the outside, electrics worked and the engine is a thing of beauty. I did a daily 80-mile round trip in it for 4 years and the only time it let me down was when the gear linkage broke and the clutch died in one very forgettable night. Otherwise it was faultless and it actually made me enjoy the daily commute.

What's that saying - everyone should own an Alfa at least once in their life. Yep.

[Yacht Broker]

This is my old nail (3.0 V6 Super)... bought on a whim when i was a bit hungover... was a bit of lemon and even after i took the trader to account, it still proceeded to fall to pieces... BUT, on the days when it worked properly, it was truly sublime. I even quite liked the vaguely camp flip colour.

[rtz62]

beautifulbusso said:

Ive always liked the 166, I've thought about buying one several times but found the car far to big than what I needed. I think my ideal spec would be a facelift 166 Ti with the 3.2 Busso engine though

I also own the great grandfather of the his 166, the Alfa 90 and I have noticed that the traits of the 166 are found in the earlier 90.

Pics of the 90 if anyone is interested....

Alfa Really mei 90; wasn't that the one they actually built less than 60,000 of and caused Alfa financial problems?
I'm not saying the car wasn't half-decent, and I'm sure it had a sort of handbag (??) integrated into it somehow, but to met the only engine worth talking about was the one you have, 156bhp back then wasn't to be sniffed at.
Shame it had to push the aerodynamic equivalent of a brick through the air though..l!
Still, I wouldn't mind one at all

[smilo996]

Great and understated shed. Must grin like a Cheshire cat driving that.

[MarkPhillipson]

I have one of these (a 2.5 V6). It uses a little oil but not much. The sound is brilliant - so different from my 156 2.5 V6 with the same engine - more wafty and laid-back. They're not economical but the sense of occasion and style is out of all proportion to what they cost. I really don't know why everyone isn't driving around in one...... PS Yacht-man - your car looks fantastic; it's no nail, I love the colour - well done.

Edited by MarkPhillipson on Friday 4th March 19:47

Edited by MarkPhillipson on Friday 4th March 19:52

[matt5791]

I had a 166 exactly like this one - 2.5 V6 manual. It was fantastic to drive, with superb steering. The engine was very reliable and sounded wonderful.

It didn't suffer any electrical issues and was a very reliable car all round - it was a few years ago, but I can't honestly remember any issues.

When I came to sell it, I advertised it on Ebay - this was around 2005 - and sold it within 24 hours. Had a huge amount of interest.

[Mr Tidy]

Lovely looking cars, and that V6 sounds fantastic!

I really have no need of one and thankfully I am not a fearless company director type, so I will avoid the classifieds.....I really will!

[WarnieV6GT]

Just to add as well that V6's don't use much oil. Mine uses sod all between services. I drove the 3.0 V6 auto whilst mine was being worked on and to be honest in auto mode it was crap. It was only 200bhp down on my 3.2 but felt like a 100 bhp down. The kickdown was awful, then I flicked it over to manual mode and the thing flew. Great cars that feel solid and are quite nice inside although I found the seating position too high for such a low dash design.

[405dogvan]

Back in the teeth of the scrappage scheme (so late 2009 IIRC?) I was offered an MOT failure 166 V6 for £500 - looking it over (it as a 04 IIRC - so not 6-years-old), I was ASTONISHED how cheaply made/rotten it was underneath - it's failure was due to rot around suspension mounts tho it was rusting most everywhere and the way petrol prices were going, a V6 was never going to resell so I passed.

I was reminded of this yesterday looking-over a 159 a mate was repairing - it was rusty-as-hell around some of it's mounting points, the coating on things like engine mounts was gone and one of the bonnet bung/stops was actually gone because the metal it was screwed-to was completely rusted out!!

SO much as I love how these things look - you need to take a long, hard look under the thing because you might be Flintstonesing the thing sooner than you might imagine - they ain't made to last...

[PoopahScoopah]

405dogvan said:

Back in the teeth of the scrappage scheme (so late 2009 IIRC?) I was offered an MOT failure 166 V6 for £500 - looking it over (it as a 04 IIRC - so not 6-years-old), I was ASTONISHED how cheaply made/rotten it was underneath - it's failure was due to rot around suspension mounts tho it was rusting most everywhere and the way petrol prices were going, a V6 was never going to resell so I passed.

I was reminded of this yesterday looking-over a 159 a mate was repairing - it was rusty-as-hell around some of it's mounting points, the coating on things like engine mounts was gone and one of the bonnet bung/stops was actually gone because the metal it was screwed-to was completely rusted out!!

SO much as I love how these things look - you need to take a long, hard look under the thing because you might be Flintstonesing the thing sooner than you might imagine - they ain't made to last...

Like with any car model, there are lemons, and sounds like that was one. 166s fair much much better in the rust dept than 156s and are very sturdy beasts. At the age they are now of course rust is becoming an issue but they are still better than many of their peers of a similar age. The old preconceptions of Alfas being rusty and unreliable are not true for the 166, but there's always someone with a story about how they owned a shocker.

[Brompty]

TurboHatchback said:

That is good shed right there, looks like it should cost much more than it does.

It will, don't worry.

"It's a perfectly practical option that needn't empty your wallet." C'mon, this is optimistic - this will cost a fortune.

But a great looking car. It is one of those cars that is not photogenic, so when I see one in the flesh I always stop. The facelifted version is fantastic looking and is rare. My worry would be getting it fixed when something does go wrong, as the parts are not that easy to get hold of.

A top SOTW

[iSore]

PoopahScoopah said:

Like with any car model, there are lemons, and sounds like that was one. 166s fair much much better in the rust dept than 156s and are very sturdy beasts. At the age they are now of course rust is becoming an issue but they are still better than many of their peers of a similar age. The old preconceptions of Alfas being rusty and unreliable are not true for the 166, but there's always someone with a story about how they owned a shocker.

Not really. Alfa seemed to stop undersealing cars around 2004 - 156's can be just the same. Mind you, I've seen 2003 E39's needing loads of welding underneath and 166's are not expensive cars.