RE: Alfa Romeo Stelvio: Review
Discussion
Motormatt said:
nickfrog said:
Kitchski said:
You don't need to convince me as to why you bought a particular car chief, it's your money, your choice! I personally don't see the advantages of an SUV over a normal estate car. You obviously do. We can leave it there, it doesn't need elaborating 
Not trying to convince you. You can't see the benefits compared to an estate - I can't see ANY benefits that an estate would have compared to an SUV. But remember you're the one elaborating with a bizarre collection of obsolete clichés at 14.00, so I am quite happy to leave it there.be lighter,
have a lower COG,
have better performance
be more aerodynamic
give better economy
be dynamically superior as a result of the above.
Unless you don't see any of these things as benefits?
So zero real world downsides and loads of real world benefits (comfy ride, easier access, better visibility, smaller physical footprint). For family use, the choice is simple, despite the ghastly image and the PH science
Edited by nickfrog on Tuesday 28th February 17:33
Summit_Detailing said:
Looks sharp, will await the full UK road test verdict.
Why would you buy a Levante over this I'm not sure but each to their own.
Chris
Its not surprisung to me at all though that Americans in particular seem to love the styling of the Levante though.Most cars now are tailored to suit the American car buyer and the average American these days wouldn't know good car design if it slapped them in the face with an "Awesome" stick.Why would you buy a Levante over this I'm not sure but each to their own.
Chris
I have no idea where the americans went wrong. They used to have such incredible flair and drama and now they design mostly f
king hideous monsters and everyone seems willing to do the same to sell cars to them.nickfrog said:
Motormatt said:
nickfrog said:
Kitchski said:
So zero real world downsides and loads of real world benefits (comfy ride, easier access, better visibility, smaller physical footprint). For family use, the choice is simple, despite the ghastly image and the PH science
Agreed, your list of real world benefits is exactly the reason we have a Cactus, when carting kids about and shopping is the main priority, it simply does those things better than an estate car, and I'm sure the Stelvio will be purchased for the same reasons. Edited by nickfrog on Tuesday 28th February 17:32
Hhmmm.. this Alfa and the PH article demonstrate how far removed modern SUV's now are from their predecessors - not a mention of it's ability to handle off-road terrain or the features that facilitate that (ability to raise ride-height; low-box; enhanced traction-control; towing capability; wading depth; underbody protection, etc).
Yes, yes - I know that it's now a 'lifestyle' vehicle. However, I see this as a further example of 'style over substance'; in my opinion it further tarnishes the image of similar looking vehicles bought to service specific utility needs.
It's pretty though, I'll give it that.
Yes, yes - I know that it's now a 'lifestyle' vehicle. However, I see this as a further example of 'style over substance'; in my opinion it further tarnishes the image of similar looking vehicles bought to service specific utility needs.
It's pretty though, I'll give it that.
nickfrog said:
The thought process is simple. They tend to be a better functional alternative for transport than traditional estates or saloons for many people. They're slightly shorter than an "equivalent" estate yet offer similar interior space ; they offer a higher driving position which is brilliant for visibility, touring, ease of access. They tend to have taller sidewalls and longer travel suspension which is a good combo for comfort.
They are dynamically superb despite the high COG but won't quite match a lower car, which is no big deal as they're not track cars. They use a little more fuel which is offset by better residuals. No downsides IME. I am sure they are also bought for fashion but that shouldn't come into it objectively ; many buy them despite the image as they don't really care about what others think.
Er... have you not just almost described a Fiat Multipla?They are dynamically superb despite the high COG but won't quite match a lower car, which is no big deal as they're not track cars. They use a little more fuel which is offset by better residuals. No downsides IME. I am sure they are also bought for fashion but that shouldn't come into it objectively ; many buy them despite the image as they don't really care about what others think.
underphil said:
TurboHatchback said:
Woop, yet another ugly jacked up uncomfortable 4cyl diesel hatchback. I know they have to build one as the market gets what the market wants and it sounds like they've done the best job they could given the stupid requirements but why people want this sort of rubbish mystifies me.
remind me which hatchback has been 'jacked up'?And regarding glitzy Range Rovers, the 'ladies' that I see swanning around in them around here obviously press the relevant options buttons to match their vajazzlry (is that the right word for 'lady-garden' adornments?).
Sweaty indeed, but also perma-tanned and with fake designer label teeth too. Personally I believe that a Stelvio is actually ioccupying a social class that these elks thankfully fail to recognise or inhabit....
nickfrog said:
Motormatt said:
nickfrog said:
Kitchski said:
You don't need to convince me as to why you bought a particular car chief, it's your money, your choice! I personally don't see the advantages of an SUV over a normal estate car. You obviously do. We can leave it there, it doesn't need elaborating
Not trying to convince you. You can't see the benefits compared to an estate - I can't see ANY benefits that an estate would have compared to an SUV. But remember you're the one elaborating with a bizarre collection of obsolete clichés at 14.00, so I am quite happy to leave it there.be lighter,
have a lower COG,
have better performance
be more aerodynamic
give better economy
be dynamically superior as a result of the above.
Unless you don't see any of these things as benefits?
So zero real world downsides and loads of real world benefits (comfy ride, easier access, better visibility, smaller physical footprint). For family use, the choice is simple, despite the ghastly image and the PH science
Edited by nickfrog on Tuesday 28th February 17:33
There is so much hate for the idea of an SUV, especially an Alfa one, but the reality is some of them do a pretty decent job of being a jack of all trades, and get surprisingly close to being a master of some.
I moved from an Alfa Giulietta to a Skoda Yeti (4x4 170 bhp) as a practical car the Yeti is in a different class to the Giulietta, as a car to have fun in on the back road it is almost as good too, what it looses in not being being quite as stable, it gains in providing a better sight line for corners, with its higher driving position. Then you add in the other advantages, much more room for a dog, tow capacity which is genuinely useful, ground clearance to take it down unclassified tracks across the moors, four wheel drive to make that less of a worry.
I do miss the style of the Alfa and if I'm being badge conscious I miss owning a modern everyday Alfa, so the Stelvio makes a lot of sense in my world. Mind you what I do have to consider Is the fact it will cost half as much again as the Skoda!.
Having owned an Alfasud and immediately got on first name terms with my local garage and auto electrician I feel qualified to be a bit judgemental about Alfas
This looks great and the name is uber cool but would you really buy one over an F Pace?
Most people wouldnt as the Alfa baggage is enormous and consequently residuals will be abysmal
As a consequence PCP deals will be awful, lease deals similarly dreadful apart from the odd loss leader to get numbers on the road and anyone paying for one with their own money should be immediately sent to Broadmoor
It will be a sales disaster over here - no mistake
That doesnt stop me wanting one though
And my Sud is still one of my favourite ever cars although it must be long dead now
Sigh..................
When was the last time you saw a woman driving an estate car? They simply don't like them and would choose any SUV over an estate. The argument goes on and on yet many of the SUV cars are driven by women who, guess what, don't care about COG or a slight improvement in MPG.
Enjoy your Passat estates while you can.
Enjoy your Passat estates while you can.
037 said:
When was the last time you saw a woman driving an estate car? They simply don't like them and would choose any SUV over an estate. The argument goes on and on yet many of the SUV cars are driven by women who, guess what, don't care about COG or a slight improvement in MPG.
Enjoy your Passat estates while you can.
Yes that's the problem with women, they don't realise how much apex speed you're losing by having a shockingly high COG in the supermarket car park or picking the kids up.Enjoy your Passat estates while you can.
numtumfutunch said:
Having owned an Alfasud and immediately got on first name terms with my local garage and auto electrician I feel qualified to be a bit judgemental about Alfas
This looks great and the name is uber cool but would you really buy one over an F Pace?
Most people wouldnt as the Alfa baggage is enormous and consequently residuals will be abysmal
As a consequence PCP deals will be awful, lease deals similarly dreadful apart from the odd loss leader to get numbers on the road and anyone paying for one with their own money should be immediately sent to Broadmoor
It will be a sales disaster over here - no mistake
That doesnt stop me wanting one though
And my Sud is still one of my favourite ever cars although it must be long dead now
Sigh..................
Good god.... you are still relating Alfa to the Sud and unreliability, have you also forgotten how bad Jags were in much more recent times than the 1970's. This looks great and the name is uber cool but would you really buy one over an F Pace?
Most people wouldnt as the Alfa baggage is enormous and consequently residuals will be abysmal
As a consequence PCP deals will be awful, lease deals similarly dreadful apart from the odd loss leader to get numbers on the road and anyone paying for one with their own money should be immediately sent to Broadmoor
It will be a sales disaster over here - no mistake
That doesnt stop me wanting one though
And my Sud is still one of my favourite ever cars although it must be long dead now
Sigh..................
mind you your ridiculous preconceptions are shared by a number of people still, so yes lease deals won't be as good as say a VW.
I see some are referring to the better visibility from SUV's. Of course this only applies to those driving them and not those following behind in your average hatchback who can't see beyond your huge lifestyle truck. Better over potholes. No doubt they are, but they are probably not helping them either.
Guvernator said:
I can think of 3 advantages of an SUV over an estate off the top of my head.
1) Better visibility. The higher driving position lets you see over other traffic and better judge the corners of the car, especially since the largely female target demographic are shorter on average. My missus rates this as one of the most important advantages of an SUV.
2) Easier to get small kids in and out of the back and shopping in an out of the boot. Both my missus and I have suffered from back issues from having to stick heavy toddlers in the back seat. This problem is greatly reduced in an SUV as you are at the right height to plop them straight even rather than bending over.
3) Ride comfort, the bigger tires and larger suspension travel often mean they have a comfier ride, much more important in a family wagon then whether it will corner on it's mirrors. Also the urban suv's might not be so great at going off-road but they are certainly capable enough to handle our pot whole ridden, crap roads and better than a long, low estate.
4. 4WD with no transmission tunnel. 1) Better visibility. The higher driving position lets you see over other traffic and better judge the corners of the car, especially since the largely female target demographic are shorter on average. My missus rates this as one of the most important advantages of an SUV.
2) Easier to get small kids in and out of the back and shopping in an out of the boot. Both my missus and I have suffered from back issues from having to stick heavy toddlers in the back seat. This problem is greatly reduced in an SUV as you are at the right height to plop them straight even rather than bending over.
3) Ride comfort, the bigger tires and larger suspension travel often mean they have a comfier ride, much more important in a family wagon then whether it will corner on it's mirrors. Also the urban suv's might not be so great at going off-road but they are certainly capable enough to handle our pot whole ridden, crap roads and better than a long, low estate.
OK, only the X5 , Discovery and Range Rovers do this .. but gives loads more interior space
SRT77 said:
I see some are referring to the better visibility from SUV's. Of course this only applies to those driving them and not those following behind in your average hatchback who can't see beyond your huge lifestyle truck. Better over potholes. No doubt they are, but they are probably not helping them either.
Very true - if everyone has a SUV then the visibility arms race will lead to everyone driving a double decker , but that's OK because many still prefer a low COG for family transport so there should be a good mix. And tbf, it's also lateral visibility that is improved, not to mention larger glass area.Good point on the pot hole front too !!
nickfrog said:
SRT77 said:
I see some are referring to the better visibility from SUV's. Of course this only applies to those driving them and not those following behind in your average hatchback who can't see beyond your huge lifestyle truck. Better over potholes. No doubt they are, but they are probably not helping them either.
Very true - if everyone has a SUV then the visibility arms race will lead to everyone driving a double decker , but that's OK because many still prefer a low COG for family transport so there should be a good mix. And tbf, it's also lateral visibility that is improved, not to mention larger glass area.Good point on the pot hole front too !!
For me, if everyone had an SUV, I would not feel the need to have a double decker for the above reason. At the same consolation, I also accept that vehicles come in every shape and size and that (surprise surprise) a Range Rover or whatever is not what blocks my view ahead....it's a f
king massive HGV or a bus or a high-top transit. I assume when people site SUVs as being too big and blocking peoples' view, they must never encounter any other traffic larger than a Nissan QuishQuash!! Lucky you!
PhantomPH said:
The mistake you're making, is to think that 'visibility' means being able to see over the car in front. From my SUV I can see over hedges, roundabout shrubbery, junction clutter, etc, etc. much better than in my other cars. The added visibility is really not about being taller than other road users - it's about being taler than a lot of the stuff that obscures junctions etc. That's really quite nice.
That's the point I was (clumsily) trying to make.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff