Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,680 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,508 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Performance is substantially down on the 2.4 and it will not sound like the 2.4 either. At least it will be lighter at the front end.
I'd hardly say substantially Fraser :) 8.1 v 8.8 to 60....slightly down might be nearer. It'll be lighter and with a cheeky remap could be a belter

Anyone know when they are available ?
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
45,305 Posts
More powerful and more fuel efficient than the 1.9.. Sounds like a replacement for the 1.9 rather than a replacement for the 2.4.

Whens the 3.0 V6 diesel coming out?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,680 Posts
I'd hardly say substantially Fraser :) 8.1 v 8.8 to 60....slightly down might be nearer. It'll be lighter and with a cheeky remap could be a belter

Anyone know when they are available ?
Yes, but the 2.2 and 2.4 aren't that far apart in terms of 0-60 times but are a mile apart in in-gear (useful) acceleration. I suspect the difference between the 2.0JTD and the 2.4 will be similar.

Actually I'm quite disappointed with the power output of the 2.0 JTD - I thought it would be nearer 200bhp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,485 Posts
I'd hardly say substantially Fraser :) 8.1 v 8.8 to 60....slightly down might be nearer.
I'm with Fraser - 0-60 isn't a great measure for real-world performance of any car, a diesel in particular. I think this will feel a good bit slower than the 2.4.

It's definitely a good step forward from the 1.9, though*.

There'll likely be something else coming to replace the 2.4 - last year, I heard that the 3.0 V6 diesel was meant to be coming in the 169 this year, but it seems unlikely now.




* Although I expect Audi has a car with better economy, there's a Vauxhall with 5 more bhp, etc., etc. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,508 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
More powerful and more fuel efficient than the 1.9.. Sounds like a replacement for the 1.9 rather than a replacement for the 2.4.

Whens the 3.0 V6 diesel coming out?
Of course it is - just think it's closing the gap that's all.

I must have missed it but having driven both varients in the TI i didn't see a huge difference personally, yes it was there but not night & day. For me the lighter 1.9 with a better map might be the best all round option.

Anyway spoke extensively to dealer today and 1.9 production effectively stopped now but 2.0 not likely to be around till sep / oct at the earliest. Also new engines wont see the 159 facelifted just very subtle tweaks ie panel nr windows B pillar is it ?

He may be off the mark but usually knows his stuff so later this year folks.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,508 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I'm with Fraser - 0-60 isn't a great measure for real-world performance of any car, a diesel in particular. I think this will feel a good bit slower than the 2.4.

It's definitely a good step forward from the 1.9, though*.

There'll likely be something else coming to replace the 2.4 - last year, I heard that the 3.0 V6 diesel was meant to be coming in the 169 this year, but it seems unlikely now.




* Although I expect Audi has a car with better economy, there's a Vauxhall with 5 more bhp, etc., etc. :D
Totaly agree on 0-60's but it a benchmark if nothing else.

Good to see Alfa improving their engines but sadly we are playing catchup and as soon as we move forward so do the competition. Still I rather drive a gorgeous car than a dull economical one :thumbs:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,680 Posts
I must have missed it but having driven both varients in the TI i didn't see a huge difference personally, yes it was there but not night & day. For me the lighter 1.9 with a better map might be the best all round option.
I've heard that said about the 2.4v1.9 before but the figures don't lie and there is a considerable bhp/tonne difference between the two cars. In my experience the difference was substantial. Don't necessarily disagree about a mapped 1.9 though, although the 4-pot engine just doesn't have the sound the 5-pot does.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,485 Posts
I've heard that said about the 2.4v1.9 before but the figures don't lie and there is a considerable bhp/tonne difference between the two cars. In my experience the difference was substantial.
Same here - similar to the difference between the 2.0 and 3.0 GTV, I thought. The car with the smaller engine feels a bit nimbler, but the power difference outweighs the 'nimbleness' difference.


With the 2.0d looking like a good step on from the 1.9d and the 1750 petrol replacing the 2.2, it looks like there'll be a better selection of engines to choose from when my 159 is due replacement than there was when I bought it.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top