Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
221 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I bought my absolute favourite car ever (no contest) in May 2006. As I prepare myself for moving on, I thought I'd share my long term report here.

Experience:
Utterly fabulous. The noise, the performance, the noise, the interior, the performance, the interior, the noise, the performance. I have a ten mile commute to work on a range of country roads. Twenty minutes of pleasure every day. Third and Fourth are to die for. It's amazing. The car is totally smooth when cruising but demands that you drive like a hooligan on the b-roads. Great car.

Reliability:
She's been recovered (un-driveable) twice for burst power steering hoses.
Many, many things have gone wrong. I have 23 garage receipts so, on average, it's been to the garage about 4 times a year.

Running costs:
Total garage bills (Alfa Sport Sawston) add up to ... wait for it ... £13,161.
That's £2300/year. Depreciation is less than £500/year on top of that.
What an absolute f*****g bargain.

She's currently in very good shape (new clutch & flywheel in November) but I feel it's time to move on.

I'm planning to test drive some 159 Q4's tomorrow.

I'm hoping they can get close to my 166 3.0 Super.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
873 Posts
If you have the space keep the 166 and get something else.

We did after buying our 159 and have not regretted the decision. Depends very much on how much you can get for it but VED on a pre Mar 2001 car is at the fixed level (albeit increasing each budget) rather than being emissions based.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
221 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I'd suggest u keep the 166!

Or GTA or 3.2 gt :)
I've not driven a 159 yet. I take it it's not much cop compared to the 166?

By GTA, do you mean 147? I'm looking for something younger than a 156.
I have considered 'GTA'ing a 159 at Autodelta.

I suppose I could squeeze the three kids in the back of a GT ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
327 Posts
I've not driven a 159 yet. I take it it's not much cop compared to the 166?

By GTA, do you mean 147? I'm looking for something younger than a 156.
I have considered 'GTA'ing a 159 at Autodelta.

I suppose I could squeeze the three kids in the back of a GT ...
Go for the GT, once you're in the back there's plenty of room, and a big boot too. According to the boss of Fiat, they made the 159 400kg too heavy. That's a lot of weight to drag around.
Chris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
674 Posts
Running costs:
Total garage bills (Alfa Sport Sawston) add up to ... wait for it ... £13,161.
OMG. I ran my 166 for seven years and the total repair bill over that period was one side-light bulb which the helpful MoT chap put in for a token sum. Other than that it had an oil change every year, one cambelt (and bits) change, tyres, and one set of brake pads. I never added it up but would be surprised if it was over £3,000 total - the most reliable car I've ever owned.



I'm planning to test drive some 159 Q4's tomorrow.
I'd be interested to read your report. The 159 just didn't do it for me when I felt it was time to move on and so I jumped ship :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
860 Posts
I think it'll largely come down to your budget and priorities of what you're really after.

I had to go the other way (159 to 166!) due to finances but in all honesty, both cars have a lot to offer. The 159 had the right 'oomph' from the 1750 TBi engine (but you forsake sound of course). However, the interior material quality of the 159, seat support (if TI) and front end aesthetic looks IMO are better.

In reality, my 166 is about 5-10 mpg less efficient (depending on driving style), £15 more per year in road tax due to age/emissions and about the same (£30 a month) in insurance.

I have to say though that I'm having more fun driving the 166 :) Both are great cars and it would have been great if they'd just dropped a V6 Busso into the engine bay of a 159!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
221 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
OMG. I ran my 166 for seven years and the total repair bill over that period was one side-light bulb which the helpful MoT chap put in for a token sum. Other than that it had an oil change every year, one cambelt (and bits) change, tyres, and one set of brake pads. I never added it up but would be surprised if it was over £3,000 total - the most reliable car I've ever owned.
I've done 65k in that time. I've had lots and lots of suspension work (I blame the speed bumps) various new arms (£400 each!), roll-bars, wishbones, bushes. Two clutches, one flywheel, some brake discs, some brake pads, two sets of timing belts, lots of spark plugs, some head gasket, a radiator (caused the head gasket), a burnt out heater fan, some coil springs (bloody speed bumps), some wheel bearings, lots of power steering fluid, an alternator, a silencer and quite a few tyres.

I honestly still think it's very good value for that quality of car.


I'd be interested to read your report. The 159 just didn't do it for me when I felt it was time to move on and so I jumped ship :(
I've gone off the 159 idea - seems like a downgrade from the 166: Smaller. Better looking front, worse looking rear. No significant performance improvement. Just seems less special.

Becoming quite smitten by a 3.2 GT as recommended here. Took the family to look at one today. They really are very spacious in the back for a coupe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
237 Posts
Hi having owned a GT 3.2 i can say that the GT especially in 3.2 is my favourite Alfa ,i prefered the looks to the Brera and there is a suprising amount of space for even adults in the rear seats and the the boot is very practical even with the seats down.
The downsides i found were the squeaking bootlid that Mangoletsis did their best to cure although they did say it was a "GT problem" Also the pathetic stereo even with the Bose system (V6 soundtrack made up for it though ) I didnt like the cheapo 147 type dash.
The ride on 18" wheels was just this side of awful and i was the slowest thing on wheels when there was speed humps as it scraped its arse on every one and people driving lesser cars who followed me used to get impatient as they could just drive over them at normal speeds !
Also wet shoes nearly caused me to have accidents due to them slipping off the metal pedals
But these are mere niggles on what must be the last true Alfa made.
But i still remember the first time i went to look at it and even though it was round the back of the showroom i heard its deep chested bellow while i was sat at the salesmans desk.
Dont bother with a 159 unless you want a car later than 2005/6 but if you want newer go for the 159 with the 3.2 even though its GM based it still sounds glorious and the upside is newer technology and better build quality ,you are in an enviable position enjoy your hunting .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,889 Posts
ken can probably give you his impression from moving from a 166 to a 3.2 159....
:wow: I thought Ken had gone to the dark side.Pomeo learning awe ra time.etc:lol:

I just could not contemplate getting an Alfa with an American engine. Maybe it's an irrational mental block. I can't get over it, even if the heads are by Alfa. Just look at it compared to the Busso

:vomit:



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d5/AlfaRomeo30-24V.JPG/800px-AlfaRomeo30-24V.JPG
Just doesn't look the same as Paul Says

Pomeo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,943 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,429 Posts
Honestly, I've had a GT for nearly 4 years now, but don't overestimate the size of the rear seats. If nothing else, getting kids or anyone else in and out isn't the easiest. If you need to use the back seats regularly, get a 159 or keep the 166.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
873 Posts
In reality, my 166 is about 5-10 mpg less efficient (depending on driving style)
Ho Ho Ho!

Our 166 3.0 Sportronic = 24mpg
Our 159 TBi = 27mpg

I happily admit I don't try to save fuel but both cars are used on the same routes at the same times by the same people (mr Mrs and me) and the real world difference is not as much as you might expect. Admittedly on a single tank it might be more, but when you average over 10,000 miles it's not that big!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
221 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Honestly, I've had a GT for nearly 4 years now, but don't overestimate the size of the rear seats. If nothing else, getting kids or anyone else in and out isn't the easiest. If you need to use the back seats regularly, get a 159 or keep the 166.
Thanks for the tip but meh. I've checked they fit and that's good enough for me.
We've always got the wife's motor ... oh ... that's a Boxster :rolleyes:

I'm convinced the GT is the most practical option available. Heck, it's a hatchback! That's a family car!
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
Top