166 TS or 2.5 V6??

Currently have 2L TS, needs a few odds and sods sorted (exhaust sounds like it's blowing under acceleration/cruising from front area, but have had replacement manifold and gaskets and still sounds the same and only does around 25MPG on a run), but is generally in VGC apart from this and an oil leak somewhere that I can't find -poss sump gasket?. I now have the chance to buy a 2.5 V6 of the same age (2001), for around £2.5K. Haven't been to see it yet, but apparently in excellent nick, having just had a full service and cam belt/tensioner change. Would be interested to hear from other members whether they think I should go ahead and fix up the twinnie back to full glory or splash the cash on the 2.5. What are the downsides of V6 ownership if any? I do a fairly high mileage of around 20K/pa with a lot of motorway and London traffic driving, so the auto would be better for this

the auto 2.5 does not perform that differently from the manual 2.0, on paper any way. I have a manual 2.5 and that returns 25mpg on my daily drive that involves a 7 miles trip into Birmingham each day, however when traffic is really bad, eg the 20 min drive turns into 55 mins, consumption drops to 15mpg, an auto may well be worse. For a significant performance change the 3.0 auto would be worthwhile but they cost much more.

The good news is that the 2.5 is pretty affordable these days, is smooth quiet and despite having that big lump up front, it still handles well for a big car, maybe not as well as the 2.0 but way better than my old Saab 9000. The belt change is more expensive and more of a specialist job than the 2.0, the water pump is best changed at the same time as the original is plastic and the impeller can spin on the axis. The front suspension/tyres get more of a hammering as well due to the weight.

The 2.5 can still come without a CD player so check that and the cable, the rad is just as flimsy, same part, if you have two 166s on the drive you could always transfer any missing bits onto the new car.

and get some chrome polish for those pipes

HTH

I have a Dec 02 2.5 red manual with beige leather. I love it ! I also cover 20k per year but mainly motorway and a roads (try to avoid city driving and traffic). Car returns 400 miles per tank and gets driven quickly but kindly. I recommend a 2.5, go and drive it....

I cant comment directly on the 166 but I have a TS & V6 156 and I would think the two cars are pretty similar at least engine wise. The V6 feels a totally different engine to the TS, smoother and more relaxed but it is thirstier.

The manual V6 would be a much better choice than the auto where the 2.5 engine is not really torquey enough for the long gears of the auto. Also auto is thirstier again than the manual 2.5

On the motorway I find the V6 a more relaxed drive than the TS due to longer gearing but give it a boot and it will quickly take off. Handling is not as precise as the TS due to the extra weight but a good set of dampers easily sorts that out and in fact are pretty essential

And then there is the V6 sound...........

Depends on the condition/price of the V6 and whether you're happy with the Sportronic. The V6 sounds lovely but, personally, I wouldn't go for the Sportronic version. Lots more to go wrong and performance/fuel economy is worse than the manual equivalent. In fact, as Purple says, the 2.5 Sportronic is fractionally slower to 60 than the manual TS!
Full specifications can be found here:
http://www.alfaowner.com/Forum/alfa-...d-options.html (166 Technical Specifications, Key Equipment & Options)

thanks, it went for £1950 and I didn't buy it in the end. Have posted a couple of threads to see if I can get help with my 166 twinnie, and if not I think I might just be walking away from Alfa's as reputable independants can't fathom what's wrong and nor can, it seems, anyone else (anyone fancy a challenge???)