Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Alfa Romeo Cars / April 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Buy or not to buy 147 2.0 SS?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
HK - 19 Apr 2006 08:32 GMT
I found Alfa 147 2.0 Selespeed, year 2002, 42.000 Mls.
Since I own 146 1.6TS I am well aware of all pros and cons
for a secondhand Alfa. The only thing that I am affraid of is
a selespeed gearbox. I heard it is not so reliable. Has anyone
any experience with  a selespeed? Shoud I buy it or wait to
fing a manual?
SteveH - 19 Apr 2006 19:02 GMT
> I found Alfa 147 2.0 Selespeed, year 2002, 42.000 Mls.
> Since I own 146 1.6TS I am well aware of all pros and cons
> for a secondhand Alfa. The only thing that I am affraid of is
> a selespeed gearbox. I heard it is not so reliable. Has anyone
> any experience with  a selespeed? Shoud I buy it or wait to
> fing a manual?

Buy a manual.

They're generally known as the 'sillyspeed' in the trade for obvious
reasons.
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 - Fiat Marea 20v HLX -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

MarkK - 19 Apr 2006 23:18 GMT
> > I found Alfa 147 2.0 Selespeed, year 2002, 42.000 Mls.
> > Since I own 146 1.6TS I am well aware of all pros and cons
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> They're generally known as the 'sillyspeed' in the trade for obvious
> reasons.

Though to balance things up a bit, I remember reading in a post here that
from 2001-on they were much more reliable. Worth digging in Google Groups,
as this has been covered before.

Mark
Szymon - 26 Apr 2006 19:55 GMT
> Though to balance things up a bit, I remember reading in a post here that
> from 2001-on they were much more reliable. Worth digging in Google Groups,
> as this has been covered before.

True. I heard that pre-01 examples need setup of gearbox (via examiner)
every time they appear at the service.

Szymon
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.