Giulia. New segment leader? Would you buy one?

[Ares]

Ahbefive said:

Ares said:

Ahbefive said:

Autos are great for boring mundane driving but if you want to enjoy driving a manual is far more fun and involving. This is a statement of fact.

Autos are for the elderly, perfect laptimes and boring motorway slogs.

The clue is in the fact that a performance car with a manual gearbox will almost always hold its value better than its auto counterpart.

Wrong
Wrong
Wrong

HTH.

Not wrong at all. Care to expand?

3 Points raised and your response is a one word answer, you can do better than that.

As far as I can see these points are all perfectly valid.

I did expand....about two hours before you posted that

They're still wrong

[Ares]

Ahbefive said:

Ares said:

It wasn't me that mistook opinion for fact. See bold above.

Ahbefive's three 'facts' were wrong.
.

My "facts" were correct actual facts. However I forgot to add that autos are good for the disabled or people with gammy knees.

Still waiting for your futile retort..........

Specsavers? - Look on the previous page, you see why your 'facts' are wrong Futile you say?

[Ares]

underphil said:

Dr Gitlin said:

The gear stick (in both QVs I've driven and the 2.0L) had some hard edges, as did the grab handles on the center console. But you know what? It doesn't matter. Neither does the lack of NVH. It all just adds to the character.

Merc's infotainment system is nothing to write home about (although the new MBUX that's debuting the A Class is almost on a par with Audi's latest MMI and Volvo's Sensus, which are probably the two best systems on the market right now. iDrive 6 is good, but it's not as good as either of those two.

"Neither does the lack of Noise Vibration & Harshness" ??

This is where it does lag behind the Germans. The flip side of the sporting suspension set up can make the ride a little harsh on the st road surfaces we have here. OK, I'm only comparing it to higher spec 3-series, 5 series and 6 series, but it is harsher.

[Ares]

telecat said:

As somebody said. All the right gears are in there. its whether they are selected in the right order. It's very little use having a well programmed box if it's programming means what it does is decide to do something else from what you wanted.

In reality, that doesn't happen. And certainly not as much as a manual gearbox operator getting the wrong gear.

[Ares]

smarty156 said:

Mike335i said:

Not daft at all, I don't like automatics that much. ZF8 is dull and ponderous

I'm guessing you've not driven a Giulia then, especially a Quadrifoglio?

Shhh.... Ignorance is bliss.

[Ares]

RobM77 said:

Rawwr said:

RobM77 said:

The point I was trying to make is the difference between enjoying performance in a performance car (as a typical RS4 or RS6 owner might), and enjoying the process of driving (as the owner of a Lotus Elan or Formula Ford might). I've always been firmly in the latter category, and I think automatic boxes belong there too. If it's faster, I'm not that interested - if it's more enjoyable, then I am interested.

Interaction and tactility.

Absolutely. Plus a direct drive, without a layer of mush between your right foot and the wheels (although admittedly the latest ZF does lock the torque converter when in gear), and the ability to think ahead and prepare the car for a corner and then control the car through the corner - no auto box knows what's coming up next! Keep em for wafting is what I say, that's what they're best at.

You are right, and have the right to know your preference....however, it is solely subjective AND intangible.

You are right, no autobox knows what it coming next...but no manual box knows what is coming next, both rely on the driver's knowledge/decision of what is coming next!

[Ares]

Mike335i said:

Ares said:

smarty156 said:

Mike335i said:

Not daft at all, I don't like automatics that much. ZF8 is dull and ponderous

I'm guessing you've not driven a Giulia then, especially a Quadrifoglio?

Shhh.... Ignorance is bliss.

No not driven one sadly, but I have driven the ZF8 in various BMWs and, whilst I know the implementation of them is supposedly flawed and it is much better in the Alfa, it is still two gears too many for me and too lacking in a clutch pedal.

I know automatics are easier, more efficient etc etc, I just don't care. Don't want one, don't like autoboxes for fun cars. But they are great for relaxing and cruising.

Doesn't make it dull and ponderous.

Drive it before you make sweeping generalisations

It's a bit like me saying the current BMW M3 is dull because I didn't like the 3 litre turbo in the 2012 335i


As mentioned above, you are allowed to not like autos, but it's intangible. You just don't like autos, you don't have to create factual air scientific reasons for it, because once you bring science in, the auto is typically better.

It's a bit like people with Ginger hair. You can just simply not like them, but to try and justify becomes tricky

[Ares]

telecat said:

Ares said:

akirk said:

All this does is demonstrate a misunderstanding as to what performance is / means

performance is not just about outright speed, though I accept that many powerful cars are sold to many not very talented people for whom speed is the main criteria!

performance is a combination of things - speed is certainly one, but I would argue that one of the top elements is reaction or response in the car - how does the car translate the driver's commands (right or wrong) to the road - so you move the steering wheel / how does the car respond... you change gear - how quickly do you get put into the gear you have chosen... etc.

One of the outstanding memories from last year for me was driving an e63 AMG through some great Scottish roads - phenomenal car - and oh so frustrating... every decision you made went through a bank of computers, each of which decided whether or not to obey your input / vary it / block it / change it - corner approaching - I want xyz gear - sorry, the computer says no, in fact at this speed and on the straight, the computer has decided to change up instead of your clearly foolish request to change down... Nothing to do with protecting the car and not blowing up the engine - simply that the engineers didn't anticipate a driver who wants to be free to make their own decisions...

So instead of buying a car like that (on my short list) I went and bought a proper car - manual M5, now when I choose to change gear, the car does exactly what I tell it to do - yes, I might get it wrong, but I am all grown up and will take responsibility for that, but equally, I might just have made that choice as it is what I want from the car - having a dumb machine argue with you has to be the most frustrating thing a driver can experience...

so, yes, for the driver who thinks that performance is all about straight line speed then the e63 AMG will be a better car than my smaller-engined M5 - but for the driver who actually wants to drive the car, the performance from the e63 is very lacking and the manual M5 gives a far better response!

You are right.

However, on speed of reaction, how do you reconcile that nowadays, autos are quicker to respond and quicker to act/react than even the best driver in the best manual?

As somebody said. All the right gears are in there. its whether they are selected in the right order. It's very little use having a well programmed box if it's programming means what it does is decide to do something else from what you wanted.

But in reality that doesn't happen. And in anything remotely sporting, you have full manual control as well?

[Ares]

akirk said:

exactly...
yes an auto is faster at the physical change but if even 1 in 10 changes result in the car saying no thanks then that is a very slow result and not acceptable... and I am yet to drive the auto which always does what I want / gets it right every time...

the perfect combination is when driver and car work together as one, not when they are battling each other...

What autos have you driven? Right from my 2007 330i, I've never had an auto that has done something other that what I would want?

Conversely, I do sometimes get 3rd/5th and 2nd/4th mixed up on Mrs Ares' MINI.

[Ares]

Ozone said:

Sporty for me is where the car reacts to inputs quickly, I found the Giulia didn't particularly do that. Like I said nice for cruising but not for throwing around a/b roads. I don't think the gearbox helped but the car gave me the impression of being sluggish changing direction and making progress.
As I said I selected sport mode and put my foot down on a straight and my wife looked at me and said "is that it"? It did seem to change gear very early or not get to the rev limit before changing.
Maybe I needed more time than the 20minutes that I had to adjust to the car but I was left disappointed.

There isn't a 'sport' mode. Sounds like you were in Advanced Efficiency by accident, that short shifts

[Ares]

NDNDNDND said:

Funny you should mention brake servoes - I've seen a few articles criticising the Giulia's 'numb' drive-by-wire brakes. I've also seen a couple of American forum posts complaining about 'latency'. Apparently 'brake lag' is now a thing.

I guess that means you can have numb, electronic brakes to go with your numb electronic throttle, numb electronic steering and numb electronic gearbox.

Yay progress.

Thats right. Numb is how most people have described the drive.

[Ares]

200Plus Club said:

To be fair the chap has a point. The lack of "great" service at Alfa dealerships and potential resale depreciation has stopped me buying a brand new QF, despite it being absolutely stunning to drive.
My local Alfa dealers were useless sorting a test drive and px offer on my R8. I might have jumped in had they not made it frustrating and time consuming.
I'm still watching prices and they are now from £49k used already and £55k will get one with say 2k miles on it. That's a massive saving and very tempting as a next car.

Mine were too. But I ordered through a Broker and the supplying dealer, 80miles away, was amazing.

Given my cars have only ever been to a dealer, on average once a year, even travelling past 2 dealers to the supplying dealer isn't a hardship...and certainly wouldn't put me off a great car?

Resale is a totally different issue. But smart money leases in the current climate

[Ares]

akirk said:

but no car / technology can know what is coming up next, AND how the driver wishes to drive it...

No car/gearbox can know what is coming next? Any car/gearbox relies on the driver to set the car up via pedals/paddles/sticks?

[Ares]

RobM77 said:

You're both surely referring to the gearboxes' abilities to predict what's coming next in a straight line (i.e. an accelerating driver in 3rd will likely need 4th next, and vice versa). That wasn't the point I was making! In fact it was the very opposite. That's one of the main problems I have with auto boxes - let's say you want to enjoy a corner at 3-4k revs in 3rd gear, but the auto box thinks you should be in 4th or even 5th - annoying! Then you start to accelerate from the apex onwards, when the auto box shuffles down a gear mid corner to give you the torque you need (it probably thinks you were stuck behind a tractor and are now trying to overtake it) - a complete and utter mess. This is why, as far as I know, no purpose built racing car has ever had an automatic gearbox, and certainly no good driver's cars either (some, like the NSX, had auto options, but they were st and nobody physically capable of changing gear who liked driving went for them). Given that the gearbox doesn't make a car noisier or less refined, why not have that joy of control that a manual gearbox gives you in a sports saloon? Why limit it to sports cars? When I see a B road, I want to enjoy the drive. As I said though, if you want to waft along, buy an auto. I don't. The problem I have with Alfa is they don't give us that choice with the Giulia.

The scenario you describe does't happen though, except in efficiency modes. Stick a car in sport/dynamic/etc mode, and it will hold the gear if you are using any throttle.

And you have always got easily accessible manual control over and above if you want further control.

[Ares]

Rawwr said:

Someone asked earlier in the thread if the Performante and Speciale were boring cars and no, they're not boring cars but I'd argue they'd be more fun, more involving and offer a more tactile, pleasing experience with a manual gearbox. Just a shame it's not an option.

It's not an option because when it was, no-one bought them!

[Ares]

velocemitch said:

Ares said:

Rawwr said:

Someone asked earlier in the thread if the Performante and Speciale were boring cars and no, they're not boring cars but I'd argue they'd be more fun, more involving and offer a more tactile, pleasing experience with a manual gearbox. Just a shame it's not an option.

It's not an option because when it was, no-one bought them!

it is an option on the continent, it would be interesting to see how many take it.

Truth is Alfa (or FCA) can't afford the investment of engineering a RHD manual for the miniscule sales it would attract. All of whom seem to be on this forum.

It seems we are unlikely to get a Sportwagon for similar reasons, the big sales are expected to be in China and USA, who just don't do Estates. Stelvio will have to suffice for the small number of Alfa buyers who just must have a hatch....., or you could do what i did buy a Giulia and a cheapo SUV to chuck the Dog in and tow with.

We were talking about the Performante and Speciale!

And the world doesn't do estate!

[Ares]

akirk said:

Ares said:

What autos have you driven? Right from my 2007 330i, I've never had an auto that has done something other that what I would want?

Conversely, I do sometimes get 3rd/5th and 2nd/4th mixed up on Mrs Ares' MINI.

Lots I own two autos - classic RR in which it is perfect - doze off in the armchair seat while reading the paper and the car blunders on... / z3 in which it is not ideal (but car was v. cheap, so kept as a fun soft-top - would prefer a manual) - can stick it in 'manual mode' but car will still make independent choices and change at times... e.g. when slowing down it will drop back to second gear - you then go to do the same and find you push into first gear which you didn't want...

but in addition to those I have driven modern / old / computerised / non-computerised - pre-selectors / auto boxes / manual mode / no manual mode etc. and am still to find one which is anyway close to what I am choosing for it to do...

an example I have given above was the e63 AMG - every choice you make - even in manual - there was a feeling that it was deciding whether to let you or not - nowhere near as nice as a manual... as for modern 911s - there is a reason they build some cars with a manual gearbox - because the auto still doesn't offer the same feel

Ares said:

The scenario you describe does't happen though, except in efficiency modes. Stick a car in sport/dynamic/etc mode, and it will hold the gear if you are using any throttle.

And you have always got easily accessible manual control over and above if you want further control.

Until it chooses to change up / down

let's acknowledge - you like autos and think they are amazing - you can't see a reason not to have them, but I and others prefer to have manual - I have no doubt that for many drivers an auto is a far better choice - and it is great to see their capability improved so much - but if you want control / and to have input on what happens then there isn't yet an auto which matches a manual...

The autos you've driven are antiquated then.

Try a modern one, especially a modern one with different modes. You are welcome to derive mine if you are local to Cheshire. It will give every bit of holding a gear, responsiveness etc etc as a manual.

But it would be fruitless.

You like manuals, you prefer manuals. You just don't like autos. You're allowed to just not like them. That's all. To try and justify it with 'facts', and put science behind your dislike it won't work. You just don't like them.

I don't like Audi saloons. I could try and justify it having driven dozens, but at the end of the day, I just don't like them.
I likewise don't like estate cars. I could again argue the reasons for it, but it would be to no avail. I just don't like them.

Same thing with people irrational SUV hatred, or dislike of the French. Or people with Ginger hair.

[Ares]

Ozone said:

Ares said:

There isn't a 'sport' mode. Sounds like you were in Advanced Efficiency by accident, that short shifts

That explains why I think it's not sporty, there isn't a 'sport' mode!

There is a dynamic mode though. But that revs to the red line, even on half throttle, so you weren't in that.

[Ares]

RicksAlfas said:

RobM77 said:

This is precisely my point. I've no wish to convert an auto lovers into manual lovers, and I find the reverse tiresome and pointless. Some people just have a strong preference for one or the other - just like RWD or FWD or turbo or n/a; we all have our preferences. It's all the more weird because in mainland Europe a manual box is available. As another poster pointed out earlier, the car itself doesn't offer the variety of other marques either - unlike a 3 series there's no estate options, or GT option, coupé option etc. I guess that Alfa and Jag (the XE is the same) just don't expect to sell their cars in enough numbers to justify it?

Or they don't have the money to do so?

I wonder if RHD means Alfa can't offer a manual box, or it's the market which doesn't warrant it?

From what I was told pre-launch, there was never the plan to offer manual in the UK, as there was no demand.
There was a plan to offer manual in the US, but they likewise discovered that there was no real demand.

[Ares]

akirk said:

Ares said:

akirk said:

Ares said:

akirk said:

exactly...
yes an auto is faster at the physical change but if even 1 in 10 changes result in the car saying no thanks then that is a very slow result and not acceptable... and I am yet to drive the auto which always does what I want / gets it right every time...

the perfect combination is when driver and car work together as one, not when they are battling each other...

What autos have you driven? Right from my 2007 330i, I've never had an auto that has done something other that what I would want?

Conversely, I do sometimes get 3rd/5th and 2nd/4th mixed up on Mrs Ares' MINI.

Lots I own two autos - classic RR in which it is perfect - doze off in the armchair seat while reading the paper and the car blunders on... / z3 in which it is not ideal (but car was v. cheap, so kept as a fun soft-top - would prefer a manual) - can stick it in 'manual mode' but car will still make independent choices and change at times... e.g. when slowing down it will drop back to second gear - you then go to do the same and find you push into first gear which you didn't want...

but in addition to those I have driven modern / old / computerised / non-computerised - pre-selectors / auto boxes / manual mode / no manual mode etc. and am still to find one which is anyway close to what I am choosing for it to do...

an example I have given above was the e63 AMG - every choice you make - even in manual - there was a feeling that it was deciding whether to let you or not - nowhere near as nice as a manual... as for modern 911s - there is a reason they build some cars with a manual gearbox - because the auto still doesn't offer the same feel

Ares said:

The scenario you describe does't happen though, except in efficiency modes. Stick a car in sport/dynamic/etc mode, and it will hold the gear if you are using any throttle.

And you have always got easily accessible manual control over and above if you want further control.

Until it chooses to change up / down

let's acknowledge - you like autos and think they are amazing - you can't see a reason not to have them, but I and others prefer to have manual - I have no doubt that for many drivers an auto is a far better choice - and it is great to see their capability improved so much - but if you want control / and to have input on what happens then there isn't yet an auto which matches a manual...

The autos you've driven are antiquated then.

Try a modern one, especially a modern one with different modes. You are welcome to derive mine if you are local to Cheshire. It will give every bit of holding a gear, responsiveness etc etc as a manual.

But it would be fruitless.

You like manuals, you prefer manuals. You just don't like autos. You're allowed to just not like them. That's all. To try and justify it with 'facts', and put science behind your dislike it won't work. You just don't like them.

I don't like Audi saloons. I could try and justify it having driven dozens, but at the end of the day, I just don't like them.
I likewise don't like estate cars. I could again argue the reasons for it, but it would be to no avail. I just don't like them.

Same thing with people irrational SUV hatred, or dislike of the French. Or people with Ginger hair.

I am not sure you actually bothered reading what I wrote
but maybe a brand new e63 AMG has an antiquated auto system?
maybe brand new 911s have a gearbox from the 60s?
maybe you just have an idea you believe in and don't bother reading replies?

And you are wrong - I do like Autos - I like them a lot - but for when I want to actually drive a car, then I want to be in control and don't want a computer that thinks it knows better and isn't - but I don't expect you to read that anyway

I don't try and justify anything - if you actually bothered reading what I wrote you will see that I totally accept that for many people an auto is ideal - e.g. those who might put a manual gearbox into the wrong gear?! but no, you make a whole bunch of inaccurate assumptions and keep on and on about them - for those of us on here 'defending' manual gearboxes - e.g. RobM77 and myself - we are careful to clarify that it is our personal preference and we fully accept that others may have a different perspective - for some reason though you don't seem to understand that two different people can have a different view and both be valid in that view for themselves - i.e. you are allowed to like autos and we are allowed to like manuals - there is no internet battle here, no having to prove one better than another - amazingly the world ticks along quite well with both in existence... but don't waste your effort telling us that we are wrong and that when we drive we would be better off with autos - and that an auto can do everything we want exactly like a manual - it doesn't - they are different and having spent a lot of time driving a large variety of cars including lots with brand new sophisticated autos, they do not allow me to drive as I want to - where I am in control and choose exactly what happens at what point... hence I choose to have both - as I said before (but you probably didn't bother reading it) I have a RR with an auto - perfect for it, especially off road, squirt and go - lazy driving - but the M5 I chose to buy one with a manual...

TLDR? You are wrong in your assumptions

I'll make the effort to ignore your sanctimonious tone.

I didn't read it as obvious that you'd driven the C63. IMO, having nearly bought an S last year, it's not the best example of an Auto box, but still very good. And you describe it having a 'feeling' that it was deciding whether to 'let you' or not, still at odds with your comment that no auto ever does what you want or gets it right every time.

Ditto the 911. I assume you mean the PDK? You talk of feel again, still at odds with your comment that it doesn't so what you want or get it right every time. Feel is wholly subjective, and if you dislike the auto in that application, it will never feel right regardless of how is actually performs.

You don't like performance autos. Fine. As said a million times. You don't like how they feel, how they look - but you are trying to justify it by saying "and I am yet to drive the auto which always does what I want / gets it right every time" - when what you mean is, you just don't like them.

I hope my reply is understandably without mirroring your seemingly patronising tone and repeated use of the ' ' smilie.