Car Forum / Alfa Romeo Cars / April 2005
Looking to buy a 156
|
|
Thread rating:  |
BigAl - 01 Apr 2005 16:24 GMT Hi All
With a budget of up to ?6,000UKP what would the group consider my best buy?
I'm leaning towards a 2000-2001 Velococe and I'd like a 1.8 but I'm not seeing many available, unless I want to travel a bloody long way.
I'm going to take a look at a 1.6 2001 (Y) with 56Kon the clock, full leather, metallic black tomorrow, dealer is asking ?5,500 with 36 month warranty. Seems a reasonable dealer price especially with a warranty of that length, although I will pick over what that includes
I'm staying well clear of Selespeeds, and a 2.0 is not really an option as they're a bit thirsty for me. But I could do with some advice regarding the 1.6 and their performance, I'm well into my 40s now so I've no desire to tear up the road, but just looking at a 156 one has to ask if that's big enough.
All of the above is a roundabout way of asking if the 1.6 is underpowered. I've trawled the groups and am I right in thinking that if you didn't know you were in a 1.6 or 1.8 you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference?
Your thoughts
Cheers
Alan
Catman - 01 Apr 2005 17:30 GMT > Hi All > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > warranty. Seems a reasonable dealer price especially with a warranty of > that length, although I will pick over what that includes Cambelts and thrice cambelts. Either evidence that they've been changed (with tensioners) or get it thrown into the deal.
> I'm staying well clear of Selespeeds, and a 2.0 is not really an option as > they're a bit thirsty for me. But I could do with some advice regarding [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I've trawled the groups and am I right in thinking that if you didn't know > you were in a 1.6 or 1.8 you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference? Personally I'd go for a 1.8 (actually I'd probably go for 2l minimum, but we all know what Freud thinks about that), but some people that I know, have a great respect for and trust implicitly with all my cars reckon that the 1.6 is fine. The power is not that different.
> Your thoughts Saving the tough ones til last, huh? ;)
 Signature Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7 155 TS Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
simon - 01 Apr 2005 17:53 GMT Check also...
Creaky suspension - get it out over some speed bumps at low speed. Water ingress in footwells - check under any mats for dampness. Make sure that the heater control selects all positions. (up, down, screen..etc)
SS
BigAl - 02 Apr 2005 09:06 GMT > Creaky suspension - get it out over some speed bumps at low speed. > Water ingress in footwells - check under any mats for dampness. > Make sure that the heater control selects all positions. (up, down, > screen..etc) Many thanks for the top tips
Alan
BigAl - 02 Apr 2005 09:05 GMT >> I'm going to take a look at a 1.6 2001 (Y) with 56Kon the clock, full >> leather, metallic black tomorrow, dealer is asking ?5,500 with 36 month [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Cambelts and thrice cambelts. Either evidence that they've been changed > (with tensioners) or get it thrown into the deal. Oh yes, well aware of the cambelt/tensioner issue, also suspension bushes and curiously corrosion around mirrors and doorhandles. Will definitely want to know if the cambelt's been done, or if not whether the warranty covers it.
>> Your thoughts >> > Saving the tough ones til last, huh? ;) Hey, no harm in giving the grey matter a workout ;-)
Thanks for the reply.
Alan
SteveH - 01 Apr 2005 19:41 GMT > Hi All > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I'm staying well clear of Selespeeds, and a 2.0 is not really an option as > they're a bit thirsty for me. I wouldn't have a 1.6. For the engine size they have a fair bit of power (120bhp-ish, ISTR), but it's a heavy car for that engine.
I think you'll find the 2.0 is no thirstier than the 1.6 in real world driving.
A 1.8 would be a compromise, but why do that when buying an Alfa?
That does seem a reasonable price for a car with 3 year warranty, though.
 Signature Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo' http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - VW Passat 1.8T 20V SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
BigAl - 02 Apr 2005 09:20 GMT > I wouldn't have a 1.6. For the engine size they have a fair bit of power > (120bhp-ish, ISTR), but it's a heavy car for that engine. Hence my post
> I think you'll find the 2.0 is no thirstier than the 1.6 in real world > driving. Surprising. There is of course the maintenance costs, a local independent I use warns that the oily bits for the 2.0 are a darn site more than the 1.8/1.6
> A 1.8 would be a compromise, but why do that when buying an Alfa? > > That does seem a reasonable price for a car with 3 year warranty, > though. Indeed, Oakwoods in Maidstone, UK www.oakwoodvs.com, they advertise on the Autotrader website, only when you look at the vehicle details do you see there's another ?495 to be added for the warranty. I would assume that one would need to keep the vehicle serviced with them to maintain the warranty, depending on their servicing costs it may make the cost prohibitive. Never heard of them before, but they market themselves as an Internet outfit and require appointments for viewing.
Popping round after work today, if anyone's interested I'll let you know how I get on.
Alan
buzzardous@yahoo.com - 03 Apr 2005 16:35 GMT Alan, What oily bits were they talking about? On the contrary I think those driving the 156 1.6 are having the raw deal. The engines are mechanically very similar so the parts & labour costs are the same. Oil change quantity is the same from 1.6 right through to 2.0.
Wear & tear items like brakes, shocks, suspension arms, bushes, cambelts all identical.
Believe me, there will be no significant difference in fuel consumption between the 1.6 & 2.0 cause they're pushing the same kerb weight around. If you do spend lots of time idling in traffic, then there will be a difference but it'll be well worth the extra refinement. Bear in mind the 2.0 has balancer belts (that make it smoother) and much better low end torque (useful if you're not into caning the engine). And yes, stay away from the selespeed to keep your maintenance costs down.
BC
> > I think you'll find the 2.0 is no thirstier than the 1.6 in real world > > driving. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Alan stuartalfa - 03 Apr 2005 17:30 GMT Have you thought about insurance? I got a few quotes from different insurers but the best was www.directline.com I had the choice 3 years ago of a 1.8/2.0 until they gave me a quote of 410 for a 2.0 & 420 for the 2.5 V6.(fully comp+protection) Ok it likes the odd bit of fuel but if you just want to drive gently at the age of 40+ there is no better way. Which ever one you go for though you will be very happy so long as you take your time & get the one you really want? Good luck stuart
Zathras - 03 Apr 2005 17:53 GMT <Snip>
>Wear & tear items like brakes, shocks, suspension arms, bushes, >cambelts all identical. I don't think you're entirely correct here! Last time I looked at this, the 1.6 and 1.8 had identical brakes. The 2.0 has bigger disks and, IIRC, are ventilated instead of solid.
>Believe me, there will be no significant difference in fuel consumption >between the 1.6 & 2.0 cause they're pushing the same kerb weight [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >much better low end torque (useful if you're not into caning the >engine). I would avoid a 1.6 or 1.8 on the simple basis that they are less powerful with even less torque than the 2.0. Frankly, I don't think the 2.0 is a powerful enough engine in a 156. I'd have a 1.9JTD instead - at least it has some noticeable torque.
>And yes, stay away from the selespeed to keep your maintenance costs >down. Agreed..this is rule 1 for me!
 Signature Z Scotland Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather 'Oil' be seeing you.. (Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
o - 01 Apr 2005 22:02 GMT > Hi All > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > Alan fwiw - I'd prefer a bit more poke rather than my 1.8 Veloce - and check the boot for a huge puddle of water in the spare type well .
o
BigAl - 02 Apr 2005 09:36 GMT > fwiw - I'd prefer a bit more poke rather than my 1.8 Veloce - and check > the > boot for a huge puddle of water in the spare type well . Thanks for the tip, I believe this is especially an issue on models with rear spoilers.
Dunno about you but I find the high spoiler terribly garish (hope that hasn't upset anyone, as if I do become a 156 owner no doubt I'll become a regular poster), the low spoiler I can take or leave.
Every fibre of me is telling me to buy something else, but there's just something about Alfas. Never owned one before btw.
Channel hopping yesterday I came across an episode of Top Gear from a couple of years ago where they did a piece of the 147 GTA. They put it up against the Focus RS and Golf GTI, in every way ( apart from straight line speed ) the GTA came third[1], but when Clarkson and Hammond did their summing up both said that, despite their better judgement, if it were their money they'd buy the GTA.
Alan
 Signature [1] Smirked when Clarkson delived his appraisment of Alfa dealers. Widely recongnised in the motor trade as "The worst in the world".
Zathras - 03 Apr 2005 19:27 GMT <snip>
>I find the high spoiler terribly garish (hope that >hasn't upset anyone, as if I do become a 156 owner no doubt I'll become a >regular poster), the low spoiler I can take or leave. The high spoiler is hilarious! Only the GTA would be able to use such a device and Alfa upset a few folks by not fitting it for aesthetic reasons, seemingly.
>Every fibre of me is telling me to buy something else, but there's just >something about Alfas. This is entirely normal.
> Never owned one before btw. Same here.
>Channel hopping yesterday I came across an episode of Top Gear from a couple >of years ago where they did a piece of the 147 GTA. They put it up against >the Focus RS and Golf GTI, in every way ( apart from straight line speed ) >the GTA came third[1], but when Clarkson and Hammond did their summing up >both said that, despite their better judgement, if it were their money >they'd buy the GTA. Simple, I doubt they'd feel special with a Ford or VW in the driveway. An Alfa can make you feel good in ways that other cars (no matter how good) just don't. The weird sensations start when you begin to stare at your car and admire the sheer genius that made such a beauty!
Alfa have a well-documented problem/feature with their suspension setup for UK roads - body control! Sadly, the 156 and GT do not control vertical body movement satisfactorily at speed over roads that are not snooker-table-flat. Once you get a big enough engine, you can scrape the bottom front of the car far too easily at speed over certain roads (there's a bit on the M8 near Glasgow where I can bottom out and scrape the underside). This feature can make A road speed and overtaking a nightmare. If you're not interested in speed then it's not an issue. The lighter 1.6 and non-lowered suspension ones do much better in this respect but I'm not swapping mine for one!
 Signature Z Scotland Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather 'Oil' be seeing you.. (Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
o - 05 Apr 2005 22:12 GMT <snip>
>The high spoiler is hilarious! Only the GTA would be able to use such > a device and Alfa upset a few folks by not fitting it for aesthetic > reasons, seemingly. <snip>
Oh cheers ! Have a go at the bloke with the big spoiler. Which for reference was less than half the price of any of the other spoilers & is factory fitted so matches perfectly.
With this kind of abuse I'll be getting a Vauxhall when the 156's lease is up ;o)
Catman - 06 Apr 2005 06:46 GMT > <snip> >>The high spoiler is hilarious! Only the GTA would be able to use such [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > With this kind of abuse I'll be getting a Vauxhall when the 156's lease is > up ;o) Well I *like* the big spoilers
 Signature Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7 155 TS Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
o - 06 Apr 2005 08:47 GMT > > <snip> > >>The high spoiler is hilarious! Only the GTA would be able to use such [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Well I *like* the big spoilers Size IS important :o)
Zathras - 06 Apr 2005 17:46 GMT >> > <snip> >> >>The high spoiler is hilarious! Only the GTA would be able to use such [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Size IS important :o) Huh? Are you guys just closet 'Chavs'??!! ;-)
 Signature Z Scotland Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather 'Oil' be seeing you.. (Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
Catman - 06 Apr 2005 18:00 GMT >>> > <snip> >>> >>The high spoiler is hilarious! Only the GTA would be able to use such [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Huh? Are you guys just closet 'Chavs'??!! ;-) You seen my Burberry paint job? ;)
 Signature Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7 155 TS Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
o - 06 Apr 2005 18:33 GMT > >>> > <snip> > >>> >>The high spoiler is hilarious! Only the GTA would be able to use such [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > > You seen my Burberry paint job? ;) Weh-HEY !!! - oops sorry, you said "paint" ;o)
Catman - 06 Apr 2005 18:40 GMT >> >>> > <snip> >> >>> >>The high spoiler is hilarious! Only the GTA would be able to use [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Weh-HEY !!! - oops sorry, you said "paint" ;o) You sound more like my wife every day :)
 Signature Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7 155 TS Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
BigAl - 03 Apr 2005 11:44 GMT > I'm going to take a look at a 1.6 2001 (Y) with 56Kon the clock, full > leather, metallic black tomorrow, dealer is asking ?5,500 with 36 month > warranty. Seems a reasonable dealer price especially with a warranty of > that length, although I will pick over what that includes Interior was very good, everything worked apart from the ashtray which wouldn't close but that was about it. Exterior was a bit of a problem, both spots broken, crack in the front bumper, bit of a dink on the bonnet and a bit of imperfection in the paintwork on the rear near-side quarter, other than that pretty good.
Oil was low which was worrying.
Drove nice, sounded nice, but I do have to say I think the 1.6 ain't big enough.
However, it had done just over 60K, was flat black rather than metallic and cambelt had not been changed. Warranty was not dependent on them doing the servicing, just had to be done by a garage that was VAT registered, didn't really go into any depth as to what it covered as we sort of grew apart over price. Said I wouldn't go any higher than ?5K in the condition it was it, there then came the usual 'need to make a phone call if I'd commit to it today', blah, blah.blah.
So we shook hands, thanked them for their time and walked. It is after all the first one I've looked at and it wasn't really what I wanted.
Have to say though the interior was sumptious and it felt great on the test drive. Will definitely keep looking for one.
Cheers
Alan
SteveH - 03 Apr 2005 11:59 GMT > > I'm going to take a look at a 1.6 2001 (Y) with 56Kon the clock, full > > leather, metallic black tomorrow, dealer is asking £5,500 with 36 month [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > bit of imperfection in the paintwork on the rear near-side quarter, other > than that pretty good. Doesn't sound good. Not a caring owner, anyway.
> Oil was low which was worrying. I'd be very worried about that.
> Drove nice, sounded nice, but I do have to say I think the 1.6 ain't big > enough. As I thought - 120bhp in a car that size isn't anywhere near enough. Even the 2lt TSpark in my (ex)155 didn't feel all that lively compared with the same engine in a 75.
> However, it had done just over 60K, was flat black rather than metallic and > cambelt had not been changed. Warranty was not dependent on them doing the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Have to say though the interior was sumptious and it felt great on the test > drive. Will definitely keep looking for one. Try a 2lt. I really can't see servicing being all that much more expensive and fuel consumption differences will be negligible as you don't have to cane a 2lt to make reasonable progess.
 Signature Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo' http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - VW Passat 1.8T 20V SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
WavyDavy - 03 Apr 2005 18:19 GMT > Hi All > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I'm leaning towards a 2000-2001 Velococe and I'd like a 1.8 but I'm not > seeing many available, unless I want to travel a bloody long way.
> All of the above is a roundabout way of asking if the 1.6 is underpowered. > I've trawled the groups and am I right in thinking that if you didn't know > you were in a 1.6 or 1.8 you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference? > > Your thoughts I tried the 1.8 and was quite inmpressed with the genral specof most of the 2/hand examples available... But when I test drove the JTD140, I decided that the 1.8 was just not pokey enough in 'real world' situations (like overtaking on a dual carriageway from 55/60mph+)....
So I bought a JTD[1].
Of course I read Quentin WIllson today and he reckons all 156s are looking fragile price-wise and the diesels are slipping the most... Bugger.
Not much help, I know, and you'd probbly not find a 140JTD for under ?6k now, but if you wait a few months......
Dave
[1] I may need to emphasise that I have always hated diesels in the past and am a bit of a fan of peaky two-stroke bikes and high revving/stressed petrol engines in cars etc. But for an exciting, fun, good-looking, but still remarkably frugal car the JTD won me over.
Phil Sawyer - 03 Apr 2005 19:12 GMT > I'm staying well clear of Selespeeds, and a 2.0 is not really an option as > they're a bit thirsty for me. But I could do with some advice regarding [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Your thoughts I've had a 1.6 Lusso saloon for nearly four years now. As other posters have said, 120hp is actually very good for that size of engine - when I first had it, to get that sort of output from other marques you were looking at 1.8s and 2.0s. Plus, for its size the 156 is quite a light car - I'm sure I read somewhere it weighs less than a VW Golf (mind you, these days, what doesn't?)
To be honest, on most days I haven't really experienced any noticeable lack of power. However, low down in the rev range it can be a bit gutless, especially with the air-con on. It's not so much a case of the engine lacking power, it's simply that you do need to give it a bit of a rev to reach the power band, whereas I guess in a larger-engined 156 the power is a bit more accessible. If you're not used to the Alfa mode of driving then it can take some getting used to!
The other problem I sometimes used to get was Neds in average cars (particularly debadged BMWs, it seems) spotting the 1.6 badge and thinking it gave them carte-blanche to tailgate and try overtaking me. Dropping a cog normally made them disappear into a small dot in my rear-view mirror. I did toy with the idea of debadging my car but I wanted to remain honest (plus it's a lease car).
However, all this pales into insignificance when judged against all the positive points. I still think it's a stunning looking car, and the handling is sublime regardless of the engine size. My only regret is that when my four-year lease runs out next month I won't be replacing it with another, as Alfa appear to be taking forever to bring out the 157/159 (or whatever it's being called today).
I'll miss it when it goes. :(
 Signature Phil Sawyer
Never knowingly underweight
WavyDavy - 03 Apr 2005 20:15 GMT > However, all this pales into insignificance when judged against all the > positive points. I still think it's a stunning looking car, and the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I'll miss it when it goes. :( But you need to wait anyway... Get something on a short term lease and then go the whole hog for the 3.2 AWD 159 next year... :)) But in the meantime take a facelift 156. Infact, can't you negotiate a deal for a 159 where they supply a similar car for now up until the one you *really* want is available...?
Dave
Ivan - 06 Apr 2005 19:07 GMT > But you need to wait anyway... Get something on a short term lease and > then go the whole hog for the 3.2 AWD 159 next year... :)) But in the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Dave
:-))) http://www.sniffpetrol.com/latenews0504_03.jpg  Signature Ivan.
Alfa GT Ex 156 2.5 V6 Veloce Ex 156 Selespeed (RIP 22 May 03) Ex 145 QV Ex 33 16v QV Ex 33 QV series 1
Catman - 06 Apr 2005 19:35 GMT >> But you need to wait anyway... Get something on a short term lease and >> then go the whole hog for the 3.2 AWD 159 next year... :)) But in the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > :-))) http://www.sniffpetrol.com/latenews0504_03.jpg LOL
 Signature Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3 Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply) Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7 155 TS Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
Halmyre - 06 Apr 2005 19:39 GMT >>But you need to wait anyway... Get something on a short term lease and >>then go the whole hog for the 3.2 AWD 159 next year... :)) But in the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > :-))) http://www.sniffpetrol.com/latenews0504_03.jpg ROFL!
Bonus points for reminding me that there's a new sniffpetrol page; I'd forgotten...
Halmyre
WavyDavy - 06 Apr 2005 22:34 GMT >> But you need to wait anyway... Get something on a short term lease and >> then go the whole hog for the 3.2 AWD 159 next year... :)) But in the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > :-))) http://www.sniffpetrol.com/latenews0504_03.jpg ..If only...
The 159 appears to have.... *shock*.... normal rear door handles...
Now the 159 *may* be a good car, but getting rid of the 'hidden' rear door handle just when even Honda are realising how cool they are is a seriously bad move, IMHO...
Then again, as Honda now look to be using them in their new Civic, maybe *not* having handles like that is so cool, I'm too old to realise it...
Dave
|
|
|