Car Forum / Alfa Romeo Cars / September 2005
Talk me out of buying a 166
|
|
Thread rating:  |
daveskirrow@btinternet.com - 17 Sep 2005 05:02 GMT I'm thinking of buying a used 166, maybe a '99 and almost certainly a 3l V6 auto. The problem is that I am rather scared of the costs involved after I purchase. There's a baby on the way and I don't have much cash so the last thing I want is a massive bill when something goes wrong.
Can anyone give me an idea of prices of common parts such as brake disks and pads and service parts.
I can handle most jobs myself on older cars but my experience is limited on anything in the last 10 years with the exception of simple stuff like a Fiat Punto, so I'm worried I might get in over my head with all the gadgetary in a 166 and end up with a huge Alfa main dealer bill that I can't afford.
Is a cam-belt change on one of these involved? And if it is, are they costly from the dealer?
And is there any other advice anyone can offer?
What I'm getting at is, is a 166 going to cost me a lot more to maintain than something dull like a Vectra? CShould I wait till I am in a beter financial position before becoming an Alfa owner? I'd hate my first experience with an Alfa to be a bitter one.
My heart says Alfa Romeo, my head says Ford Mondeo :(
Cheers, Dave
ts86 - 17 Sep 2005 09:29 GMT > I'm thinking of buying a used 166, maybe a '99 and almost certainly a > 3l V6 auto. The problem is that I am rather scared of the costs > involved after I purchase. There's a baby on the way and I don't have > much cash so the last thing I want is a massive bill when something > goes wrong. Don't buy it then. Family comes first :)
> Can anyone give me an idea of prices of common parts such as brake > disks and pads and service parts. www.shop4parts.co.uk
> I can handle most jobs myself on older cars but my experience is > limited on anything in the last 10 years with the exception of simple > stuff like a Fiat Punto, so I'm worried I might get in over my head > with all the gadgetary in a 166 and end up with a huge Alfa main dealer > bill that I can't afford. Wear parts and servicing is easy enough.
> Is a cam-belt change on one of these involved? And if it is, are they > costly from the dealer? £900? Random figure that. No idea.
> And is there any other advice anyone can offer? Consider maybe a different Alfa model?
> What I'm getting at is, is a 166 going to cost me a lot more to > maintain than something dull like a Vectra? CShould I wait till I am in YES.
> a beter financial position before becoming an Alfa owner? I'd hate my > first experience with an Alfa to be a bitter one. > > My heart says Alfa Romeo, my head says Ford Mondeo :( Go with something in between. Fiat?
J-P Westaway-Green - 17 Sep 2005 09:48 GMT Hi Dave,
If you're after a spacious, comfortable, executive car, then the 166 is the one to go for - but avoid the automatic like the plague.
Mine is a 2.5 V6. I would have liked the 3L (running costs are practically the same and you get the extra power), but trying to source a used one with a manual transmission - that didn't have stupid miles on and also had a full dealer service history, was like looking for a chocolate tea pot.
Brakes: I paid £55/Disc and £45/pad www.autoplanet.co.uk (although I'm sure someone in this forum will tell me I've been ripped off).
I've just had all the belts and tensioners changed on my T plate (52,000), along with the water pump (just because they were there at the time and it made sense), the usual oil change and filter, total bill from an independent was £664.00 (you'll pay over £1000 from a main dealer for that little lot).
Fuel costs: I average about 28MPG in mine - which, given its size and the weight of the engine isn't to bad.
If the car you go for is 99-2001 - make sure its had the recall to replace the oil cooler.
Make sure the car isn't fitted with Xeon head lights, as these are prone to failure on the 166 and cost a fortune to replace.
If cost is a real concern than why not go for a 2L TS. Sure, you won't get to here that wonderful V6 exhaust note, but with the lightness of the TS engine it should be adequate for your needs - you won't be kickin' ar*e if you've got a baby in the back will you?
Go get one and enjoy it - they're fantastic cars and highly underrated - Alfa really should have done a proper marketing job with this motor. As a result, there's hardly any on the roads, which makes them kinda cool IMHO.
Hope this helps
J-P
> I'm thinking of buying a used 166, maybe a '99 and almost certainly a > 3l V6 auto. The problem is that I am rather scared of the costs [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Cheers, > Dave Steve - 17 Sep 2005 10:00 GMT The 166 will certainly cost alot more to run than say, a Vectra. Insurance, fuel costs and servicing are all on the high side.
My previous car was a golf VR6, so I was used to high insurance premiums and low fuel economy. However, the servicing costs for my current car (156,v6) dwarf those of the golf. My experience is that Alfa servicing costs increase each year until after the 72k (6,years) biggie, when they go back to the original year 1 cost and the process starts again. On all other cars I've owned, servicing costs are more or less the same each year, interspersed with the occasional milestone service. The same may apply to other Alfas, but is certainly not true in my experience.
Regarding servicing costs, I usually have to have the brake pads replaced each year, even though I do a low mileage. According to my dealer, this is because the pads are now made of a softer compound compared to the asbestos-based material which was used earlier. Whether or not this is true, I've no idea other than it usually adds £200 to the service bill. Ever other year the dealer kindly pops another set of discs on as well.
The service which involved the cambelt change was gobsmackingly expensive. I was quoted around £750, but once all the extras were toted up - including a new alarm - the final cost was a fiver short of 2 grand.
If you are at all concerned about the costs involved, especially with a baby on the horizon, then steer clear. Even if the car requires no repairs, a 3l car the size of a 166 is not going to be cheap to run. My 156 averages around 22 mpg - 28 if I'm lucky and there are motorways involved. Insurance with 5 years no claims is around 1K.
Personally, I would be reluctant to buy a 166. My father-in-law had a 166 and being in one is just like driving around in a sofa - albeit a very comfy one. The term "barge-like" springs readily to mind. Not that quick either...
p.s. I wouldn't include your real email address in posts. These posts are spidered and you suddenly won't be short of sources where you can buy Viagra and other lovely cocktails at amazingly low prices.
> I'm thinking of buying a used 166, maybe a '99 and almost certainly a > 3l V6 auto. The problem is that I am rather scared of the costs [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Cheers, > Dave SteveH - 17 Sep 2005 10:31 GMT > I'm thinking of buying a used 166, maybe a '99 and almost certainly a > 3l V6 auto. The problem is that I am rather scared of the costs [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Can anyone give me an idea of prices of common parts such as brake > disks and pads and service parts. As an example, here's the front disc and pad prices:
https://sslrelay.com/buypartsby.co.uk/discs_details.php?recordID=186
> I can handle most jobs myself on older cars but my experience is > limited on anything in the last 10 years with the exception of simple > stuff like a Fiat Punto, so I'm worried I might get in over my head > with all the gadgetary in a 166 and end up with a huge Alfa main dealer > bill that I can't afford. A 166 is no more complex than any other luxury car in it's class - look at how complex a MkIII Mondeo Ghia is, for example.
> Is a cam-belt change on one of these involved? And if it is, are they > costly from the dealer? Don't go to a main dealer - cambelts are surrounded by myth and mystery - however, my local back street mechanic is happy to replace the belts on anything (the one on my Passat was quite complicated to replace, but he did it for under £200) - I'd say he'd charge me about £300 for a service and belt change on a 166.
> And is there any other advice anyone can offer? Stay away from main dealers - find a competent local mechanic with a cheap hourly rate, but also find a local Italian car specialist who can do the more specialist jobs - not that you'll need them very often.
> What I'm getting at is, is a 166 going to cost me a lot more to > maintain than something dull like a Vectra? CShould I wait till I am in > a beter financial position before becoming an Alfa owner? I'd hate my > first experience with an Alfa to be a bitter one. IME, Alfas are more expensive than mainstream cars to run. The insurance is a bit more, but not massively so, and servicing costs *can* be higher, although I know people who've paid silly amounts of money out on servicing Volkswagens.
> My heart says Alfa Romeo, my head says Ford Mondeo :( Go with your heart - the 166 is one of the undiscovered bargains on the used car market. As you're new to Alfas, I'd definitely recommend buying from a specialist or having the car you're interested in inspected.
As has been said by someone else - also consider the 2lt TSpark. It's a great engine, if a little low powered for such a big car. However, they're a lot more economical and the engine is certainly easier to work on.
On the other hand, are you sure you need something as big as a 166? - with the 159 on it's way, 156s are currently at bargain basement prices - we bought a 156 2lt TSpark Lusso recently, on a 99V, with climate control, for £2800 with a 12 month warranty, from a respected Alfa specialist.
 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 - Alfa 75 TSpark Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
PeterMcC - 17 Sep 2005 11:27 GMT daveskirrow@btinternet.com wrote in <1126927794.783161.326860@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
> I'm thinking of buying a used 166, maybe a '99 and almost certainly a > 3l V6 auto. I'd avoid the auto and go for the standard gearshift box.
Find a good independent to do the servicing - my experience of Alfa main dealers ranges from not good to appalling.
If you're looking for a large saloon that will gladden your hear every time you drive it and make you look forward to a 300 mile drive home after a day's work at the other end of the country, then the 166 is hard to beat.
My only regret about buying mine was that, by the time my 2nd 164 3.0 retired and there weren't any more decent ones to be had, I had to make do with the next best thing - the 166.
 Signature PeterMcC If you feel that any of the above is incorrect, inappropriate or offensive in any way, please ignore it and accept my apologies.
Pete - 17 Sep 2005 11:29 GMT >What I'm getting at is, is a 166 going to cost me a lot more to >maintain than something dull like a Vectra? CShould I wait till I am in >a beter financial position before becoming an Alfa owner? I'd hate my >first experience with an Alfa to be a bitter one. > >My heart says Alfa Romeo, my head says Ford Mondeo :( How can you seriously compare a mundane family saloon with a luxury exec sport saloon? Vectra and Mundeo are comparable to the Alfa 156. Not the 166. You are starting on a false base-line. Compare the costs against a 5 series or Merc E320 Elegance, These common panzerwagons have costs that will be similar to the 166.
If you want the style of an Alfa 166 then you will have to go to the Maserati Quatroporte to buy better. Look how much a Maser would cost and the Alfa 166 is a bargain.
As has been said - family first. Hope you enjoy whatever you buy.
Pete
 Signature <iowna156@rustclubalfa.com> 156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso
SteveH - 17 Sep 2005 11:43 GMT > >What I'm getting at is, is a 166 going to cost me a lot more to > >maintain than something dull like a Vectra? CShould I wait till I am in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > series or Merc E320 Elegance, These common panzerwagons have costs that > will be similar to the 166. I'd tend to disagree with your point about the 156 - it's smaller than the current generation of Mondeo / Vectra / Passat - my Panzerwagen is closer in size to a 166 than a 156. The 156 is, as was the 155, somewhere between Focus and Mondeo in size - the same market sector that was occupied by the BMW 3-series in it's E30 and E36 incarnations.
However, you're right about the 166 - it may be slightly smaller than a 5-series or E-class, but that's the sector it's marketed to.
> If you want the style of an Alfa 166 then you will have to go to the > Maserati Quatroporte to buy better. Look how much a Maser would cost and > the Alfa 166 is a bargain. > > As has been said - family first. Hope you enjoy whatever you buy. Personally, I'd also consider the 156, but then I would, because we have one.
 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 - Alfa 75 TSpark Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
daveskirrow@btinternet.com - 17 Sep 2005 15:48 GMT Thanks for all the replies guys. I was originally looking at the 156 then I "discovered" the 166 and fell in love. The reason I compared to Vectra/Mondeo was because I was reluctantly looking at a boring family saloon then I got onto the 156 and then the 166. The harsh depreciation makes it a real option for me. To buy an BMW in a similar condition/year etc I would be paying a lot more than I would for the Alfa.. and I'd much rather have the Alfa anyway. The bottom line, is if I don't get a 156/166 then it's gonna be a dull family saloon.
I'll be honest, there's not many modern cars in this price range that light my fire but the Alfa is a real exception. I don't mind paying a little more for it, but I'm just worried of it becoming a cash blackhole.
Thanks again for your help, you have all been very helpful.
PeterMcC - 17 Sep 2005 19:24 GMT daveskirrow@btinternet.com wrote in <1126968488.905226.155080@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
> Thanks for all the replies guys. I was originally looking at the 156 > then I "discovered" the 166 and fell in love. The reason I compared to [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks again for your help, you have all been very helpful. Have you never owned an Alfa before? If not, that's another powerful argument to put on the 166's side. And, quite genuinely, though I don't do the miles I used to, my current 166 is one of the cheapest cars to maintain that I can remember. In the last 24,000 miles my only outside-of-servicing expenditure was on a replacement water pump.
Go on - enjoy :)
 Signature PeterMcC If you feel that any of the above is incorrect, inappropriate or offensive in any way, please ignore it and accept my apologies.
SteveH - 17 Sep 2005 19:29 GMT > > Thanks again for your help, you have all been very helpful. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that I can remember. In the last 24,000 miles my only outside-of-servicing > expenditure was on a replacement water pump. Erm, doesn't that mean replacing the cambelts etc, though? - it's hardly a trivial item, IME.
 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 - Alfa 75 TSpark Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
daveskirrow@btinternet.com - 17 Sep 2005 20:36 GMT Nope, never owned an Alfa before. I'm swinging back to the 156 idea, whats the general consensus on the Selespeed gearbox? I'm thinking I will be better trying to avoid it so there's less to go wrong but I must say I'm a sucker for fancy gadgets.
SteveH - 17 Sep 2005 20:55 GMT > Nope, never owned an Alfa before. I'm swinging back to the 156 idea, > whats the general consensus on the Selespeed gearbox? I'm thinking I > will be better trying to avoid it so there's less to go wrong but I > must say I'm a sucker for fancy gadgets. Yup, you're right, avoid it.
It's sometimes known as the 'sillyspeed' around these parts.
 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 - Alfa 75 TSpark Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
Catman - 17 Sep 2005 21:32 GMT > Nope, never owned an Alfa before. I'm swinging back to the 156 idea, > whats the general consensus on the Selespeed gearbox? I'm thinking I > will be better trying to avoid it so there's less to go wrong but I > must say I'm a sucker for fancy gadgets. Stick with the manual. It's nice
OTW I really *like* the 156
It's not got as much sheers guts as the Giulietta. or as much character as either of my others, but when it comes to sheer car park kudos and long range crusing, it's a superb car
 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 1.7 156 TS S2 Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk
George Graves - 17 Sep 2005 23:53 GMT > I'm thinking of buying a used 166, maybe a '99 and almost certainly a > 3l V6 auto. The problem is that I am rather scared of the costs [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Cheers, > Dave The Alfa will cost you more in maintenance than the Ford. No two ways about it. If that's your concern, go with the Ford and buy the 166 when you can better afford it, I.E. have both. The Mondeo for your head, and the Alfa for your heart. That's what I did. I have a 2003 VW GTI for my every day driving and my GTV-6 Alfa for weekends. The Alfa is still maintenance intensive, but as a hobby car with few miles being accumulated (less than 10,000 miles in four years) day to day reliability is not all that important.
daveskirrow@btinternet.com - 18 Sep 2005 01:41 GMT I don't think the wife will let me have any more hobby cars, not with a half built kit car in the garage, and 2 Minis and a Honda CRX in the back garden....
But, based on what all you helpful Alfa owners have told me and after a few more hours research on the net, I have decided the manual 156 is the way to go, it's just the particular model that is the issue now, year is going to have to be 2001 at the very latest for the price I've got a max of £3000 to spend, I'm leaning towards the 2l but a nice 1.8 or V6 would be considered. Leather and extras are important.
Am I right in ruling out the 1.6? And am I right in thinking Veloce is best option pack , then lusso, then standard?
SteveH - 18 Sep 2005 11:02 GMT > I don't think the wife will let me have any more hobby cars, not with a > half built kit car in the garage, and 2 Minis and a Honda CRX in the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > got a max of £3000 to spend, I'm leaning towards the 2l but a nice 1.8 > or V6 would be considered. Leather and extras are important. The V6 is nice, but it's very nose-heavy and thirsty. Personally, I wouldn't have one as I prefer the balance of the car with a 4-pot engine.
Don't get a 1.8, they're vastly inferior. The engine is significantly different - a lot harsher as it doesn't have balance shafts.
> Am I right in ruling out the 1.6? And am I right in thinking Veloce is > best option pack , then lusso, then standard? Definitely not a 1.6... not big enough for the size of car.
The choice between Lusso and Veloce is down to taste - they're both almost identical in terms of equipment, but the Veloce or Sportpack versions have harder suspension, bigger wheels, sports seats, fake carbon fibre trim and a leather steering wheel. Veloce gets more comfortable seats, wooden steering wheel, fake wood trim, smaller wheels and softer suspension. My preference is Lusso, Catman likes his Sport trim.
What you often find is that 1.8s are 'poverty' models with aircon instead of climate, nasty cloth trim (the Lusso has the same seats, but with a very plush velour) and steel wheels with plastic trims.
 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 - Alfa 75 TSpark Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
Hans de Heer - 18 Sep 2005 11:50 GMT > Am I right in ruling out the 1.6? And am I right in thinking Veloce is > best option pack , then lusso, then standard? Consider a Sportwagon. With a baby on its way, you can really use the extra space in the back. Stuffing a buggy in the back of a 156 sedan is not a nice thing to do, trust me... And indeed avoid the 1.6, it's underpowered. I think the 2.0 is the best trade-off between power and fuel economy.
 Signature Regards, Hans Alfa Romeo 156 Selespeed - 1999 Alfa Romeo Spider 3.0V6 - 1997
Pete - 18 Sep 2005 16:20 GMT >Consider a Sportwagon. With a baby on its way, you can really use the extra >space in the back. Stuffing a buggy in the back of a 156 sedan is not a nice >thing to do, trust me... >And indeed avoid the 1.6, it's underpowered. I think the 2.0 is the best >trade-off between power and fuel economy. That Sportwagon is a good suggestion. At least take a good look and a drive in one before parting with cash.
Definitely 2.0 Ltr with as much trim as you can find. The bigger alloys ride better in my opinion. Though others here will say the lowered Sport Packs drive better. If it is a trade off between driving pleasure and family ride comfort then the 2.0 TS with the rigid ride, 15" alloys and leather is my pick, but that is what I own.
You do realise that the rear seat in the 2.0 does not fold like the smaller engine versions. Less body roll. If you need "child lugging space" then the Sportwagon looks just the same from the driving seat :-) Looks pretty darn smart from the outside too. Pete
 Signature <iowna156@rustclubalfa.com> 156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso
Zathras - 18 Sep 2005 21:21 GMT >>Consider a Sportwagon. With a baby on its way, you can really use the extra >>space in the back. Stuffing a buggy in the back of a 156 sedan is not a nice >>thing to do, trust me... er..have you lot forgotten that the Sportwagon has LESS boot capacity than the saloon UNLESS you drop the back seats! I manage 1 kid + all the kit with a 156 saloon. Any more kids and I'd need a top box. I took one look at the Sportwagon boot, laughed, then bought the saloon. I'm sure the Sportwagon was an Italian joke that nobody else got.
 Signature Z Scotland Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather 'Oil' be seeing you.. (Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
Hans de Heer - 18 Sep 2005 21:26 GMT > er..have you lot forgotten that the Sportwagon has LESS boot capacity > than the saloon UNLESS you drop the back seats! I manage 1 kid + all > the kit with a 156 saloon. Any more kids and I'd need a top box. I > took one look at the Sportwagon boot, laughed, then bought the saloon. > I'm sure the Sportwagon was an Italian joke that nobody else got. I also manage two kids plus all the kit in a saloon, but I think the extra height of the Sportwagon boot plus the bigger opening would come in handy. It's not the lack of space that's frustrating, but the size of the opening I think. Hell, I even have to slide in a box of groceries sideways and tilted...
 Signature Regards, Hans Alfa Romeo 156 Selespeed - 1999 Alfa Romeo Spider 3.0V6 - 1997
SteveH - 18 Sep 2005 21:50 GMT > > er..have you lot forgotten that the Sportwagon has LESS boot capacity > > than the saloon UNLESS you drop the back seats! I manage 1 kid + all [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > think. Hell, I even have to slide in a box of groceries sideways and > tilted... You want to try loading the boot of a 75....
 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 - Alfa 75 TSpark Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
Zathras - 19 Sep 2005 08:38 GMT >> er..have you lot forgotten that the Sportwagon has LESS boot capacity >> than the saloon UNLESS you drop the back seats! I manage 1 kid + all [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >think. Hell, I even have to slide in a box of groceries sideways and >tilted... True..I use bags for that reason. However, it's still a smaller space in the Sportwagon and I need all I can get.
 Signature Z Scotland Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather 'Oil' be seeing you.. (Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
George Graves - 19 Sep 2005 02:04 GMT > >>Consider a Sportwagon. With a baby on its way, you can really use the extra > >>space in the back. Stuffing a buggy in the back of a 156 sedan is not a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > took one look at the Sportwagon boot, laughed, then bought the saloon. > I'm sure the Sportwagon was an Italian joke that nobody else got. Except that it's the prettiest current station wagon on the planet and maybe the best looking one this side of an Aston Martin Shooting Brake.
Zathras - 19 Sep 2005 08:36 GMT <snip>
>Except that it's the prettiest current station wagon on the planet and >maybe the best looking one this side of an Aston Martin Shooting Brake. I agree..but as a load carrier...1/10
 Signature Z Scotland Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather 'Oil' be seeing you.. (Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
Pete - 19 Sep 2005 15:04 GMT ><snip> >>Except that it's the prettiest current station wagon on the planet and >>maybe the best looking one this side of an Aston Martin Shooting Brake. > >I agree..but as a load carrier...1/10 Which is why I have a 156 saloon + a LWB Transit <ROF>
Pete
 Signature <iowna156@rustclubalfa.com> 156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso
Zathras - 19 Sep 2005 18:29 GMT >><snip> >>>Except that it's the prettiest current station wagon on the planet and >>>maybe the best looking one this side of an Aston Martin Shooting Brake. >> >>I agree..but as a load carrier...1/10 >Which is why I have a 156 saloon + a LWB Transit <ROF> Ha Ha! That covers a few bases!!! :-) It also has the plus point that after the Transit, the Alfa will feel like a supercar!
 Signature Z Scotland Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather 'Oil' be seeing you.. (Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
Pete - 19 Sep 2005 19:44 GMT >after the Transit, the Alfa will feel like a supercar! Yep, but it doesn't have the sub-aqua kit fitted :-)
Pete
 Signature <iowna156@rustclubalfa.com> 156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso
George Graves - 19 Sep 2005 22:09 GMT > <snip> > >Except that it's the prettiest current station wagon on the planet and > >maybe the best looking one this side of an Aston Martin Shooting Brake. > > I agree..but as a load carrier...1/10 Could be, I've never been in one, and they aren't sold on this side of the pond. Seen plenty of them in Europe though, and have admired their looks. I have an Italian friend named Jocopo (who posts here occasionally) who has one. He seems to like it.
Zathras - 19 Sep 2005 22:35 GMT >> <snip> >> >Except that it's the prettiest current station wagon on the planet and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >looks. I have an Italian friend named Jocopo (who posts here >occasionally) who has one. He seems to like it. I don't doubt it.
I really fancied one until I saw the inside. It is one of those cars that I opened the tailgate of (in a showroom) and immediately thought someone had filled it..it was just the back seat backs though. I don't understand it..it's built to be some sort of load carrier (otherwise why bother) and looks like one from the outside but inside there's no useful load carrying capacity unless you make it a two seater. Even then, the tailgate lip and size make it rather difficult to load. It's the best style-over-function I've seen from Alfa.
 Signature Z Scotland Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather 'Oil' be seeing you.. (Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
Arjan Renting - 20 Sep 2005 09:48 GMT >>><snip> >>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > then, the tailgate lip and size make it rather difficult to load. It's > the best style-over-function I've seen from Alfa. Alfa's have never been designed just for practicality, so what do you mean...? IMHO the sportwagon was only built to be attractive, for a load carrier you should buy an other car. And as you initialy fancied one, they did their job well apparently.
Arjan
Zathras - 20 Sep 2005 12:17 GMT >>>><snip> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >Alfa's have never been designed just for practicality, so what do you >mean...? But Sportwagons are about fun AND practicality according to Alfa. To build an Estate-style Sportwagon with LESS luggage capacity than the saloon it's based on with the seats in place is just hopeless. I used to Windsurf competitively as a sponsored sailor so I know a lot about loading a car to the absolute max. It is possible to make good practical cars and in smaller packages than a 156. Don't get me started on the 147 load space though.... I bet the 159 will be a lot more practical than the 156.
>IMHO Yes but Alfa built it to be MORE practical than the saloon - they never said it was less practical.
>the sportwagon was only built to be attractive, That's not how Alfa described it and, presumably, they know. I agree with you though.
>for a load carrier you should buy an other car. That's true.
>And as you initialy fancied one, they did their job well apparently. No..for me it failed completely. As I said, the minute I saw the interior and realised I could load more into the even better looking saloon, it was game over.
 Signature Z Scotland Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather 'Oil' be seeing you.. (Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
Arjan Renting - 20 Sep 2005 18:22 GMT >>Alfa's have never been designed just for practicality, so what do you >>mean...? [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > interior and realised I could load more into the even better looking > saloon, it was game over. Well in general I think that the choices (or compromises) that are made in the design of an Alfa normally are in favour of style and drivability. Other marks hang more to practicality and/or economy. That's what I like about Alfa's, you have either to deal with it and (learn to) like it or you better buy an other car. I agree that within the plan of the design of an Alfa there is some space for improvement but somehow they just don't do that, for stylish reason or just to distinguish themselfs from the ordinary...
La Bellezza Necessaria
Arjan
Halmyre - 20 Sep 2005 19:49 GMT > But Sportwagons are about fun AND practicality according to Alfa. To > build an Estate-style Sportwagon with LESS luggage capacity than the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > started on the 147 load space though.... I bet the 159 will be a lot > more practical than the 156. One of the 'improvements' to the 159 is the introduction of 'proper' rear door handles, apparently because 156 owners complain that passengers have difficulty getting in! Perhaps Alfa-Romeo should tell people who complain about such quirks to bugger off and buy a Vectra or a Mondeo if door handles are such a big issue...
 Signature Halmyre
f c e k i r i s h c o n n e c t i o n
SteveH - 20 Sep 2005 20:19 GMT > > But Sportwagons are about fun AND practicality according to Alfa. To > > build an Estate-style Sportwagon with LESS luggage capacity than the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > people who complain about such quirks to bugger off and buy a Vectra or > a Mondeo if door handles are such a big issue... Or a Honda Civc. Oh, they now have Alfa-esque door handles. As will every car soon. Which is probably the reason Alfa moved away from them.
 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 - Alfa 75 TSpark Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
Pete - 21 Sep 2005 15:36 GMT >156 owners complain that >passengers have difficulty getting in! Perhaps Alfa-Romeo should tell >people who complain about such quirks to bugger off and buy a Vectra or >a Mondeo if door handles are such a big issue... Too true. Although I suspect it was 156 drivers rather than owners who complained. After all, who would spend out on a brand new 156 and not notice the beauty of the non-visible rear door-handles? The sad fact is that Alfa have to listen to fleet buyers & users to make affordable cars for the rest of us. Whilst Alfisti may well pay a grand more to not have nasty door handles, fleet buyers are only interested in making their budget work. It takes a lot of units sold to bring unit cost down by 1000 quid.
Pete
 Signature <iowna156@rustclubalfa.com> 156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso
George Graves - 19 Sep 2005 02:02 GMT > I don't think the wife will let me have any more hobby cars, not with a > half built kit car in the garage, and 2 Minis and a Honda CRX in the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Am I right in ruling out the 1.6? And am I right in thinking Veloce is > best option pack , then lusso, then standard? I have driven the 1.6 liter 147 extensively. Even in a car the size of a Ford Focus, the 1.6 is anemic, I cannot even imagine how lackluster the performance would be in a car the size and weight of a 166. I did notice one other thing. At highway speeds, the 1.6 is really busy sounding, fatiguing, actually. The 2.0 liter is much better, but a car the size of the 166 wants the 3.0 liter V-6 or at least the 2.4 liter Diesel.
PeterMcC - 19 Sep 2005 08:22 GMT George Graves wrote in <gmgraves-CA8C38.18023518092005@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>
> I have driven the 1.6 liter 147 extensively. Even in a car the size > of a Ford Focus, the 1.6 is anemic, I cannot even imagine how > lackluster the performance would be in a car the size and weight of a > 166. That would be a good point, were it possible to buy a 1.6l 166
 Signature PeterMcC If you feel that any of the above is incorrect, inappropriate or offensive in any way, please ignore it and accept my apologies.
George Graves - 19 Sep 2005 22:11 GMT > George Graves wrote in > <gmgraves-CA8C38.18023518092005@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > That would be a good point, were it possible to buy a 1.6l 166 I was going by what someone else wrote. Alfas aren't marketed in the US so I have no way of knowing which engine is available in which model, where.
PeterMcC - 20 Sep 2005 19:43 GMT George Graves wrote in <gmgraves-690157.14114819092005@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>
>> George Graves wrote in >> <gmgraves-CA8C38.18023518092005@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > US so I have no way of knowing which engine is available in which > model, where. No personal criticism intended, George - and it *would* have been a good point :)
 Signature PeterMcC If you feel that any of the above is incorrect, inappropriate or offensive in any way, please ignore it and accept my apologies.
George Graves - 20 Sep 2005 22:04 GMT > George Graves wrote in > <gmgraves-690157.14114819092005@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > No personal criticism intended, George - and it *would* have been a good > point :) OK.
Robert - 20 Sep 2005 11:35 GMT I have a 2003 2.5L V6, my first alfa and i love it. Its done 28,000 miles
If I cruise at say 80MPG down the motorway I get 31MPG. My computer tells me that my combined MPG is 27.4MPG (thats over 13,000 miles since I last reset it) I changed my front tyres after 20,000 miles. My rear tyres have still got at least another 20K wear left in them.
My 12,000 and 24,000 mile services both cost about £230.00 from a main dealer
Its great to drive, very comfortable, lots of toque, effortless even when the car is fully loaded.
Would i buy another - YEP :-)
I have had lots of company cars in my time and quickly got bored with each of them, but I always look forward to driving the Alfa.
Rob
> I'm thinking of buying a used 166, maybe a '99 and almost certainly a > 3l V6 auto. The problem is that I am rather scared of the costs [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Cheers, > Dave daveskirrow@btinternet.com - 24 Sep 2005 10:57 GMT Well fellas, thanks for all your help.
I'm now the proud owner of a 1997 2.0 156 Sportspack 2. I was going to get a slightly newer model with more gadgets and leather but after hours of searching I managed to pick this one up for £1700. Couple of scratched and scuffs but very well kept inside and runs very well.
How long she will last I'm not sure but for £1700 a couple of years will do me :)
Thanks again for your comments, without them I probably would not be a member of the Alfa club.
Cheers, Dave
SteveH - 24 Sep 2005 11:11 GMT > Well fellas, thanks for all your help. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Thanks again for your comments, without them I probably would not be a > member of the Alfa club. Well done that man. That's a fsking bargain.
To all those who think I'm a little harsh with my valuations..... there's some living proof that I know what I'm doing ;-)
 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 - Alfa 75 TSpark Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE - COSOC KOTL BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
PeterMcC - 25 Sep 2005 17:15 GMT daveskirrow@btinternet.com wrote in <1127555877.100821.142510@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
> Well fellas, thanks for all your help. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Thanks again for your comments, without them I probably would not be a > member of the Alfa club. Enjoy :)
 Signature PeterMcC If you feel that any of the above is incorrect, inappropriate or offensive in any way, please ignore it and accept my apologies.
michaelb - 25 Sep 2005 19:36 GMT "" wrote:
> Well fellas, thanks for all your help. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Cheers, > Dave Dave,
Congrats on the purchase. At that price it’s a steal. Enjoy it.
I had an old 164 3.0 once I sold to a friend for GBP 500, he kept it for a couple of years after that and managed to get it past 200,000 miles with no problems and the only servicing being infrequent oil changes. He eventually traded it in (against a 166) and persuaded, no forced, Desira to give him GBP 500 part-ex for it. Now if you can get that sort of use out of your 156 you will be doing well.
Have fun,
Michael
|
|
|