Alfa Romeo Forum banner

156 GTA vs 159 1750 TBi Ti

8K views 60 replies 20 participants last post by  sizewell 
#1 ·
Which one is the more engaging drive? I'm thinking more about handling than straight line performance.

Has anyone remapped the 1750? What's it like to own?

I'm in a very bad place with this Alfa fixation. Can't seem to get enough but cannot decide which one to get next. [emoji57]

Sent from my using Tapatalk
 
#2 ·
156 GTA all the way for me, lighter, better handling, more power, nicer noise.

Only issue would be finding a decent one, with out any of the usual rust issues, that and parts availablity for some bits is impossible.

159 is a nicer looking car (to me at least) but no comparison otherwise.

No comments on the remapping of the TBi engine I'm afraid.
 
#3 ·
The 159 is a much more modern car. Stiffer, (much) safer, quieter. Not as "engaging" as a result, with a less good engine (obviously more gas guzzling though).

From what I understand the 156 rusts through like the tin man on lifeguard duty which was a big red flag for me but others might be willing to deal with.

In the end it is what compromises you can live with...If you carry kids or do long journeys the 159 is probably a no brainer...if it's for just a bit of fun the 156 GTA.
 
#4 ·
IMO you are not really comparing like with like....A limited production special against a full production car that was just part of the normal range. Heart says GTA all the way...the weak points are as mentioned above...rust can be serious. Rather more expensive to run and maintain ...unless you DIY.....and can be rather more expensive to insure. As a daily driver it would be the 159 all the way....easier parts supply, better economy (just) and running costs and a little more interior and boot space. I would not use a GTA as a daily (although others do)...they are getting too rare and collectable....id have one as a sunny day toy.....and yes although looks are personal I also think the 159 is way prettier and the 156 range is not aging as well as even some of the earlier ALFAs..
 
#6 ·
#42 ·
Big money for a half-decent GTA, if you can find one that is.
The TBi (in a 159) can be had comparatively cheaply even from respected Alfa specialists Used Alfa Romeo 159 Saloon 1.8 Tbi Ti 4dr in Rochdale, Lancashire | True Alfa Italian Sports & Prestige Specialist
Way more expensive in a Brera or Spider.
If you can afford the running costs, a 156 all day long for the ''engaging drive'' and ''handling''.
I think this one is good value given condition, mileage and it is sold by a main dealer. What else could you get with that individuality, rareness and engine for £16k?

 
#7 ·
156 GTA all the way...still modern enough but yes the 159 is more refined, however lacks the real feeling of fun and entertainment you get in a GTA..... if Alfa had managed to sort emissions out for the Busso engine and got it in a 159, then it would have been amazing.
 
#9 ·
Thanks for your replies. I was under the impression that the GTA with the heavier Busso would be a bit of a clunky handler whereas the TBi ,being lighter, would be a swifter car to drive round the bendies, especially in ti trim with its suspension upgrades.

GTA's are going for silly prices lately, and the low-priced ones makes me wonder if rust is the reason for the low price. [emoji848]



Sent from my using Tapatalk
 
#11 ·
I've just gone from a 147 GTA to a Brera TBI, so not too dissimilar to your question.

My 147 GTA was heavily modified to make it tighter and more nimble. The Brera just has a tuning box to take it 230bhp and 400nm or so.

Believe it or not, the kerb weight of a Brera TBI is only 100kg heavier than a 147 GTA, (according to online sources I've used such as zeperfs).

The GTA sounded better, was more "fun" was egging me on to drive it harder, felt like it wanted to be pushed to the limit. Power was really only from 4K and above though and it felt very nose heavy and bouncy even on coilovers.

The Brera is quiet and refined in comparison, it's better balanced with less weight over the front and more over the rear in comparison to the 147 GTA. The Brera just feels like it has much more even weight distribution. The Brera feels faster, due to the lump of torque the turbo gives you low down. The Brera makes you want to shift up prematurely like a diesel though and runs out of puff at the very top end whereas the GTA sings.
 
#15 ·
The styling of the Brera suits a quick-off-the-blocks pocket rocket, but the JTS engines are unimpressive in performance. From what I've read, the TBi has more usable torque in the lower revs, and this would be good coupled with a good suspension, hence my interest in the 159 TBi in ti spec.

Still, nothing comes close to the legendary Busso, I imagine... :sneaky:
 
#16 ·
Selespeed was so poor they never even sold the 159 in the UK with it. Too many complaints over warranty work from UK dealers with previous models.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alfaitalia
#21 ·
i never drive a 156 GTA , the most equal that i drove was a GTV 3.0V6 and i love it. Now as you know i have a 159 Ti 1750 TBi and simply love the car. It's a 2010 full spec and also woth some modifications in intake, exhaust and a stage 2 remap for around 270hp(max of stock turbo) and 431n.m of torque. This engine is like a bull, you have a lot of torque from very low revs and it pull all the way up to 6000 to 6500 because it's remaped. From stock it stops pull around 5500rpm.

If i can i have both, but if i have to choose i pick the 159. It's better car and this 1750tbi you can easily make around 350 to 380hp without many mods.
 
#58 ·
Correct!

It is unfair to compare the two. Not a fan of the GTA, but the engine makes it really special, 147 or 156.

The 1750 a good engine and the 159 a great car. Together, excellent. Front wheel drive though - mmm! Should never have been.

GTA, front wheel drive - it had to be. There wasn’t the resources for anything else at the time.

The alternative would have been no GTA. So I can forgive that, very easily. And they didn’t make a bad fist of it, even in standard form.
 
#29 ·
Curve-ball time:

Alfa Romeo 156 2.5 V6 Busso Veloce SP3 6-Speed - FSH and only 73k miles | eBay

Same noise and most of the thrills of a 156 GTA with the benefit of spare parts that are not only affordable, but available!

I'd be tempted myself if I had the funds...
Looks like a nice car that one. But it's nearly 20 years old, so I dare say it'll need constant fettling.
And wasn't rust/rot a big thing with 156s?

And yes, revving is a big part of the fun. Diesel drivers don't have that...
 
#27 · (Edited)
Nothing like a GTA. The 2.5 is a mere 190 horse compared to 247 for the GTA and more importantly the torque is only 218nm at a stratospheric 5000 rpm...the GTA still produced its max at, a too high IMO, 4800 rpm but at least its 300nm. That said I had that car in red....loved it....but not even close to a GTA imo.

I don't see that car at much over two large though...I sold my red with tan MOMO guts (far better combo IMO) about 4 years ago with only slightly more miles than that for only about two G...and that took me ages.

EDIT....just had a quick look around….not many for sale at less than that so he will probably sell it for that I guess.
 
#28 ·
You could look at it as a compromise: 10 fewer horses than a tbi (ok, peak torque is a little higher in the rev range, but isn't revving them part of the fun?) in a lighter, more engaging car with a Busso soundtrack and no worries about sourcing and funding rocking-horse-poo GTA-specific parts.

I did say "curve ball" and "most of the fun of a GTA"!
 
#30 ·
As said before...I loved revving my V6 2.5 156....but its not fun ALL THE TIME! When I'm in top at 70 and want to over take I want to just push the throttle down and go....not change down two or three gears to get to the sweet spot on the rev range. To my mind that makes for a nicer drive and a car that's ultimately quicker point to point. Its not a diesel thing....you can get nice torquey petrol cars...especially now where nearly everything is turbocharged....The TBi is great example...not far of as much torque as my diesel (TBi 320nm ...2.0 JTDM 360nm) and about the same revs (350 rpm lower to be precise...TBi peak torque is at just 1400rpm...which is impressive for a petrol)....but lots of revs when you want them. I never understood why the GTA 3.2 torque peaked so high....my old 2006 BMW 530i (slightly smaller engine but still 6 cylinders) produced its identical 300nm of torque at just 2750 rpm (compared to the GTA at 4800 rpm) and still revved hard and went on to produce slightly more power than the GTA...255. Its not the peak torque on the graph that counts....its the area under the curve that matters.
 
#35 · (Edited)
Nope....only had two autos in my life...out of about 35 cars I've had. A Jeep Grand Cherokee 2.7 CRD (WJ shape) and an Audi A8 4.2 V8.....both those cars were never built with a manual transmission....so since I wanted those models I had no choice. I'm seriously looking at getting an early Giulia Quad....such a pity that it's not available with a proper slick six speed manual in this country...like it is in others. To the point I'm even looking at the possibility of importing a manual.....but unfortunately none of the other 50 odd counties that drive on the left get the Quad in manual either so it would have to be LHD. Which is not the end of the world...my Intergrale was LHD ..never an issue. Might be more hassle than it's worth though an I'll end up with the 8 speed Auto.
 
#36 ·
That's a hell of a jump from a 159 alfaitalia. How much are early Quadrifoglios down to?
 
#38 ·
Wow, I had no idea. Thought it was still in the 40s!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top