RE: Alfa Brera gets a boost

[Marki]

cirvy said:

In that time, i saw 4 TVRs but not a single 159/Brera.... what on earth is going on? I can sort of understand it with the Brera, sadly, but not the 159!! The Brera is not a good car, but by all accounts, the 159 is.

We seem to have a lot of Alfas arounfd these parts , the 159 has got to be the best looking mid size 4 door you can buy

[cirvy]

LexSport said:

cirvy said:

i find the seat is so poorly designed, that under spirited driving i fall out of it!

Not the ideal solution, but might help: www.cg-lock.com/

Interesting

[peter450]

timberwolf said:

I'd rather see it lose weight though...

A big part of what made the Twin Spark 156 so fun to drive was its light weight for a mid-size modern saloon. (About 1250kg). These are all, what, about 1500-1600kg? I know the press does like to indulge in a bit of Alfa-bashing, but it can't be entirely ignored that every review I've read has mentioned that the car suffers from the high weight of its platform.

I suppose it's just another sad casualty of the increasing trend towards upsizing, safety features and porcine kerb weights.

one mag had one weighed it was something like 1700+ kg!

[macdeb]

cirvy said:

macdeb said:

Top bloke 'cirvy'. TVR + Alfa.

Kind of you to say that mac, i'm afraid though my loyalty has been misplaced with the Brera, it's my 4th Alfa & it may well be the last..... it's that poor

I'm sort of the other way. 4th TVR and 1st Alfa, only 147 JTD lusso mind but what a brilliant car, had it coming up to three years now from new, still like driving it and will definately get another. [sorry, slightly of topic] Was really hoping for great things about the Brera.

[peter450]

The main problem with this car is its just too heavy, a 4 wheel drive car with 260 hp yet its a over second slower to 60 than a 350z (itself no lightweight at 1500 kg +) which only has about 25hp more and is 2 wheel drive so it doenst get the benefit of 4 wheel traction off the line, this huge weight blunts the performance, god only knows what the 2 litre an diesal are like, 2 litre focus pace or worse i expect, this is just not what people expect from a sporting coupe.

As i said in my earlier post this car was weighed in one of its mag road tests and came in over 1700 kg (which i can well believe as 260 hp an 4 wheel drive should add up to a lot more than 6.8 to 60 somthings clearly holding it back), it was a while ago i read it but if memory serves me right that was the lighter 2 litre version aswell!

Its a shame as the car looks great

[cirvy]

In its defence, maybe the pre-occupation with 0-60 times is missing the point of the 4 wheel drive. The way the car maintains its composure when pressed hard over a challenging surface whilst going round a typical B road corner at high speed is like no previous Alfa. Maybe that was the point of this car, i dunno

Either way, thats very difficult to demonstrate on a bit of paper, or even pick up on a test drive.

[richb]

cirvy said:

In its defence, maybe the pre-occupation with 0-60 times is missing the point of the 4 wheel drive. The way the car maintains its composure when pressed hard over a challenging surface whilst going round a typical B road corner at high speed is like no previous Alfa. Maybe that was the point of this car, i dunno

Either way, thats very difficult to demonstrate on a bit of paper, or even pick up on a test drive.

Agree with you about the preoccupation with 0-60 times but when I drove one last weekend it simply felt slow. Admittedly it's hard to compare because I am used to my Griffith 500 but it felt distinctly slower than my wifes 3.0 V6 Spider and probably slower (and certainly as heavy) as my Volvo V70 T5.

p.s. Just looked up the data on my V70 weight 1550kg, 256bhp, 258lbft that's 80kg lighter than the Brera and 140kg lighter than the Spider, with as near as damn it the same power and 20lbft more torque. Surely an estate shouldn't be lighter and faster than the top-end Alfa Romeo Coupe???

Edited by richb on Friday 15th September 10:44

[silversixx]

I love Alfa Romeo to bits.....which is precicely why i have no time for the current GM engined cars.

I'm not saying this out of blind badge-loyaly. I've driven the new cars and they just aint the same as the Alfas I've been driving for years. I have a 156 V6 right now and whilst i'm acutely aware thjat it's based on the old Fiat Tempra platform, the noises and 'manner' in which the motor operates are just wonderful, heavenly some might say. This cannot be said of the latest Vauxhall (4cyl) based and Holden (v6) based motors. The soul of the machine has gone.

Ironically, Fiat has now pumped big money into selling us Alfas as cars with soul! They've just taken the last bit out! We are left with what i call a 'tarts handbag'.

The people who bought 'old' Alfas bought them for their 'soul' if you will - they HAD one. The new owners i can see hovering near a gas-barbeque behind a mock-tudor house saying "ya, the Brera has sooo much soul you know". Victims of ditortion-of-truth-by-association.....

[peter450]

cirvy said:

In its defence, maybe the pre-occupation with 0-60 times is missing the point of the 4 wheel drive. The way the car maintains its composure when pressed hard over a challenging surface whilst going round a typical B road corner at high speed is like no previous Alfa. Maybe that was the point of this car, i dunno

Either way, thats very difficult to demonstrate on a bit of paper, or even pick up on a test drive.

The main point i was trying to make was the weight, the 0 60 time is a good illustration as 4 wheel drive cars tend to have very good traction off the line so with similar power to a 350z but the added benefit of 4 wheel traction i used the 0 - 60 time as good illustration of what is this cars biggest problem, and if the point of the car was a good B road driver why does it weigh nearly 2 tons!

[cirvy]

peter450 said:

cirvy said:

In its defence, maybe the pre-occupation with 0-60 times is missing the point of the 4 wheel drive. The way the car maintains its composure when pressed hard over a challenging surface whilst going round a typical B road corner at high speed is like no previous Alfa. Maybe that was the point of this car, i dunno

Either way, thats very difficult to demonstrate on a bit of paper, or even pick up on a test drive.

The main point i was trying to make was the weight, the 0 60 time is a good illustration as 4 wheel drive cars tend to have very good traction off the line so with similar power to a 350z but the added benefit of 4 wheel traction i used the 0 - 60 time as good illustration of what is this cars biggest problem, and if the point of the car was a good B road driver why does it weigh nearly 2 tons!

I must admit, i do agree, especially in terms of the 'point' of the car. It fails to do anything really well. My previous Alfa GT was a better car & i'm sure Alfa dealers must be beginning to get the message now. The lack of the later generation cars round here ( big midlands city adjacent the M1 ) is quite astonishing !!!!

Makes me wonder what is going on with Alfa

[silversixx]

I'm with you Cirvy and Peter450 - above all an Alfa has always been about being behind the wheel.

The new ones seem to be built for people who worry about how others see them rather than the magic of experiencing one down a quiet bypass for example. I think that if an Alfa is so-so to drive and nothing special to listen to then it isn't really an Alfa - no matter how good it looks (and to me at least it does look amazing).

Tradition is not a privilege, it's a responsibility. I can accept that the changes had to happen, i just hope Fiat doesn't really believe that it's maintaining the tradition of Alfa with these cars. Sadly, having seen the TV advertising i think thats exactly what it thinks it's doing....

[cirvy]

You certainly get the feeling that this doesnt feel like a 'proper Alfa', i mean, it's even got a proper turning circle

[jamieboy]

silversixx said:

I love Alfa Romeo to bits.....which is precicely why i have no time for the current GM engined cars.

I'm not saying this out of blind badge-loyaly. I've driven the new cars and they just aint the same as the Alfas I've been driving for years. I have a 156 V6 right now and whilst i'm acutely aware thjat it's based on the old Fiat Tempra platform, the noises and 'manner' in which the motor operates are just wonderful, heavenly some might say. This cannot be said of the latest Vauxhall (4cyl) based and Holden (v6) based motors. The soul of the machine has gone.

I think we maybe make a bit too much of it being a Holden engine.

As far as I know, it was developed by the Fiat-GM joint venture, and the block is the only common part between the Alfa version and the Holden/Cadillac/Saab versions. The heads are (I think) unique to Alfa, as is the injection system and the type of VVT.

So although it's fair to say it doesn't look or sound quite as good as the 'classic' V6, it's not entirely fair to say it's 'not an Alfa engine'.

It seems cyclical - when the boxer was dropped from the 145/6, people complained that it was losing the essence of being an Alfa, but then we got used to the new twin-sparks. Once the new V6 has had as many years development as the old one, we might come to like it a bit better.

[silversixx]

LOL - yes, such provision for practicality is most un-Alfa!!

Having driven the 159 and Brera i can honestly say that i'm happier with my 156's AWFUL turning circle but EPIC motor. I drove the Brera and 159 and like you said - it was 'ok' : it didn't feel half as quick as the 156 (even though it is) and the 'joy' was missing from the whole experience for me - i don't think i smiled once.

[cirvy]

The new V6 isnt as revvy as the old one but it does make a decent amount of noise, more so than the V6 in the GT. Given a pasting, it can roar like something quite potent, which is nice!

[silversixx]

I agree - the new V6 isn't bad at all. But the overall experience leaves me a bit cold.

I just prefer the idea of Alfa Romeo building motors to a standard........not a price.

[jason1788]

I felt the same reduction of passion going back a generation when I got my 156 after my 155v6. The car was better technically, but the power delivery and noise were a dissapointment.

This is what happens when they make cars with more widespread appeal. Imagine TVR suddenly procucing a car like a 911? Technical miracle blah, blah, but bang goes your exclusivity and your soul.

Edited by jason1788 on Friday 15th September 13:01

[silversixx]

I think you've nailed it there. In casting a wider 'net' they've diluted the appeal.

By the way, for me the very best v6 music came from the 2.5 gtv6 or perhaps the 3.0 75.

[jason1788]

Absolutely agree on the music - not driven or been in either, but presume the 12 valve v6s all sound the same. I get misty eyed every time I see a 155v6 for sale, everyone says they were rubbish but I think not.

Edited by jason1788 on Friday 15th September 13:41

[silversixx]

I loved 'em too. I think the wireless throttle on the 156 removed something from the experience over the 155.

A good 75 3.0 ('de dion' rwd of course..) is my favourite v6. In fact thinking how much damn fun the 75 was to drive makes me dislike most modern cars...

(christ, i'm 32 and i sound like my grandad!)