Rant: Is the Brera a joke?
Discussion
havoc said:
You missed my point.
I didn't really. I was suggesting that given a bigger budget / more engineering resource, you could reasonably expect a car to be lighter / better / faster / whatever-er. Consider the Veyron.
I would say, though, that my point still stands.
jamieboy said:
Fact is, there probably are better cars than the Brera, but that does not make the Brera a bad car.
jamieboy said:
Fact is, there probably are better cars than the Brera, but that does not make the Brera a bad car.
True. Not driven it, so can't comment on it overall.
As for 'resource'...Alfa are charging market rate for this. As a result, you would expect the same level of engineering resource to have gone into this as into a TT V6, a 350Z, a 325Ci, a VW R32, etc. etc...
IMHO, GM cars DO tend to be under-engineered compared to the competition. They are financially in dire straits and are trying to cost-cut their way out of it. Unfortunately, while that may work with Corsas and Astras, with a high-end Alfa it appears to me to be a bit of an own-goal.
It's, well...amusing...that a company thay seemingly prides itself of its "sporting" history and nature feels that a 1.75 tonne 4WD coupe can pass as its flagship. What happened to RWD? Cheaper and simpler than 4WD, surely? What happened to aluminuim; Jaguar (cash-strapped), Ferrari, Honda and Audi manage it OK; why not Alfa, given, once again, their "sporting" nature. The new TT is virtually all-alu, so why can't the Brera?
If the Brera were to recieve a school report, it'd be a "C- Promises loads but must try harder"
If the Brera were to recieve a school report, it'd be a "C- Promises loads but must try harder"
SCOOTERMAN said:
What happened to aluminuim; Jaguar (cash-strapped), Ferrari, Honda and Audi manage it OK; why not Alfa, given, once again, their "sporting" nature. The new TT is virtually all-alu, so why can't the Brera?
Aluminium cars cost a fortune to build, Fact!
Other than the new TT and the now dead Audi A2, name one, volume made, sub £40k car that uses alloy panels?
Jaguar are owned by Ford, so they're not that short of cash! Also they only used alloy on the XJ and XK which are premium models, which both cost over £50K.
Ferrari! Their cheapest alloy bodied car the F430, costs 4 times the price of a Brera/TT V6/R32, so not really a fair comparison there!
Honda are a huge company with millions of yen to spend, and apart from the NSX (£70K, and made hardly any profit), haven't really used aluminium other than for suspension components, no bodywork.
As for Audi, they made the initial investment in aluminium bodyshell production over a decade ago with the old A8, they've also used it subsequently on the A2 and on other bits and bobs like the wings and bonnet of the old RS4, so the technology is paid for now, probably several times over in fact! Hence why they can afford to use it on the new TT without adding much to the retail price.
For a company who haven't used alloy before it is a huge cost to tool up, and Alfa don't have the vast resources that other manufacturers do. Sad but true
havoc said:
GM cars DO tend to be under-engineered compared to the competition. They are financially in dire straits and are trying to cost-cut their way out of it. Unfortunately, while that may work with Corsas and Astras, with a high-end Alfa it appears to me to be a bit of an own-goal.
I might have missed something but are Alfa actually part of GM??? I thought they were still owned and controlled by Fiat, and there was a partnership between GM and Fiat, just sharing technology like VW and Porsche did on the Cayenne/Touareg? I know the V6 in the Brera is based on a GM engine.
Edited by brerasv on Sunday 23 July 23:23
Jaguar and Ford with an abundance of cash? Given they can't afford to put a decent aerial on the new XJ, I'd suggest it were the polar opposite!
The TT is the Brera's closest rival, and that being nearly all-aluminium AND being competitive on price(-ish; I can't recall TT prices) should be a major worry to Alfa.
Granted the likes of the A2/NSX/Ferrari etc are all more expensive/didn't sell (perhaps due to price in the case of the NSX and A2) BUT, due to rising fuel prices and greater driver demands there'll come a time when light weight is paramount. You'd think that the Brera and 159, with their "Alfas last chance to save themselves" tag, would embrace this, 'cos otherwise they'll be left dead in the water (sunk probably, what with weighing about the same as the Bismark).
Why can't Alfa call upon Ferrari's engineering expertise and start utilising aluminium? Hell, even if it were the wings/doors/the sodding door handles; anything to help shed a few kilos!
The TT is the Brera's closest rival, and that being nearly all-aluminium AND being competitive on price(-ish; I can't recall TT prices) should be a major worry to Alfa.
Granted the likes of the A2/NSX/Ferrari etc are all more expensive/didn't sell (perhaps due to price in the case of the NSX and A2) BUT, due to rising fuel prices and greater driver demands there'll come a time when light weight is paramount. You'd think that the Brera and 159, with their "Alfas last chance to save themselves" tag, would embrace this, 'cos otherwise they'll be left dead in the water (sunk probably, what with weighing about the same as the Bismark).
Why can't Alfa call upon Ferrari's engineering expertise and start utilising aluminium? Hell, even if it were the wings/doors/the sodding door handles; anything to help shed a few kilos!
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Monday 24th July 08:29
brerasv said:
Other than the new TT and the now dead Audi A2, name one, volume made, sub £40k car that uses alloy panels?
Honda S2000.
Not all, but at least the bonnet is aluminium, to save weight and improve weight-distribution.
You did ask!!!
Why can't you admit that the Brera IS about 200kg too lardy for what it could be?
Oh...and Alfa 'aren't' GM. Fair enough...but why are they sharing engines and, IIRC, platforms?
Oh, and one more thing. How the HELL can their 4WD system add 250Kg? I mean, you've what, a transfer box, a centre diff, a rear diff, a propshaft and a couple more driveshafts. Surely this added weight negaites any performance/handling advantage said system and attatched engine offers?
Of course Alfa could've gone RWD across the range, but that's far too simple.
EDIT: And I adore Alfas/the Brera. I'd have one tomorrow if I had the cash. Only I'd stop at the Audi and BMW dealers en route and then suddenly start sweating.
Of course Alfa could've gone RWD across the range, but that's far too simple.
EDIT: And I adore Alfas/the Brera. I'd have one tomorrow if I had the cash. Only I'd stop at the Audi and BMW dealers en route and then suddenly start sweating.
Edited by SCOOTERMAN on Monday 24th July 11:09
SCOOTERMAN said:
Jaguar and Ford with an abundance of cash? Given they can't afford to put a decent aerial on the new XJ, I'd suggest it were the polar opposite!
I still think they're in a better financial position than Fiat! Good point on the aerial, I saw one close up yesterday, and it is shocking!
SCOOTERMAN said:
The TT is the Brera's closest rival, and that being nearly all-aluminium AND being competitive on price(-ish; I can't recall TT prices) should be a major worry to Alfa.
I'm sure it is a worry, to a degree, but I don't think Alfa are planning on, (or could cope with!), selling anything like the numbers that Audi do anyway?
From what my dealer told me the estimates have been set very conservatively, and numbers are being deliberately restricted.
The TT is competitive on price and quicker! On the flip-side the new TT is not as pretty or distinctive as the original, (or the Brera in my biased opinion!), and the Brera is also better equipped! It'll soon be very common, in 12 months every estate agent and hairdresser will have one, just like before! That alone will stop some people, (including me!), from buying one.
SCOOTERMAN said:
Granted the likes of the A2/NSX/Ferrari etc are all more expensive/didn't sell (perhaps due to price in the case of the NSX and A2) BUT, due to rising fuel prices and greater driver demands there'll come a time when light weight is paramount. You'd think that the Brera and 159, with their "Alfas last chance to save themselves" tag, would embrace this, 'cos otherwise they'll be left dead in the water (sunk probably, what with weighing about the same as the Bismark).
I agree, it is a major dissapointment that they haven't tried to save weight, both the 159 and Brera have been criticised for being too heavy. My original point however is that doesn't make them bad cars, and won't stop them selling! The Brera is better built, quieter and more refined than what went before it. Alfa obviously thought that would appeal to more people than a stripped out, lightweight, Elise type car, which without going to Alloy, (which they clearly can't afford), would have been the other option.
It would be great if they had produced a car with all that added refinement, equipment and safety, that also weighed 150-200kg lighter than it does; but without following Audi's lead to alloy it seems it's not possible!
havoc said:
brerasv said:
Other than the new TT and the now dead Audi A2, name one, volume made, sub £40k car that uses alloy panels?
Honda S2000.
Not all, but at least the bonnet is aluminium, to save weight and improve weight-distribution.
You did ask!!!
Hmmm I forgot that one, but I was really meaning more use than a bonnet! All the other examples use nearly full alloy panels, but it is a fair point that if they can use it on one panel to save weight, others could too.
havoc said:
Why can't you admit that the Brera IS about 200kg too lardy for what it could be?
I have never denied it's heavier than it could/should be, just that it's not the end of the world! Would it be a better car if it was 200kg lighter, yes probably, does it make it crap that it isn't, no!
The added weight comes from more equipment, better safety features, better quality materials/improved build quality all of which are demanded by 'The Market', so in some way it is justified. It's not like they've filled the bumpers with lead just for fun!!!
I dont understand this fixation with speed. I am no slouch behind the wheel and have been on track a couple of times too but it is certainly not the principle factor in choosing a new car. This is a big problem these days, it is the same when Top Gear etc try new cars, all they are interested in is how well it drives sideways or pulls doughnuts! In the real world, most drivers do not have the training or skills to handle a car at those extremes. It is irresponsible to promote these criteria as a means of rating cars by. By the time 99% of drivers would ever have the car performing like that they would have already lost control and likely be heading for serious injury. (I used to teach Advanced driving and I have seen plenty young or not so young drivers who think they know it all but are nothing short of accidents waiting to happen, sort of automotive terrorists).
Like I said earlier, I would never have considered an Alfa and have actively desuaded friends from buying them. I had never been in one let alone driven or considered owning an Alfa but I was attracted to the brand by the Brera's stunning appearance. To be honest, I was going to write the cheque with or without the test drive but I found the car to be very very nice indeed to drive which was almost a bonus by that time. I think many of you are missing the point. It doesnt have to be the fastest car on the road to attract buyers. I would say looks, build quality, practicality, heritage/brand and economy are all important factors and (apart from the rear seats which it could easily have done without) I think it can tick all those boxes. It certainly turned many heads on the few miles we took it on the road. What I find really strange is that I feel I am defending this beautiful new Alfa that is a credit to the brand to what I assume to be Alfa fans, I expected to have to justify my purchase to the world and his brother except Alfa people, but everyone else loves it!
Like I said earlier, I would never have considered an Alfa and have actively desuaded friends from buying them. I had never been in one let alone driven or considered owning an Alfa but I was attracted to the brand by the Brera's stunning appearance. To be honest, I was going to write the cheque with or without the test drive but I found the car to be very very nice indeed to drive which was almost a bonus by that time. I think many of you are missing the point. It doesnt have to be the fastest car on the road to attract buyers. I would say looks, build quality, practicality, heritage/brand and economy are all important factors and (apart from the rear seats which it could easily have done without) I think it can tick all those boxes. It certainly turned many heads on the few miles we took it on the road. What I find really strange is that I feel I am defending this beautiful new Alfa that is a credit to the brand to what I assume to be Alfa fans, I expected to have to justify my purchase to the world and his brother except Alfa people, but everyone else loves it!
brerasv said:
The added weight comes from more equipment, better safety features, better quality materials/improved build quality all of which are demanded by 'The Market', so in some way it is justified. It's not like they've filled the bumpers with lead just for fun!!!
But WHY is it that 200kg heavier than the (non-alloy) competition? The 3-series isn't nearly that heavy, and you can't argue that's not quality, not loaded, and not safe. If all cars in that segment were the same weight, I wouldn't be making the same fuss. I'd still think it's excessive, but it would be comparable and proportionate. Thing is, it's not, and I genuinely don't know how they've hit that weight.
Bailey2agd said:
I dont understand this fixation with speed. I am no slouch behind the wheel and have been on track a couple of times too but it is certainly not the principle factor in choosing a new car. This is a big problem these days, it is the same when Top Gear etc try new cars, all they are interested in is how well it drives sideways or pulls doughnuts! In the real world, most drivers do not have the training or skills to handle a car at those extremes. It is irresponsible to promote these criteria as a means of rating cars by. By the time 99% of drivers would ever have the car performing like that they would have already lost control and likely be heading for serious injury. (I used to teach Advanced driving and I have seen plenty young or not so young drivers who think they know it all but are nothing short of accidents waiting to happen, sort of automotive terrorists).
Like I said earlier, I would never have considered an Alfa and have actively desuaded friends from buying them. I had never been in one let alone driven or considered owning an Alfa but I was attracted to the brand by the Brera's stunning appearance. To be honest, I was going to write the cheque with or without the test drive but I found the car to be very very nice indeed to drive which was almost a bonus by that time. I think many of you are missing the point. It doesnt have to be the fastest car on the road to attract buyers. I would say looks, build quality, practicality, heritage/brand and economy are all important factors and (apart from the rear seats which it could easily have done without) I think it can tick all those boxes. It certainly turned many heads on the few miles we took it on the road. What I find really strange is that I feel I am defending this beautiful new Alfa that is a credit to the brand to what I assume to be Alfa fans, I expected to have to justify my purchase to the world and his brother except Alfa people, but everyone else loves it!
Like I said earlier, I would never have considered an Alfa and have actively desuaded friends from buying them. I had never been in one let alone driven or considered owning an Alfa but I was attracted to the brand by the Brera's stunning appearance. To be honest, I was going to write the cheque with or without the test drive but I found the car to be very very nice indeed to drive which was almost a bonus by that time. I think many of you are missing the point. It doesnt have to be the fastest car on the road to attract buyers. I would say looks, build quality, practicality, heritage/brand and economy are all important factors and (apart from the rear seats which it could easily have done without) I think it can tick all those boxes. It certainly turned many heads on the few miles we took it on the road. What I find really strange is that I feel I am defending this beautiful new Alfa that is a credit to the brand to what I assume to be Alfa fans, I expected to have to justify my purchase to the world and his brother except Alfa people, but everyone else loves it!
Well said that man!
Saw it at the motor show yesterday,it is a very pretty car...I would buy one!
havoc said:
The 3-series isn't nearly that heavy, and you can't argue that's not quality, not loaded, and not safe.
There's no 4wd V6 3-series at the moment, so if we compare the 2.2 Brera and the 320 (2171cc petrol) 3-series, we see that the 3-series is 2mph faster, and 0.3 seconds quicker to 62. It costs £3,000 more (13% or thereabouts) and at 1470 kilos weighs exactly the same.
These figures are from Alfa Romeo and BMW websites.
Edited by jamieboy on Tuesday 25th July 10:07
havoc said:
But WHY is it that 200kg heavier than the (non-alloy) competition? The 3-series isn't nearly that heavy, and you can't argue that's not quality, not loaded, and not safe.
From the manufacturers websites:
The 320cd M Sport has 150bhp, 330Nm torque, costs £27,990 and weighs 1490kgs.
8.8 0-62 and 137mph
The Brera SV JTDm has 200bhp, 400Nm torque, costs £27,500 and weights 1600kgs.
8.1 0-62 and 142mph
Similar price, similar performance, both two wheel drive. The Brera has an extra cylinder and a roof made entirely out of glass so that probably accounts for the 7% extra weight over the 320. So, pretty much comparable cars and it all depends on your personal choice which you would prefer to sit in to make your daily journeys.
My mate had a 147GTA and loved it. When the Brera became reality she had a deposit on one of the first to enter the country. Then she got hung up on top speed, weight etc and bought a Audi S4 cab instead which sounds like a washing machine. She`s sold her sole and will have to live with her concience for a lot longer than the Audi will be fashinable.
Interesting to note some of the PR spinners have only just joined to post on this thread 
Alfa used to represent spirited driving for enthusiasts - ie, everyone on this site. Hence the focus upon speed and the thrill of driving you may have noticed. PH isn't really about obese people carriers laden with lead armchairs. No matter how pretty the surface might be. Alfa has clearly shifted it's target audience.
Alfa used to represent spirited driving for enthusiasts - ie, everyone on this site. Hence the focus upon speed and the thrill of driving you may have noticed. PH isn't really about obese people carriers laden with lead armchairs. No matter how pretty the surface might be. Alfa has clearly shifted it's target audience.
Theres a 1375kg (including fuel and 75kg driver) 0-60 6.4, 0-100 in 17, 22k RWD 4 seater stunner out there waiting. Shame I dont have mine anymore I'd have loved to have met soem Brera's around.
Gm dont own any of Fiat group because they paid $billions to get out of the deal :shocker:
Gm dont own any of Fiat group because they paid $billions to get out of the deal :shocker:
Gassing Station | Alfa Romeo, Fiat & Lancia | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff