Alfa Romeo Recommendations

Author
Discussion

SpamCan

Original Poster:

5,026 posts

217 months

Monday 30th January 2017
quotequote all
Alfa Romeo gurus of PH it is time to offer your advice to a potential future Alfa Romeo owner.

Within the next week or so my 2006 Mustang GT will go up for sale (I want to fly more and to be frank £200pcm on fuel alone is not helping that), however I don’t want something that is totally humdrum. Yes I will miss the power of the Mustang, the effortless big V8 and the dynamics of a RWD car but I will manage I am sure. A mate of mine has his second Alfa at the moment; 159 V6 AWD Lusso spec and in the past had a 147 1.9 diesel, again Lusso spec and has enjoyed both. My parents urge me to buy a Lexus but the cars in my price range don’t offer me the fuel economy I want (even the dealer has said buy the IS250 over the 220d) nor the MP3 compatibility.

I have a £4000 budget, though I might go a smidge higher to get the right car if I have to. I do not want to make any monthly payments. I am looking for fuel economy in the 40mpg+ range (my current steed gives me between 18 and 20) so no big petrol engines unfortunately. Most of the time there is just me in the car and one other person. Three (including me) on limited numbers of occasions so I am not against having a smaller car but a larger one is better, no large coupes (had enough of massive doors) though.

Auto or manual, auto preferred but I am fine with a manual if the automatic gearbox that is available on the better model is pap.

My commute to and from work is ~12 miles. Its roughly half 30/40 speed limits (during the morning its always flowing easily and on an evening it’s a little slow but never stop start traffic) and half fast A-roads and DCs (NSL) where the speed is usually 45 – 50mph, occasionally I might get up to the speed limit.

Anything else that is suggested it needs to be able to read MP3s from an SD card or USB thumb drive, or the stereo needs to be able to be easily replaced with one that can. I am not interested in being able to use MP3 CDs (it’s a faf), AUX cables with an MP3 player or my phone as that means having to install a cradle so that I can skip albums/tracks.

I’m not ready to buy the car just yet (Mustang needs to be sold first) but I am looking for options and opinions on what to look at and what to look for.

The shortlist so far:
159
1.9 or 2.0 JTD, would the 2.4 diesel give me the economy that I want?
I doubt the petrol engines that are available on this model would give me the economy I need but am I going to be stuck with DPF and EGR woes if I go diesel? A faulty parking distance sensor being the only issue with my mates current 159.

147
1.9 JTD (pre-dpf) or newer 1.6 T-spark, the former will get me the MPG’s, the latter I have no idea. I know the control arms are chocolate on these if you are doing any sort of mileage. My mate had very little trouble with his 2003 147: a new battery, a few blown bulbs, a perished rear washer pipe and a broken wiper motor mount (early ones were plastic, later they were metal I understand) everything else was just servicing.

MiTo
It is small (not that much smaller than the 147 though) but it is in my price range so I cannot discount it off hand. 1.4 petrol or 1.3 diesel, though will the latter give me EGR and DPF issues and will the turbocharged petrol engines give me the fuel economy I want?

Over to the PH Alfa Gurus. Thanks.

Edited by SpamCan on Monday 30th January 13:13

SmudgeQ4

26 posts

99 months

Monday 30th January 2017
quotequote all
SpamCan said:
Alfa Romeo gurus of PH it is time to offer your advice to a potential future Alfa Romeo owner.

Within the next week or so my 2006 Mustang GT will go up for sale (I want to fly more and to be frank £200pcm on fuel alone is not helping that), however I don’t want something that is totally humdrum. Yes I will miss the power of the Mustang, the effortless big V8 and the dynamics of a RWD car but I will manage I am sure. A mate of mine has his second Alfa at the moment; 159 V6 AWD Lusso spec and in the past had a 147 1.9 diesel, again Lusso spec and has enjoyed both. My parents urge me to buy a Lexus but the cars in my price range don’t offer me the fuel economy I want (even the dealer has said buy the IS250 over the 220d) nor the MP3 compatibility.

I have a £4000 budget, though I might go a smidge higher to get the right car if I have to. I do not want to make any monthly payments. I am looking for fuel economy in the 40mpg+ range (my current steed gives me between 18 and 20) so no big petrol engines unfortunately. Most of the time there is just me in the car and one other person. Three (including me) on limited numbers of occasions so I am not against having a smaller car but a larger one is better, no large coupes (had enough of massive doors) though.

Auto or manual, auto preferred but I am fine with a manual if the automatic gearbox that is available on the better model is pap.

My commute to and from work is ~12 miles. Its roughly half 30/40 speed limits (during the morning its always flowing easily and on an evening it’s a little slow but never stop start traffic) and half fast A-roads and DCs (NSL) where the speed is usually 45 – 50mph, occasionally I might get up to the speed limit.

Anything else that is suggested it needs to be able to read MP3s from an SD card or USB thumb drive, or the stereo needs to be able to be easily replaced with one that can. I am not interested in being able to use MP3 CDs (it’s a faf), AUX cables with an MP3 player or my phone as that means having to install a cradle so that I can skip albums/tracks.

I’m not ready to buy the car just yet (Mustang needs to be sold first) but I am looking for options and opinions on what to look at and what to look for.

The shortlist so far:
159
1.9 or 2.0 JTD, would the 2.4 diesel give me the economy that I want?
I doubt the petrol engines that are available on this model would give me the economy I need but am I going to be stuck with DPF and EGR woes if I go diesel? A faulty parking distance sensor being the only issue with my mates current 159.

147
1.9 JTD (pre-dpf) or newer 1.6 T-spark, the former will get me the MPG’s, the latter I have no idea. I know the control arms are chocolate on these if you are doing any sort of mileage. My mate had very little trouble with his 2003 147: a new battery, a few blown bulbs, a perished rear washer pipe and a broken wiper motor mount (early ones were plastic, later they were metal I understand) everything else was just servicing.

MiTo
It is small (not that much smaller than the 147 though) but it is in my price range so I cannot discount it off hand. 1.4 petrol or 1.3 diesel, though will the latter give me EGR and DPF issues and will the turbocharged petrol engines give me the fuel economy I want?

Over to the PH Alfa Gurus. Thanks.

Edited by SpamCan on Monday 30th January 13:13
Hi, i'll start, wont be too much help but will serve as a bump!

All suggested would work with your mileage I think, but can only talk form my experience from my 159. Some good cars out there in that budget, lusso or a leggy Ti maybe.

1.9 - 2.0 engines easily 40mpg plus (may struggle for 2.0 in budget), I average 38 in my 2.4 which is 20 mile mixed run commute so i think that's the most optimistic i'm going to get. Egr/DFPGone/mapped so I do boot it a bit mind, id stump for the 2.4 personally.

Connectivity is a hard one because some out there now will have aftermarket head units or standard. Blueandme come standard on 159s I believe and give you connectivity through bluetooth.

Maybe consider a nice GT too as they look good, frugal and within budget.

Johnny 89

824 posts

151 months

Monday 30th January 2017
quotequote all
I would take the 159 from your list but as above, you should also consider a GT. I average around 40mpg in mine.

Vitorio

4,296 posts

142 months

Tuesday 31st January 2017
quotequote all
SpamCan said:
147
1.9 JTD (pre-dpf) or newer 1.6 T-spark, the former will get me the MPG’s, the latter I have no idea. I know the control arms are chocolate on these if you are doing any sort of mileage. My mate had very little trouble with his 2003 147: a new battery, a few blown bulbs, a perished rear washer pipe and a broken wiper motor mount (early ones were plastic, later they were metal I understand) everything else was just servicing.

MiTo
It is small (not that much smaller than the 147 though) but it is in my price range so I cannot discount it off hand. 1.4 petrol or 1.3 diesel, though will the latter give me EGR and DPF issues and will the turbocharged petrol engines give me the fuel economy I want?
Currently run a 2002 1.6 TS 147, ive done roughly 8K miles in it in the past 10 months, and its been good. It was a bit leggy when i got it (120K on the clock), so the TS lump does use some oil (~1L/2K miles), being the 105hp model its not the fastest car out there, but you can find models with nice toys (mines got cruise and climate control), and they are a nice place to be in, and handle pretty damn well. MPGs arent brilliant mind you, but i wouldnt drive something german/japanese for slightly improved economy.

Ive also ran two mitos (both new, company lease). fuel economy on the 1.4T engines was worse then the 1.6 TS, both of those cars were at 32 MPG in normal usage (although i do like a spirited drive). The 147 will do 38-40 on the same type of trips. Also worth noting is that while the mito isnt that much smaller then a 147, it is essentially a grande punto with an alfa make-over, the seats are quite a bit worse, the interior feels narrower, and the rear seat is quite cramped compared to a 147. Also, i really didnt like that some mitos come with a 5 speed. (my first was a 155hp 6 speed, the second a 135hp 5 speed). Its been quite a while (6 years or so) since ive driven a mito, but to me the handling of the 147 seems better (the rear axle on the mito is quite jumpy over ridges for instance)

To me the only argument in favor of a mito is the newer looks (which i like very much), and potentially the newer engines (TS lumps require a bit more care), otherwise i'd have a 147 every day of the week, its just a bigger car, and while plenty will bite my head of for this, a proper alfa, rather then a fiat in drag.

SpamCan

Original Poster:

5,026 posts

217 months

Wednesday 1st February 2017
quotequote all
Thanks for the responses.

If I decide to sell the mustang (having serious second thoughts) the 147 and the 159 will be the cars I look at.

stuart_83

1,002 posts

100 months

Tuesday 7th February 2017
quotequote all
SpamCan said:
Thanks for the responses.

If I decide to sell the mustang (having serious second thoughts) the 147 and the 159 will be the cars I look at.
Don't underestimate the GT. Same underpinnings as the 156 SW, but shares the interior (and some panels) from the 147.

Had one for a while, fantastic car, and a proper head turner.

No DPF in the diesel either, unlike the 159.

chrisga

2,087 posts

186 months

Tuesday 7th February 2017
quotequote all
We have two diesel alfas. A 147 8v lusso and a 159 2.4ti. If you're doing big mileage longer journeys I'd take the 159 everyday. It feels a lot more solid. But..... The 147 does about 45mpg and the 159 about 35mpg (ours only does a few long runs a week). The 147 is a nice place to be for a (now) cheap car. We've had the 147 for 4 years and I just use it as my commuter but in that time nothing has gone wrong that wouldn't have in any other car, as you say suspension arms made from spaghetti excepted. We had a 156 before that and again, no reliability issues other than fair wear and tear.

Not had the 159 long enough to comment on its reliability but it seems fairly well screwed together so far. As a previous poster, ours has had a few of the diesel "extras" removed and as soon as we can afford it we will have the swirl flaps deleted too. Look out for that on alfa's from about 07 onwards I think. They are in the manifold and some engines have plastic ones and some metal. They can fail and end up being ingested which is expensive but worse if the metal type. Swirl flap info here : http://www.autolusso.co.uk/swirl-flap.html

Not convinced how many failures actually happen as it was a garage recommending we have ours done so they may have been partially touting for work but just something to be aware of.

Never driven a mito so can't comment, but personally the looks don't do anything for me but that's subjective of course - you may love them.

Nigel_O

2,858 posts

218 months

Tuesday 7th February 2017
quotequote all
Another (biased) vote for the GT - mine averages 46mpg on a horrible commute. Looks good, handles well and is surprisingly practical.

Responds extremely well to a remap - I'm at about 160bhp, as I went for economy, but 170-180 is quite easy

Oh, and it has done over 220,000 miles, so reliability is decent too....

woody166

251 posts

107 months

Wednesday 8th February 2017
quotequote all
The GT is a good call. Relatively practicable for a coupe and quite robust and reliable.

The 159, it will be the 1.9 JTD or 2.4 on that budget. The 2.0 were later cars and will be a bit more pricey.

The 1.9JTD has the M32 Gearbox which is notoriously weak. Kick back when pulling off in first gear is a sign of potential failure. The EGR and DPF are problematic like most diesels of that era, particularly if used for short journey only. Economy is ok, expect low to middle 40's.
The 2.4 is a brilliant engine with few weaknesses and can be mapped to pretty impressive performance figures. Economy will be low 30's , not great for a diesel.

159's also can have suspension problems. Tracking issues will chew through tyres in less than 10k. It can be sorted though.

rxe

6,700 posts

102 months

Thursday 9th February 2017
quotequote all
My view - I have 156s, GTs and a 159....and drive lots of 147s.

159 2.4 is a great car, but unless you drive it like a saint, you'll be lucky to see 40+ mpg. More like 36 - 9 driven normally. It's better on very long motorway journeys. 1.9 is better, but not by a vast amount. The 159 is a big, heavy car, it shows in the refinement .... and it shows in the fuel consumption.

146/156/GT - lighter cars, 1.9s or 2.4s are much more economical - 40+ pretty easily. My father in law claims 60 on a long run in his 1.9 GT, but he drives like a pussy.

All of the diesels remap well. 260 HP for the later 20v, 200 or so for the older 20vs and about 190 for the 10v. That's software only. They will eat clutches if you use the torque.

GT and a 147 are indistinguishable from the drivers seat, apart from the smaller doors on the 147. They're fundamentally the same car - the interiors are literally identical (I have 147 leather interior in my GT....)

So - if your objective is economy, get a 147, GT or 156 diesel, 2.4 or 1.9. If you want to do loads of long distance motorway - a 159 1.9 is good, 2.4 is better, but higher diesel cost. If you are doing medium runs on a and b roads, get a 147 or a GT - it will be a better drive.




SpamCan

Original Poster:

5,026 posts

217 months

Friday 10th February 2017
quotequote all
Thanks again, more food for thought thumbup

I like the looks of the GT, another added to the list of cars to look it if I can bring myself to part with the Mustang at any point smile.

Vitorio

4,296 posts

142 months

Friday 10th February 2017
quotequote all
rxe said:
GT and a 147 are indistinguishable from the drivers seat, apart from the smaller doors on the 147. They're fundamentally the same car - the interiors are literally identical (I have 147 leather interior in my GT....)
The GTs wheelbase is slightly longer, and there is a version with a Q2 diff, which isnt on the 147 i think, but those are minor differences.

jamies30

5,910 posts

228 months

Friday 10th February 2017
quotequote all
Vitorio said:
The GTs wheelbase is slightly longer, and there is a version with a Q2 diff, which isnt on the 147 i think, but those are minor differences.
There are a couple of versions of 147 which had the Q2 as standard - the Q2 Sport and the Ducati Corse, possibly others.

Vitorio

4,296 posts

142 months

Friday 10th February 2017
quotequote all
jamies30 said:
There are a couple of versions of 147 which had the Q2 as standard - the Q2 Sport and the Ducati Corse, possibly others.
Ah right, didnt know about the Q2 sport (or that the Duc had Q2)

Either way, very similar cars indeed if these are the differences we're talking about

jamies30

5,910 posts

228 months

Friday 10th February 2017
quotequote all
Vitorio said:
Either way, very similar cars indeed if these are the differences we're talking about
Agreed, with the 147 / 156 / GT I think you should just pick the shape you prefer because there can be as much difference between variants of each model as there is between models.

Vitorio

4,296 posts

142 months

Friday 10th February 2017
quotequote all
jamies30 said:
Agreed, with the 147 / 156 / GT I think you should just pick the shape you prefer because there can be as much difference between variants of each model as there is between models.
Pretty much, the 156 is a bit more different then the 147 and GT are from each other (since those share an interior). There are minor differences in engine versions (i dont think the 147/GT ever had CF2 twinsparks), but just picking the shape/engine you like is a good way to go about it with these cars. I wanted a cheap(ish) alfa last year, considered both 147s and 156s, 3 door, 5 door and sportwagon, petrol and diesel, ended up with a 5 door TS 147 because that was the best (in terms of technical state) car in my budget i could find, but i was also looking at a 2.4 JTD facelift sportwagon..

And ill have a GT some day

SpamCan

Original Poster:

5,026 posts

217 months

Wednesday 8th March 2017
quotequote all
Sorry it has taken a while to respond, but I have had difficulty bringing myself to sell the Mustang, which I think will now happen.

I think the 147 will be the car that I go for, which one (engine) is yet to be decided.

Vitorio

4,296 posts

142 months

Wednesday 8th March 2017
quotequote all
SpamCan said:
I think the 147 will be the car that I go for, which one (engine) is yet to be decided.
Id suggest a 1.6 TS Veloce, the 120hp model.

For 12-14 miles one way, a diesel doesnt feel justified, and for 30-40 mph traffic, you dont need big power, and the 1.6 does just fine.

When buying any TS engined alfa, just keep an eye on the oil level (and oil consumption), and the cambelt (needs to be done every 36K or 3 years)

SpamCan

Original Poster:

5,026 posts

217 months

Wednesday 8th March 2017
quotequote all
Vitorio said:
Id suggest a 1.6 TS Veloce, the 120hp model.

For 12-14 miles one way, a diesel doesnt feel justified, and for 30-40 mph traffic, you dont need big power, and the 1.6 does just fine.

When buying any TS engined alfa, just keep an eye on the oil level (and oil consumption), and the cambelt (needs to be done every 36K or 3 years)
I'm struggling to find Veloce spec cars, plenty of Lussos on Auto Trader. That said there are a lot of nice looking Collezione models on auto trader. Lots of adverts say FSH but don’t specify that the belt and pump has been changed at the required intervals, something to ask I guess. That said until the Mustang has sold it is pointless looking at a replacement.

I was edging towards the 1.6TS as the fuel savings with the diesel don’t make sense when you take into account the potential for dual mass flywheel replacements with clutches (the perils of a diesel engine), EGR refurbs (don’t think any 147’s were ever fitted with a DPF) especially when my work mileage is only around 5100p/a (other driving brings it up to circa 8000).

Keeping an eye on oil usage and level will be no bother, I check that (along with tyre pressures and other fluid levels) on a weekly basis anyway.

Edited by SpamCan on Wednesday 8th March 12:57

Vitorio

4,296 posts

142 months

Wednesday 8th March 2017
quotequote all
SpamCan said:
I'm struggling to find Veloce spec cars, plenty of Lussos on Auto Trader.
Im not sure how spec levels were in the UK (we in the netherlands never got Lusso, we got progressive and distinctive, with distinctive being more plush), Veloce over here is used to differentiate between the 105hp 1.6 and the 120hp 1.6, im not sure the 120hp cars are called veloce in the UK as well.

I have the 105hp 1.6, and its not bad or anything, more then good enough for the daily commute, but if i could have found the 120hp version, i would have gone for that. Keep in mind that unlike with some other cars, there is no easy upgrade from the 105 to 120hp engines, the 105 is missing the cam variator, and has a different ECU etc.. converting one to the other would require a full engine + loom + ecu swap.