RE: Alfa Romeo Giulia: UK Review
Discussion
s m said:
Performance is not really anything new - it no doubt offers more interior space but ( if you believe the published Alfa weight figure ) BMW offered that sort of performance in an E36 ( saloon, touring or cabrio model ) 20 years ago
The new Clio 220 Trophy has around 220 bhp and regardless of its actual size, is regarded as a small hatchback (B segment if i remember correctly). It does 0-60 in 6.6 seconds.So, a 3-series rivaling saloon that can do the same dash to 60 with 20 less bhp is pretty impressive in my eyes. That's the point i was trying to make. That's progress to me.
Sadly this Alfa looks like a BMW with all its teeth pulled out.
And buying any Alfa new seems to be a form of financial suicide.
Shame, have an 82 GTV6 which I love, rust and all. Have had a diesel Sportwagon and a petrol version, which went on fire one dark night on the motorway.
Always carry a fire extinguisher.
Currently running diesel A4 which is plain and ugly, but more comfortable than the Alfa and pokier and has a better sound system.
Had recent spin in GTA 156 3.2 - proper Alfa, proper noise, bit tacky looking with all the skirts but goes rightly..
And buying any Alfa new seems to be a form of financial suicide.
Shame, have an 82 GTV6 which I love, rust and all. Have had a diesel Sportwagon and a petrol version, which went on fire one dark night on the motorway.
Always carry a fire extinguisher.
Currently running diesel A4 which is plain and ugly, but more comfortable than the Alfa and pokier and has a better sound system.
Had recent spin in GTA 156 3.2 - proper Alfa, proper noise, bit tacky looking with all the skirts but goes rightly..
culpz said:
s m said:
Performance is not really anything new - it no doubt offers more interior space but ( if you believe the published Alfa weight figure ) BMW offered that sort of performance in an E36 ( saloon, touring or cabrio model ) 20 years ago
The new Clio 220 Trophy has around 220 bhp and regardless of its actual size, is regarded as a small hatchback (B segment if i remember correctly). It does 0-60 in 6.6 seconds.So, a 3-series rivaling saloon that can do the same dash to 60 with 20 less bhp is pretty impressive in my eyes. That's the point i was trying to make. That's progress to me.
To illustrate, the Lancia Thema Turbo from 1989 was a big turbo saloon from 1989, weighed 1375kg, and was a front wheel drive scrabbler - timed at 6.8 to 60 and 142mph with 185bhp.
The old E39 528i, similarly big, a rwd saloon from 1996, 1500kg and 193bhp, timed at 6.8 and 142mph.
The Carlton GSI 24v, big rwd saloon from 1990, 204bhp, 1480kg - timed at 6.6 and 149mph
That's why the performance of a rwd Giulia saloon with 200bhp , 1350kg and ( according to all press about the 8-sp auto ) a fast shifting autobox doesn't seem that impressive to me - that it can do 62 in 6.6, It's basically what I'd expect a reasonably sporting rwd saloon of that weight and power to run. A similarly heavy 3-series with less bhp could do the 60 dash in half a second less 20 years back
Of course it may prove to be faster in real life tests and be more economical in everyday usage - I shall await the tests. The possible economy improvement and handling is the progress to me ......not the all out performance
Ruskins said:
What an utter load of crap! Anyone who sits in the drivers seat and thinks the "touch points" are nasty must spend their lives living a silk lined bubble. The wheel is exactly the right size, the paddles are lovely bits of metal and the seats are in exactly the right place.
I think this must be standard blurb regurgitated by every road test journo - it's an Alfa, so it therefore the interior won't be as good as the German rivals.I had a very good look around one in the showroom a couple of weeks ago, and I thought it was really very nice inside. I was there buying a Giulietta, and all the road tests on that will tell you that the interior is no match for a Golf. Well I looked at Golfs etc before I chose the Alfa, and that statement is b
ks, the Alfa is a lovely place to be.I think the Giulia looks a much sleeker piece of design in the metal than in photos for some reason too.
s m said:
Hmmmm, I guess I remember older cars of roughly the same size and weight that had this type of performance going back 20 or 30 years.
To illustrate, the Lancia Thema Turbo from 1989 was a big turbo saloon from 1989, weighed 1375kg, and was a front wheel drive scrabbler - timed at 6.8 to 60 and 142mph with 185bhp.
The old E39 528i, similarly big, a rwd saloon from 1996, 1500kg and 193bhp, timed at 6.8 and 142mph.
The Carlton GSI 24v, big rwd saloon from 1990, 204bhp, 1480kg - timed at 6.6 and 149mph
That's why the performance of a rwd Giulia saloon with 200bhp , 1350kg and ( according to all press about the 8-sp auto ) a fast shifting autobox doesn't seem that impressive to me - that it can do 62 in 6.6, It's basically what I'd expect a reasonably sporting rwd saloon of that weight and power to run. A similarly heavy 3-series with less bhp could do the 60 dash in half a second less 20 years back
Of course it may prove to be faster in real life tests and be more economical in everyday usage - I shall await the tests. The possible economy improvement and handling is the progress to me ......not the all out performance
I do see where you're coming from. My perspective is just a comparison from new to new whereas you're coming from an old to new angle.To illustrate, the Lancia Thema Turbo from 1989 was a big turbo saloon from 1989, weighed 1375kg, and was a front wheel drive scrabbler - timed at 6.8 to 60 and 142mph with 185bhp.
The old E39 528i, similarly big, a rwd saloon from 1996, 1500kg and 193bhp, timed at 6.8 and 142mph.
The Carlton GSI 24v, big rwd saloon from 1990, 204bhp, 1480kg - timed at 6.6 and 149mph
That's why the performance of a rwd Giulia saloon with 200bhp , 1350kg and ( according to all press about the 8-sp auto ) a fast shifting autobox doesn't seem that impressive to me - that it can do 62 in 6.6, It's basically what I'd expect a reasonably sporting rwd saloon of that weight and power to run. A similarly heavy 3-series with less bhp could do the 60 dash in half a second less 20 years back
Of course it may prove to be faster in real life tests and be more economical in everyday usage - I shall await the tests. The possible economy improvement and handling is the progress to me ......not the all out performance
Looking at the older cars then i understand that, in your mind, it's nothing new or special. But, to me, in a modern world of a newer age of motor cars, it looks pretty good.
What i like about this petrol Giulia is that it appears much better and faster than the diesel equivalent. In every day driving, i'm sure the derv will keep up without a fuss, but that torque figure appears to be very impressive and is very diesel-like with all the benefits of it being a petrol. In my eyes, that has to be celebrated.
Nothing remarkable generally in most cars' performance figures. They're a function of power, weight, gearing, traction and aerodynamics. Once you know those you should find cars with similar characteristics achieve similar results.
200bhp and 1400kg equalling circa 145mph and 6.5-7 seconds to 62 is about as surprising as broken eggs in a frying pan becoming an omelette!
200bhp and 1400kg equalling circa 145mph and 6.5-7 seconds to 62 is about as surprising as broken eggs in a frying pan becoming an omelette!
s m said:
Performance is not really anything new - it no doubt offers more interior space but ( if you believe the published Alfa weight figure ) BMW offered that sort of performance in an E36 ( saloon, touring or cabrio model ) 20 years ago
I hate doing this, but I tried to find some info and couldn't find a confirmation that E36 with the entry level 2.0l petrol engine offered that sort of performance. Unless one goes into 6-cylinder top range models with E36, and in this case we should compare them to Veloce I think. But I will be happy to be corrected.Even more - cars 20 years ago weren't restrained by all the emission limitations that dictate a nature of the engine performance these days. IT was Euro 1 20 years ago, just starting to move into Euro 2. And these days we have Euro 6
Not to mention the fuel consumption difference.
janesmith1950 said:
200bhp and 1400kg equalling circa 145mph and 6.5-7 seconds to 62 is about as surprising as broken eggs in a frying pan becoming an omelette!
A modern medium-sized saloon that weighs 1400kg is good going on it's own. Especially in a modern car, jam-packed with all the latest tech and safety features and an auto gearbox.It's modern hot hatch pace. How is that not impressive?
Denorth said:
s m said:
Performance is not really anything new - it no doubt offers more interior space but ( if you believe the published Alfa weight figure ) BMW offered that sort of performance in an E36 ( saloon, touring or cabrio model ) 20 years ago
( went on to say )
I guess I remember older cars of roughly the same size and weight that had this type of performance going back 20 or 30 years.
To illustrate, the Lancia Thema Turbo from 1989 was a big turbo saloon from 1989, weighed 1375kg, and was a front wheel drive scrabbler - timed at 6.8 to 60 and 142mph with 185bhp.
The old E39 528i, similarly big, a rwd saloon from 1996, 1500kg and 193bhp, timed at 6.8 and 142mph.
The Carlton GSI 24v, big rwd saloon from 1990, 204bhp, 1480kg - timed at 6.6 and 149mph
That's why the performance of a rwd Giulia saloon with 200bhp , 1350kg and ( according to all press about the 8-sp auto ) a fast shifting autobox doesn't seem that impressive to me - that it can do 62 in 6.6, It's basically what I'd expect a reasonably sporting rwd saloon of that weight and power to run. A similarly heavy 3-series with less bhp could do the 60 dash in half a second less 20 years back
Of course it may prove to be faster in real life tests and be more economical in everyday usage - I shall await the tests. The possible economy improvement and handling is the progress to me ......not the all out performance
I hate doing this, but I tried to find some info and couldn't find a confirmation that E36 with the entry level 2.0l petrol engine offered that sort of performance. Unless one goes into 6-cylinder top range models with E36, and in this case we should compare them to Veloce I think. But I will be happy to be corrected.( went on to say )
I guess I remember older cars of roughly the same size and weight that had this type of performance going back 20 or 30 years.
To illustrate, the Lancia Thema Turbo from 1989 was a big turbo saloon from 1989, weighed 1375kg, and was a front wheel drive scrabbler - timed at 6.8 to 60 and 142mph with 185bhp.
The old E39 528i, similarly big, a rwd saloon from 1996, 1500kg and 193bhp, timed at 6.8 and 142mph.
The Carlton GSI 24v, big rwd saloon from 1990, 204bhp, 1480kg - timed at 6.6 and 149mph
That's why the performance of a rwd Giulia saloon with 200bhp , 1350kg and ( according to all press about the 8-sp auto ) a fast shifting autobox doesn't seem that impressive to me - that it can do 62 in 6.6, It's basically what I'd expect a reasonably sporting rwd saloon of that weight and power to run. A similarly heavy 3-series with less bhp could do the 60 dash in half a second less 20 years back
Of course it may prove to be faster in real life tests and be more economical in everyday usage - I shall await the tests. The possible economy improvement and handling is the progress to me ......not the all out performance
Even more - cars 20 years ago weren't restrained by all the emission limitations that dictate a nature of the engine performance these days. IT was Euro 1 20 years ago, just starting to move into Euro 2. And these days we have Euro 6
Not to mention the fuel consumption difference.
Alfa are saying this car weighs 1430kg ish with a driver? So roughly 1350-1360kg without?
Autocar timed a 1391kg 328i Touring with 193bhp and 206lb ft of torque at 6.1 to 60 ( 14/6/1995 issue )
They timed a 4-door saloon 328i ( same engine ) but weighing 1350kg ( the same as quoted for this Alfa ) at 6.4 to 60 ( 30/09/1995 issue )
These had manual boxes, 205 rear tyres in the case of the 328 saloon, plus very basic traction management compared to modern cars.
As I said ( I've added the rest of my reply above ), the emissions compliance and ( hopefully ) economy will be the impressive thing to me......but the performance for a 1350kg saloon with rwd and 200bhp is, to me, simply expected.
If those are the real performance figures ( and as I said they may be underplaying them or the weight is actually much more, as with the Alfa 4c ) I don't find them surprising at all. We'll see what they really do soon I expect. It'll be great if they can release a few manual ones somehow for future second hand buyers
So far on here I've heard about this new car not having the build quality of German cars, what will be poor residuals and other negative points but I've not heard anybody mention the Alfa dealer network.
You can build the best car in the world but if you don't have the best staff in the world to maintain it, it won't remain so. I love Alfas as classic cars and as a toy to have in the garage but there is no way I'd run one as my daily drive.
You can build the best car in the world but if you don't have the best staff in the world to maintain it, it won't remain so. I love Alfas as classic cars and as a toy to have in the garage but there is no way I'd run one as my daily drive.
s m said:
The comparison I was making was cars of a similar weight, drivetrain configuration and power so you won't find an E36 2 litre turbo ( or naturally aspirated ) that makes 200bhp....HOWEVER they did produce some 1350kg -> 1400kg cars that did similar figures in 1996/1997. They were 2.8 litres but then if you are comparing a 2 litre turbo petrol to a naturally aspirated engine the equivalency would be 1:1.4 approx ( i.e a 2 litre turbo petrol should compete roughly with a 2.8 litre natuarally aspirated petrol ) - certainly used to be around that in motorsport classification
...
thank you for clarification (sorry, for not quoting your whole post). Very helpful....
I think it is fair to say that while, as you said, those numbers 'are expected' one remark is still actual: 328i was top of the range model and 2.0 petrol is the entry level for Giulia.
328i was pumping out 218g/km (243g/km with auto) and Giulia shows 138g/km with auto, so there is definitely progress we see and at the same time the emission progress restricts engines.
Then again, does ordinary driver need anything faster than that? it's a big question.
Edited by Denorth on Friday 17th March 13:15
V6Alfisti said:
The 2.0 is reviewed in the latest Evo, gets a rather strong 4.5/5.
This is probably the worst review I have read of the Giulia, and most I have read are gushingly positive and put it firmly near the top of the pile. Each to their own.
Yes, the EVO review was very positive - it would be good, as Adam Towler says, if they can phase in a manual box at some point in the future - even if it isn't a big seller compared to the auto. One of those coupled with the Performance Pack ( LSD ) would be a nice secondhand buy, something for the poorer enthusiast to hunt out in the marketplace in 5 years time.This is probably the worst review I have read of the Giulia, and most I have read are gushingly positive and put it firmly near the top of the pile. Each to their own.
Shambler said:
Ex Boy Racer said:
I just have to say something about your disappointment that you can't 'oppo' it even though it's RWD. Once again promoting and perpetuating this stupidity.
This obsession with opposite lock is just getting silly. The appeal of RWD is that the front wheels do the steering and not the driving. This gives a much more satisfying, cleaner, more sensitive feel to the steering and handling. It also allows slight changes to the balance of over/understeer by using the throttle.
It's not about getting the car sideways on a public road like the journalists do in their pictures.
Surely the thread that used to be on PH where a guy killed someone while sideways and then did time should make you pause for thought before you start promoting a dangerous behaviour that has no place on a public road. They don't even allow it on track days!!!!
I agree. I believe Dan tries too hard to appeal to the stereotypical "Clarkson" fan. This is evident earlier in the article with the usual Audi comments. Dan is obviously a talented writer and his videos are getting better and better but unfortunately articles such as this don't come across that great. This obsession with opposite lock is just getting silly. The appeal of RWD is that the front wheels do the steering and not the driving. This gives a much more satisfying, cleaner, more sensitive feel to the steering and handling. It also allows slight changes to the balance of over/understeer by using the throttle.
It's not about getting the car sideways on a public road like the journalists do in their pictures.
Surely the thread that used to be on PH where a guy killed someone while sideways and then did time should make you pause for thought before you start promoting a dangerous behaviour that has no place on a public road. They don't even allow it on track days!!!!
Grow out of this ridiculous fascination with losing the back end. It's not fast, or wise.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff