Alfa Romeo 147 GTA | The Brave Pill
Discussion
Water Fairy said:
Roy m said:
+1 - no bravery needed for this!
I think it qualifies as a brave pill. Horses for courses at the end of the day. Everything is relative. This may be 'only' 6k but could easily cost that again if you're unlucky. I don't think anyone would buy this and give up on it tbh. £2000 motor maybe, but not 6k on a GTA.
I have been in exactly one 147, broke down on the test drive.
Despite the dealer getting his tame mechanic out and trying to tell me it was just low of fuel they couldn’t get it going.
I walked away from the car and dealer, leaving them on the side of a duel carriageway, never to set foot into an Alfa again.
Despite the dealer getting his tame mechanic out and trying to tell me it was just low of fuel they couldn’t get it going.
I walked away from the car and dealer, leaving them on the side of a duel carriageway, never to set foot into an Alfa again.
Chestrockwell said:
I don’t understand the blind love for Alfa’s, I’m not a big fan but I appreciate a good Alfa when I see one, I haven’t driven one of these but the article seems to have slated the car in every aspect but the engine and driving normally yet it still receives a lot of praise.
It’s a nice looking car, it definitely sounds nice with a good engine but that’s at far as it goes!
I don’t see this as a classic, I see a not a very good car that was outshined by rivals that ultimately made it a flop.
Look at an EP3 Civic Type R, creeping up to 3k for a decent one despite thousands been built, now that’s a hot hatch that’s a future classic!
I can’t imagine anything worse than an EP3. I can’t stand the looks (inside or outside) whatsoever, nor the noise. I’d far rather one of these, hell I’d rather have an R32 just for the engine which sounds great with a Miltek.It’s a nice looking car, it definitely sounds nice with a good engine but that’s at far as it goes!
I don’t see this as a classic, I see a not a very good car that was outshined by rivals that ultimately made it a flop.
Look at an EP3 Civic Type R, creeping up to 3k for a decent one despite thousands been built, now that’s a hot hatch that’s a future classic!
Edited by Chestrockwell on Saturday 18th January 17:04
I've always lusted after one of these but always had a heavy commute and knew it would cripple me. I dipped my foot into 6 pots when i was younger and more stupid than i am now, i got offered a mk4 r32 as a px but had a 90 mile a day commute during the week, seemed like a great idea! I had the car 4 months and couldnt take it any more and a mk4 r32 is wholly sensible compared to a 147 GTA!
I still look at them from time to time, the flood of jap import ones put any corrosion issue niggles at bay but most seem to be auto. I also bought a 2.0 Lusso 156 as a stop gap at one point and i still talk about it to this day, £900, full momo italia heated leather, bose surround sound, cruise control etc. it was better specified than the 330cd i spent 7 times the amount on!
I still look at them from time to time, the flood of jap import ones put any corrosion issue niggles at bay but most seem to be auto. I also bought a 2.0 Lusso 156 as a stop gap at one point and i still talk about it to this day, £900, full momo italia heated leather, bose surround sound, cruise control etc. it was better specified than the 330cd i spent 7 times the amount on!
Time has definitely been kind to this. I remember most of the reviews, group tests of the day when it was new and even it's appearance on top gear, it appeared as a tuned version too, it was the episode with Paul McKenna.
It was an understeering bit of a mess. Visually not bad to my eyes ( certainly not beautiful) and has an interesting and sonorous engine.
Now, I think there are other cars I'd have even from its peers.
It was an understeering bit of a mess. Visually not bad to my eyes ( certainly not beautiful) and has an interesting and sonorous engine.
Now, I think there are other cars I'd have even from its peers.
I will go against the grain here as a GTA owner of 8 years and say it absolutely can be a brave pill to swallow - if you buy one which has not had much preventative work done to it.
They need more maintenance than a lot of other cars which is where it may catch the unwary new owner out, coming perhaps from a German or Japanese car - you have to remember you are purchasing an ageing quirky Italian car with an alarming tendency to rust.
It will need undersealing. It will need oil and radiator pipes checking & perhaps replacing. It will eat suspension bushes for breakfast (to the point you view top arms as a consumable like an oil change). Heated seat switches break so often that a lot of owners just don't use them. You will have odd electrical issues, like an MCSF light which will promptly disappear on engine restart and never return,.
Looked after properly, they are tremendous cars, but be prepared for larger bills if you wish to prevent problems further down the line.
Anyone looking to buy a GTA these days should look for a good folder full of receipts for maintenance work, or set a good budget aside to have the things done - this is above and beyond the stuff like diff which has already been mentioned (tbh there can't be many 147 GTAs left without a good diff these days).
They need more maintenance than a lot of other cars which is where it may catch the unwary new owner out, coming perhaps from a German or Japanese car - you have to remember you are purchasing an ageing quirky Italian car with an alarming tendency to rust.
It will need undersealing. It will need oil and radiator pipes checking & perhaps replacing. It will eat suspension bushes for breakfast (to the point you view top arms as a consumable like an oil change). Heated seat switches break so often that a lot of owners just don't use them. You will have odd electrical issues, like an MCSF light which will promptly disappear on engine restart and never return,.
Looked after properly, they are tremendous cars, but be prepared for larger bills if you wish to prevent problems further down the line.
Anyone looking to buy a GTA these days should look for a good folder full of receipts for maintenance work, or set a good budget aside to have the things done - this is above and beyond the stuff like diff which has already been mentioned (tbh there can't be many 147 GTAs left without a good diff these days).
The replies to this thread are entirely predictable. Don't get me wrong, these are a pretty car with a nice engine, but they are one of the most rose-tinted cars going I think. It was panned when new and is expensive for its age/capabilities now and yet, most are gushing over it. It shows what a strange bunch car enthusiasts are, that's for sure 
I am no Alfa fan, but it does have a certain appeal. I must say, for the money, I would struggle to buy one. There is just so much better stuff out there.
I don't understand the writer's comments about V6s though? Yes ,Alfa V6s sound good, but the article seems to suggest that V6s don't sound good on the whole. That strikes me as being, to be honest, nonsense.
I am no Alfa fan, but it does have a certain appeal. I must say, for the money, I would struggle to buy one. There is just so much better stuff out there.
I don't understand the writer's comments about V6s though? Yes ,Alfa V6s sound good, but the article seems to suggest that V6s don't sound good on the whole. That strikes me as being, to be honest, nonsense.
otolith said:
Jon_S_Rally said:
There is just so much better stuff out there.
I don't do hot hatches anymore, but one with a V6 does have some attraction in principle. That pretty much means 147, Golf or A3, and the latter two would bore the tits off me. Something else in mind?
I'd have a clio in a heartbeat over the Alfa, even if the 147 could blow it away in a straight line. The Clio to me would be more of an event to drive.
I had one of these for 7 years and only sold up last year as the alternator went last year and I just couldn't stomach spending 5/600 to get the alternator repaired after I'd fitted an ECU (£1300), and done a lot of suspension work about 6 months before!
Make no mistake these are expensive cars to maintain, I probably averaged around about 1.5k a year on basic maintenance.
The GTAs are all about the engine, I used to think if it didnt have the busso engine the rest of the car is pretty mediocre to be honest! A bit like a poster mentioned above, you kind of always got the feeling that something big was going to go on the car!
Overall a very nice car to run and drive with a great sense of occasion but be prepared to spend to keep them in excellent condition. Highlights from ownership include a long drive from alicante to london in one hit, welsh road trips and a track day!
Make no mistake these are expensive cars to maintain, I probably averaged around about 1.5k a year on basic maintenance.
The GTAs are all about the engine, I used to think if it didnt have the busso engine the rest of the car is pretty mediocre to be honest! A bit like a poster mentioned above, you kind of always got the feeling that something big was going to go on the car!
Overall a very nice car to run and drive with a great sense of occasion but be prepared to spend to keep them in excellent condition. Highlights from ownership include a long drive from alicante to london in one hit, welsh road trips and a track day!
FrenchCarFan said:
Jon_S_Rally said:
There is just so much better stuff out there.
When new this was in the same price range as the 255 Clio V6 iirc.Identical power - 247bhp - front wheel drive and similar performance - both similar age too
Edited by s m on Monday 20th January 12:55
Jon_S_Rally said:
The replies to this thread are entirely predictable. Don't get me wrong, these are a pretty car with a nice engine, but they are one of the most rose-tinted cars going I think. It was panned when new and is expensive for its age/capabilities now and yet, most are gushing over it. It shows what a strange bunch car enthusiasts are, that's for sure
I am no Alfa fan, but it does have a certain appeal. I must say, for the money, I would struggle to buy one. There is just so much better stuff out there.
I don't understand the writer's comments about V6s though? Yes ,Alfa V6s sound good, but the article seems to suggest that V6s don't sound good on the whole. That strikes me as being, to be honest, nonsense.
I think you need to take the original reviews with a pinch of salt to be honest. This was an age of peak Subaru/Mitsubishi 4wd traction. It was almost a case of 'look how silly it is to put 250bhp through the front wheels only, and we'll prove it'. Look what happens when you mash the throttle on full lock in second gear with the traction control off!!I am no Alfa fan, but it does have a certain appeal. I must say, for the money, I would struggle to buy one. There is just so much better stuff out there.
I don't understand the writer's comments about V6s though? Yes ,Alfa V6s sound good, but the article seems to suggest that V6s don't sound good on the whole. That strikes me as being, to be honest, nonsense.
The top gear review basically purposefully drove the car to smoke the front tyres on purpose. Sure, with a big V6 it's never going to be as nimble as a 205 GTI, and combine this with the classic alfa way of not quite finishing cars development, leaving the owners to finish off a few technical bits, and you have people thinking they are pretty, but a bit rubbish. However, the basics are pretty good and with the Q2 diff and a tweak of suspension these issues are largely resolved. Plus you still have great styling outside and inside, and sublime engine.
Some other hot hatches may have handled better in stock form but crucially owners cant do anything about the dull, dated styling or bland interior to improve it. And they don't have a V6 busso.
To say its overpriced for its age/capabilities misses the point somewhat, that puts old 911's, e-types, DB5's in trouble. And to be honest considering they are 17 years old 6 secs to 60 and 14-15secs to 100 will not trouble a golf R or a M140i but its not slow.
Had mine over 7 years. It was actually the PH spotted story, back then.
I love it. Something about the big engine in a small car that does it for me. Doubt I will ever sell.
Probably right when estimating about £1.5k/yr for upkeep. Mine used to cost much less, but you find more things need preventative maintenance these days, as the youngest ones are 15 years old now.
Having owned mine for 16 years I would say there is a certain amount of bravery required at this point unless you have the skills, or know someone who does, to sort it out when things go wrong. I fall very much into the latter category!
As seems par for the course mine has had a Q2, bigger brakes and Ragazzon exhaust but it also has AHM cams and the larger of the 2 superchargers Autodelta offered back in the day (and a whole bunch of other bits and pieces to help it go round corners etc.), 371bhp at the engine, not sure at the wheels but immense fun.
As I recall though my rose tinted specs, the only thing that broke that I can put down to the car was the first gearbox. I can honestly say that it was/is remarkably reliable aside from that.
It doesn't get driven any more, and I should really get round to selling it but I think i keep putting it off as it will be a little difficult to let go. They are a special car IMHO!
As seems par for the course mine has had a Q2, bigger brakes and Ragazzon exhaust but it also has AHM cams and the larger of the 2 superchargers Autodelta offered back in the day (and a whole bunch of other bits and pieces to help it go round corners etc.), 371bhp at the engine, not sure at the wheels but immense fun.
As I recall though my rose tinted specs, the only thing that broke that I can put down to the car was the first gearbox. I can honestly say that it was/is remarkably reliable aside from that.
It doesn't get driven any more, and I should really get round to selling it but I think i keep putting it off as it will be a little difficult to let go. They are a special car IMHO!
FrenchCarFan said:
otolith said:
Jon_S_Rally said:
There is just so much better stuff out there.
I don't do hot hatches anymore, but one with a V6 does have some attraction in principle. That pretty much means 147, Golf or A3, and the latter two would bore the tits off me. Something else in mind?
I'd have a clio in a heartbeat over the Alfa, even if the 147 could blow it away in a straight line. The Clio to me would be more of an event to drive.
otolith said:
I don't do hot hatches anymore, but one with a V6 does have some attraction in principle. That pretty much means 147, Golf or A3, and the latter two would bore the tits off me. Something else in mind?
It depends how much you prioritise engine configuration I guess. I don't really, so these just don't seem worth the aggro/cost.
ITP said:
I think you need to take the original reviews with a pinch of salt to be honest. This was an age of peak Subaru/Mitsubishi 4wd traction. It was almost a case of 'look how silly it is to put 250bhp through the front wheels only, and we'll prove it'. Look what happens when you mash the throttle on full lock in second gear with the traction control off!!
The top gear review basically purposefully drove the car to smoke the front tyres on purpose. Sure, with a big V6 it's never going to be as nimble as a 205 GTI, and combine this with the classic alfa way of not quite finishing cars development, leaving the owners to finish off a few technical bits, and you have people thinking they are pretty, but a bit rubbish. However, the basics are pretty good and with the Q2 diff and a tweak of suspension these issues are largely resolved. Plus you still have great styling outside and inside, and sublime engine.
Some other hot hatches may have handled better in stock form but crucially owners cant do anything about the dull, dated styling or bland interior to improve it. And they don't have a V6 busso.
To say its overpriced for its age/capabilities misses the point somewhat, that puts old 911's, e-types, DB5's in trouble. And to be honest considering they are 17 years old 6 secs to 60 and 14-15secs to 100 will not trouble a golf R or a M140i but its not slow.
Given what you said about lack of development, lack of traction and the fact it needs to be modified to work, doesn't that mean that it is actually a bit rubbish? The top gear review basically purposefully drove the car to smoke the front tyres on purpose. Sure, with a big V6 it's never going to be as nimble as a 205 GTI, and combine this with the classic alfa way of not quite finishing cars development, leaving the owners to finish off a few technical bits, and you have people thinking they are pretty, but a bit rubbish. However, the basics are pretty good and with the Q2 diff and a tweak of suspension these issues are largely resolved. Plus you still have great styling outside and inside, and sublime engine.
Some other hot hatches may have handled better in stock form but crucially owners cant do anything about the dull, dated styling or bland interior to improve it. And they don't have a V6 busso.
To say its overpriced for its age/capabilities misses the point somewhat, that puts old 911's, e-types, DB5's in trouble. And to be honest considering they are 17 years old 6 secs to 60 and 14-15secs to 100 will not trouble a golf R or a M140i but its not slow.
Don't get me wrong, I can see why it has a following, because it's quite an interesting car, and I imagine it has a bit of character but, from my point of view, I'm just not sure it could justify the cost. As above, to get into a nice one, you're looking at Megane 250/265 money and that is pretty stiff competition for the Alfa, regardless of how much you want a V6. Leaving aside the performance side, the Meg is almost 10 years newer, with bluetooth and all that other stuff that makes living with it much easier.
An interesting car and I'm pleased it exists, but it's not one I could ever see me spending money on.
Edited by Jon_S_Rally on Monday 20th January 15:12
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff