RE: Alfa Romeo Stelvio QF vs. Mercedes-AMG C63 S

[nickfrog]

Griffgrog said:

Max_Torque said:

My commute is 16 miles of B road, and yes, i can often touch 120 or more mph without trying that hard on the straighter bits....... (modern cars ARE fast, in case you haven't noticed)

Edited by Max_Torque on Saturday 23 March 19:36

120mph on B roads !!!!!!!

I think someone has hijacked MT's account.

[anonymous-user]

garystoybox said:

Anybody bragging about regularly hitting 120 mph on B roads is either a fantasist or an idiot.... most likely both. Keep it for the track fool.

I didn't say I did it. I said in these cars it's incredibly easy to do it.

[anonymous-user]

garystoybox said:

janesmith1950 said:

Griffgrog said:

120mph on B roads !!!!!!!

When you've 500bhp+ to play with it takes very little time to reach those speeds. I'm not condoning it as good practice, however passing a couple of cars and a lorry at WOT from 50mph could easily see you over that kind of speed by the time you completed the manoeuvre.

An M3 with 450hp will go from standstill to 100mph in less than 9 seconds.

All these cars are fking quick!

Anybody bragging about regularly hitting 120 mph on B roads is either a fantasist or an idiot.... most likely both. Keep it for the track fool.

er, i'm not bragging about it. Merely pointing out that if my crappy diesel estate, which is far, far from the fastest car in the world can get to 120 mph on a B road, then to claim a "performance SUV" is faster necessarily means that it will have to go even faster than 120 mph! Besides, anyone who owns a modern performance car and doesn't use the performance, what's the point, may as well buy the diesel version eh? (like me ;-) )

[Evoman]

Surprisingly entertaining read there, well done to Alfa for creating this machine with a proper wild side to it, fantastic. Sounds properly unhinged when you're on it in race mode

[DonkeyApple]

Gandahar said:

DonkeyApple said:

You’ve really got to be travelling at very silly speeds on a public highway to surpass the big advantage of that extra forward vision that a high performance SUV gives. Being able to see further, over fewer obstacles opens up a lot more safe overtaking opportunities than in a similar footprint car of similar performance that is a couple of feet lower.

Is that what enjoying a car has become, being able to see further so having more room to overtake?



I'd rather have a low car that handled well and an alarm clock that goes off at 6am on a Sunday morning.

If you were in Devon last summer you would often see that extra forward vision being used at 2mph as two large SUV's tried to squeeze past each other whilst holding up other traffic......

Bugger off to Which Car Magazine forum . I think they have a caravan towing supplement this month

Edited by Gandahar on Sunday 24th March 14:24

Or just have both types of car and avoid pensioner hotspots.

[deltashad]

I think the c63 has a lot more space for sexy stuff. A bit bigger to park. But al depends on your everyday activities

[westernlancia]

So remind me again... apart from impressing morons and shagging up the centre of gravity, what is the exact purpose of the raised ride height in an SUV?

[westernlancia]

StuH said:

GranCab said:

Now this is a face only a (short-sighted) mother could love ... what ever happened to Italian style and elegance ?

Agreed. It’s a complete munter and those wheels, dear god no! Interior looks like it belongs in our old Fiat Brava

Merc all day long for me.....

It's such a shame - FCA had two classic grilles available, and they picked the munter (Alfas always look like they have pinched cheeks). If they had used their other one (Lancia), which in most of its incarnations (admittedly not some of the recent abominations) was horizontally-oriented, they could have produced some truly pretty cars (think Thema, Dedra, Lybra or Integrale grille on a modern car). Sadly Mazda seem to have nicked it off them with the RX-8 and later cars (they even seem to have swiped the badge shape on the RX-8 - FCA's lawyers, where were you?). Which is why nowadays Mazdas are pretty and FCA's stuff isn't.

Edited by westernlancia on Sunday 24th March 19:52

Edited by westernlancia on Sunday 24th March 19:53

[Barga]

westernlancia said:

It's such a shame - FCA had two classic grilles available, and they picked the munter (Alfas always look like they have pinched cheeks). If they had used their other one (Lancia), which in most of its incarnations (admittedly not some of the recent abominations) was horizontally-oriented, they could have produced some truly pretty cars (think Thema, Dedra, Lybra or Integrale grille on a modern car). Sadly Mazda seem to have nicked it off them with the RX-8 and later cars (they even seem to have swiped the badge shape on the RX-8 - FCA's lawyers, where were you?). Which is why nowadays Mazdas are pretty and FCA's stuff isn't.

Edited by westernlancia on Sunday 24th March 19:52

Edited by westernlancia on Sunday 24th March 19:53

The Gulia is a pretty car imo and sticking a Lancia grill on an Alfa Romeo

[Jumpy Guy]

So, having had fastish German estates, and an Alfa Sportwagon in the past, I have to say I'd take the Alfa.

The merc interior is trying waaay too hard, although I don't doubt the materials are decent. Front grille is messy too.

I like the Alfa performance, and the fact it doesn't look 'German', although it's no looker.

The merc is also much too indirect... 9 levels of intervention, 5 driver modes, 3 weather modes, if I remember correctly.

and I find the added ground clearance of a SUV useful, too

[DoubleD]

westernlancia said:

So remind me again... apart from impressing morons and shagging up the centre of gravity, what is the exact purpose of the raised ride height in an SUV?

Some people like sitting up higher in a car. Its not for me, or you by the sounds of it, but as im sure you will agree, choice is a wonderful thing.

[9k rpm]

Can someone with a bit of engineering knowledge explain to my why the article states there is only 5kg weight difference between these two? Or is it a typo?

I’d have thought the 4wd and the larger body/chassis of the Alfa would mean the merc should weigh considerably less.

Is the merc made of lead?

[autofocus]

Hi there,

Seems the Stelvio QF's are pretty good on top speed runs as well. A few owners were certainly practising at VMAX yesterday.







Regards

Tim

[cerb4.5lee]

9k rpm said:

Is the merc made of lead?

German cars are always heavy and its par for the course. The Alfa is relatively light for what it is to be fair, also the Quadrifoglio saloon is commendably light compared to its rivals as well.

[anonymous-user]

autofocus said:

Hi there,

Seems the Stelvio QF's are pretty good on top speed runs as well. A few owners were certainly practising at VMAX yesterday.







Regards

Tim

Jesus, I hope it's fast, because it's certainly fking ugly.

[Jim on the hill]

westernlancia said:

So remind me again... apart from impressing morons and shagging up the centre of gravity, what is the exact purpose of the raised ride height in an SUV?

Ground clearance... Well that's why I have one.

[9k rpm]

cerb4.5lee said:

9k rpm said:

Is the merc made of lead?

German cars are always heavy and its par for the course. The Alfa is relatively light for what it is to be fair, also the Quadrifoglio saloon is commendably light compared to its rivals as well.

Didn’t know the Giulia was that light so just did some research and am really surprised:
M3 saloon 1,560kg
C63 amg 1,825kg
Giulia quadrifoglio 1,524kg
RS4 avant 1,799kg

Seems it’s only Mercs and Audis that are heavy although you can sort of forgive the RS4 as it has 4wd.

[cerb4.5lee]

9k rpm said:

cerb4.5lee said:

9k rpm said:

Is the merc made of lead?

German cars are always heavy and its par for the course. The Alfa is relatively light for what it is to be fair, also the Quadrifoglio saloon is commendably light compared to its rivals as well.

Didn’t know the Giulia was that light so just did some research and am really surprised:
M3 saloon 1,560kg
C63 amg 1,825kg
Giulia quadrifoglio 1,524kg
RS4 avant 1,799kg

Seems it’s only Mercs and Audis that are heavy although you can sort of forgive the RS4 as it has 4wd.

I've had seven Bmw's and they have all felt heavy to me...so I think that I've just fell into a trap of generalisation rightly or wrongly. I do admire what Alfa have done regards the weight though for sure.

[craig_m67]

C.MW said:

Up until last decade, if I remember correctly, cars from luxury brands (whether it be a Merc or something non-German) were defined by the simplicity, elegance and restraint in their design. And oh do I miss those days. I'd normally prefer a performance estate over an SUV any day but I can't shake away the impression that the Merc is just trying too hard especially with its interior. Those blingy bits laid everywhere possible would be sure to cause a headache after a long day at work. And what is with the ambient lighting reminiscent of a cheesy night club's? I never thought I'd say this but the Alfa's Mazda-esque interior looks better, at least it's simpler and more restrained in comparison though the material used could be improved.

Mazda have been copying Alfa’s design language for decades, they have even taken Alfa cast offs from Bertone and used them.

I don’t say this to be harsh to Mazda, I like them. Indeed apart from the price, the CX-5/8/9 is a close competitor to the povpack Stelvio in my market/mind.

It’s just interesting to me (as a 30yr Alfa fanboi/owner) that people might consider that Alfa is copying Mazda.. it’s the other way around, or at least, Mazda has continued to produce cars with the design language whilst Alfa have mucked about not producing anything consistent for 30yrs

[robm3]

DonkeyApple said:

Gandahar said:

DonkeyApple said:

You’ve really got to be travelling at very silly speeds on a public highway to surpass the big advantage of that extra forward vision that a high performance SUV gives. Being able to see further, over fewer obstacles opens up a lot more safe overtaking opportunities than in a similar footprint car of similar performance that is a couple of feet lower.

Is that what enjoying a car has become, being able to see further so having more room to overtake?



I'd rather have a low car that handled well and an alarm clock that goes off at 6am on a Sunday morning.

If you were in Devon last summer you would often see that extra forward vision being used at 2mph as two large SUV's tried to squeeze past each other whilst holding up other traffic......

Bugger off to Which Car Magazine forum . I think they have a caravan towing supplement this month

Edited by Gandahar on Sunday 24th March 14:24

Or just have both types of car and avoid pensioner hotspots.

Height makes motorway commuting a hell of a lot easier. Just traded my 428i for a RR Sport and do not miss being level with brake lights, spray, limited visibility etc.. I can see why people are flocking to Sports SUVs, people that do big mileage anyhow.
Got a Mini JCW for the 5am stuff.