Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey everyone.

Having owned a 2001 alfa 147 1.6 for the last 2 years, I just changed it for a late 2003 (just pre-facelift) 2.0 147.

Just thought I'd give people some insights into choosing between them:

The first time I drove the 2.0 I was kinda disappointed..It didn't have as much extra grunt as I expected.

But, as I got used to driving it over the last few days, it's started to make a LOT more sense.

The first time I drove it I was thinking "RIGHT..lets see what this baby can do!" I was sticking my foot to the floor and changing up late..

In essence I was driving it the same as I had the 1.6 when I was pushing it hard...basically, thrashing the nuts off it..

It was only driving to work today, I realised that it seemed a much more relaxing drive than nornal..and it's now that I realise the magic of the 2.0...

It does exactly what the 1.6 does..but..you don't have to push the throttle pedal so hard. You don't have to be in EXACTLY the right gear every time you over take..

From experience, the way to get the best performance from the 1.6 is, to be blunt, thrash it.

The 2.0 responds best to a much gentler driving style..change up earlier etc.

This has the weird effect of actually making the 2.0 seem LESS sporty than the 1.6. My dad has it right when he says it feels like "more of a grown up car". It's more of a car to waft effortlessly along in.

In short, if you are wondering which to get, if you want a thrash along country roads, I'd go for the 1.6, if you are more likely to cruise down motorways the 2.0 is definitely the one to get. The extra torque and power is just enough to make everyday driving pretty much effortless.

Any comments? Anyone agree or disagree?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
i have a 156, 1.6. totally agree! i love thrashing along country roads and thank god we have plenty here. :)

if u r not at 3500rpm u are not gonna move, thats for sure. thrashing in b roads its just like watching porn for the first time.. u know its not a good thing, but boy you like it. city driving is **** though. no usable power in the low range
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37,353 Posts
I always found the 2.0 to be pretty rev-happy, especially when fitted to a 145 QV (with shorter gearing)

The overall gearing on the 2.0 147 (and 156) is taller which makes the car more refined on a run but less revvy on a backroad blast.

IMO the cars characteristics have more to do with the way they are geared than the engine, so you are not really getting a fair comparison.

a 1.6TS 145 V's a 145 QV would be a better comparison.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top