Giulia. New segment leader? Would you buy one?

[Toltec]

It may be auto only, however looking at autotrader of the 123 for sale 43% are petrol versus 17% of BMW 3 series from 2017 on and 13% from 2015 on.

[telecat]

I have an M240i MANUAL. If Jaguar had produced a XE petrol manual I would have been interested. If this Alfa was manual I would be interested. As it stands where Jaguar and Alfa miss out is in the second hand market where the manuals have higher residuals. Mainly the Autos are seen as a better bet new due to co2 but that's not a consideration for the next owner.

[Big GT]

As a regular consumer of mid size execs over the 15 years I would say the pecking order is now

1) Alfa Giulia
2) Jag XE
3) 3 series / 4 series
4) A4
5) Merc C

All are good. 3-5 are very similar. The Jag has the best handing / chassis but the Alfa is much nicer.

So last year I had to pick (2.0tdi form whoop!) and chose a Skoda VRS

[RobM77]

Big GT said:

As a regular consumer of mid size execs over the 15 years I would say the pecking order is now

1) Alfa Giulia
2) Jag XE
3) 3 series / 4 series
4) A4
5) Merc C

All are good. 3-5 are very similar. The Jag has the best handing / chassis but the Alfa is much nicer.

So last year I had to pick (2.0tdi form whoop!) and chose a Skoda VRS

I had an brand new A4 for three months a few years ago whilst my 3 series was being repaired and I wouldn't say it was similar to the 3 series. It was an interesting comparison, but virtually everything about it was completely and utterly different. The engine response over the rev range was entirely different; both were 2L diesels, but the Audi had a sudden surge over a narrow rev range, whereas the BMW had a much broader spread of torque. The handling was chalk and cheese between them; not a single degree of commonality. The layout of the controls, both on the dash and around the driver, was completely different. I could go on, but you get the picture.

I've not got enough extensive experience of the others to comment. I have spent a lot of time in #6 onwards though as hire cars (Skoda Octavia, Ford Mondeo, Vauxhall Vectra, Peugeots, Alfas etc), and I'd say the difference between 3 series and A4 was amongst the largest in the sector (and sub-sector of 'premium' cars of this size).

[griffsomething]

Not driven the Giulia, or any of its rivals but if I was in the market for a car like that I think based on looks and interior design and how well they apparently drive etc alone it’d be top for me:

1) Giulia
2) Jag XE
3) C-Class
4) 3 series
5) Lexus IS
6) A4
7) That Infiniti thing?

There’s just something about them that’s very desirable

[rxe]

RobM77 said:

An auto in full auto mode doesn't know the difference between cornering, when you need revs for control, and a straight, when you want lack of revs for mpg.

An auto in 'manual mode' is still a slushy torque converter.

A double clutch box is much better, but they're extremely heavy.

A manual just solves the above problems immediately.

I rented one for a while in Spain. I am also of the persuasion that the clutch pedal will only be pried from my cold, dead foot. I expected not to like it, but it was fine. I ragged it (hard) on twisty mountain roads and it didn’t get it wrong once. The diff started to get a bit chattery on hairpins, but the gearbox was fine. I tried driving it manually, but I gave up after a while, auto was better. If you really think it is going to get it wrong, you can just pull on the paddles.

Interior was nice, I liked the infotainment system, the only downside was an electrical issue that froze the car once when I parked it. This was a very early one and probably riddled with bugs - a quick battery disconnect/reconnect sorted everything.

I’d have one in a flash if I needed a new (or nearly new) car and they made an estate.

[Alucidnation]

Still trying to justify your car choice OP?

[akirk]

Ares said:

RobM77 said:

Ares said:

As is calling any car with an Auto, boring.

....and you realise that BMW sells way more autos than manuals don't you? That's because, aside from men that think not have a stick manual affects their masculinity, most drivers realise they are now way better

Most drivers want boring and effortless, that's why autos are popular. An auto suits that perfectly. Even most drivers of performance cars don't actually enjoy or even understand any more than just the power of a performance car - handling and driving through corners is a niche interest, which is why manuals are a niche thing, I freely accept that.

True. But those who want ultimate performance also want the auto/dsg/etc - because it gives ultimate performance. So what you are saying is the beige, middle of the road, average driver that likes driving wants the manual?

Same as when servo brakes came in, 'real' drivers didn't want it as it robbed the car of brake feel.

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!

[velocemitch]

Avalyn said:

I'd certainly look at a Guilia if I was in the market for a sporty saloon, however I have a feeling I'd head to BMW or Audi for something that didn't have a blown 4 pot ..

velocemitch said:

Using the paddles is a skill in itself (not one i have mastered yet!)

I'm a little unsure of this comment though, I can't see how using a paddle is a skill .. you use one finger, or two maybe, and pull back when you want to change a gear .. it's a pretty basic skill. I appreciate some of the skill may be in terms of what gear do I want to be in for this corner etc. but it's only confusing now as there are usually 7, 8 or 9 speeds and you've no gut feel for whether you're in 4/5/6/7 etc. so you may as well let the car sort it out as it usually does it better.

I may be a tad biased as I'm driving a 5.0 v8 manual and wouldn't have it any other way after 5 years of auto/PDK/S-Tronic

Yes basically the skill is choosing the right gear at ‘precisely’ the right time, obviously pulling a paddle isn’t particularly demanding unless you are deformed!. When you manually change going down a box it takes two or three seconds, instinct experience and skill informs you when you declutch, blip the throttle and rev match then re engage. When that operation is being done in a split second the precise timing is more critical.
I’m finding I’m changing down too early and sometimes too many times.
It’s a whole new skill that needs to be learnt.

Changing up mid corner is a different issue too, much easier than a manual, but just because you can, should you?.

[Ahbefive]

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.

[bloomen]

I have never, ever, ever driven an auto of any type that didn't ultimately make me want to kill myself.

Going from many weeks of hopping between top line rental cars in the US back to a clapped out and very manual Peugeot 206 at Heathrow was enough to make me well up with joy.

I can't believe Alfa aren't offering manual options. If they did I'd probably already have a Quadrifoglio. As it is I may import a LHD one. Whatever inconvenience is worth it.

If manuals go properly extinct then I'm buying a barn and filling it with manual relics and parts to keep them going.

[Ares]

RobM77 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.

You're still confusing opinion with fact. It's your opinion that the auto Giulia is nicer to drive than the manual. 'Nice' is a subjective term and belongs solely in the realm of opinion, alongside thoughts on music, art, sport, holiday destinations and bathroom tap design.

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

Ahbefive's three 'facts' were wrong.

FWIW, every person that has driven the manual Giulia has said the same. It's not as good as the auto. That'll be down to a) how good the auto is, and b) how poor the manual is.

[Ares]

Agent XXX said:

Ares said:

Come and try my dark grey QV.

If your heart rate doesn't double and you don't leave thinking it's an Alfa, I'll buy you a bottle of 2008 Amarone

2008? Nice choice.

Not an accident

[Ares]

Dr Gitlin said:

Also, the wheel and pedals are a bit too offset from the centerline of the driver's seat. But again, none of this matters, it's a cracking car.

Can't speak for LHD, but unlike Alfa's of old, and unlike the M3, the wheel pedal alignment is perfect IMO (as it was in the C63) - I suspect as RHD was never set up to allow for a three pedal requirement in either.

[200Plus Club]

the Alfa QF in auto is a simply stunning drive. the gear ratios are perfect, the box changes like lightning, and in race mode etc blips on downshifts like an F1 car does. there is no reason whatsoever to avoid one, i would have one tomorrow. go get a test drive booked if you are sceptical about performance autos like the QF

[Ares]

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?

[Ahbefive]

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..........

[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?

[Big GT]

RobM77 said:

Big GT said:

As a regular consumer of mid size execs over the 15 years I would say the pecking order is now

1) Alfa Giulia
2) Jag XE
3) 3 series / 4 series
4) A4
5) Merc C

All are good. 3-5 are very similar. The Jag has the best handing / chassis but the Alfa is much nicer.

So last year I had to pick (2.0tdi form whoop!) and chose a Skoda VRS

I had an brand new A4 for three months a few years ago whilst my 3 series was being repaired and I wouldn't say it was similar to the 3 series. It was an interesting comparison, but virtually everything about it was completely and utterly different. The engine response over the rev range was entirely different; both were 2L diesels, but the Audi had a sudden surge over a narrow rev range, whereas the BMW had a much broader spread of torque. The handling was chalk and cheese between them; not a single degree of commonality. The layout of the controls, both on the dash and around the driver, was completely different. I could go on, but you get the picture.

I've not got enough extensive experience of the others to comment. I have spent a lot of time in #6 onwards though as hire cars (Skoda Octavia, Ford Mondeo, Vauxhall Vectra, Peugeots, Alfas etc), and I'd say the difference between 3 series and A4 was amongst the largest in the sector (and sub-sector of 'premium' cars of this size).

Correct yes

What I meant was similar and a close call in the pecking order