[symon]

Go for the Petrol, the diesel is strong and powerful but fuel economy isn't the best for a 4 cylinder diesel, and they are loud and clattery.

The petrol cars are lighter at the front too which makes the car handle better, and with the cost difference between Diesel and petrol being high it does wipe out any potential fuel saving costs...

 

[jparkin486]

Petrol. I've had a diesel and multiair. Nothing wrong with the diesel but the petrol drives so much better.

 

[wbanham]

Been lots of posts about diesel and petrol comparisons.

My 12 year diesel returns 60mpg at 60mph in 6th gear. I have my suspicions about mpg claims for the petrol engines ! I miss my 159 1.75tbi but not the mpg.

 

[cue2]

Eight years ago I started this thread;

Blindfold test Multiair versus Diesel

As we have a 2.0 diesel loan car at the moment , I suggested my wife used the loaner this morning . She came back and said " it's much heavier than yours and not as responsive" . I did not tell her return with a report or the fact that despite being the same colour it is Diesel and not petrol.

www.alfaowner.com

 

[Zoo]

The multiair mpg are no where near claimed. 35mpg on average if you’re lucky

 

[cue2]

I used to get 37-38 mpg unless I used it in town a bit more. 16” wheels did 10% better mpg than with 18”.

 

[symon]

The multiair mpg are no where near claimed. 35mpg on average if you’re lucky

That is the same with almost all cars, the MPG figures at the time being based on test cycles which were no way representative of normal driving.

We get Low to mid 40's on the Diesel 170, in normal driving. The best I have ever had is 51mpg at a steady 60mph

Diesel is 25p per litre more expensive which eats up a few of the MPG benefit of having a diesel.

 

[Robden]

Around here, diesel is 9p dearer a litre. The best I've seen on my MA over 2000 miles is a tad over 40 mpg. usually it's 37-38 mpg. But it wasn't bought for the economy, it was bought because it's pretty and (still) makes me smile when I look back at it.

 

[Jetronic77]

and here diesel is the same as E95, with E98 being 10% more costly

 

[SmOgER]

Interesting. Here the diesel is 0.20 EUR per liter more expensive. Petrol is now far more reasonable 1.60-ish. Down from 2.00s it was not terribly long ago.

 

[Sterzo]

The multiair mpg are no where near claimed. 35mpg on average if you’re lucky

I have never seen an average that low on either of my 1.4MA Giuliettas. I've had the current one for 3 years. For the first two I'd drive an hour a day, the first three miles in town, the rest belting up and down the North Downs in D mode. The dash showed an average of 39.9.

Usage changed drastically a year ago. Driving only seven miles a day, entirely in town, it reads 36.8.

 

[TonyGr]

For the petrol 1.4MA 170 take a look at the figure in my signature. This is the cumulative mpg over 95,700 miles and 10 years. However there is only minimal town driving. Click on the Fuelly link and you will get a breakdown which shows a maximum of 47.2mpg (do remember to change from US galls to imperial) for a single fill in September 2016. This was part of the journey home from holiday in Austria and was basically 65-70 mph on the German autobann.

 

[Pujazuba]

I have never tried a MA Giulietta but I feel like the purpose of Giulietta is to be equipped with a lightweight MA engine.
It's clear that the economy of the MA engine is very far off the claimed values given that the values at the time were for comparison only and not representing real life scenarios. Here the diesel begs to differ as it can give impressive fuel economy.
Additionally, the diesel engine has a wonderful amount of torque at the cost of feeling quire unrefined which you get used to.
MA seems to be prone to some issues as well while the diesel is a bullet proof work horse.

 

[SmOgER]

I have never tried a MA Giulietta but I feel like the purpose of Giulietta is to be equipped with a lightweight MA engine.
It's clear that the economy of the MA engine is very far off the claimed values given that the values at the time were for comparison only and not representing real life scenarios. Here the diesel begs to differ as it can give impressive fuel economy.
Additionally, the diesel engine has a wonderful amount of torque at the cost of feeling quire unrefined which you get used to.
MA seems to be prone to some issues as well while the diesel is a bullet proof work horse.

Judging by this thread Best and worst MPG in 1.4MA and 2.0JTDM (useful to OP too), 1.4MA has great fuel economy actually. It's a good engine too as it's basically an undersized version of 2.0T MA found in Giulia.

Regarding diesel, it's a work horse like you said. But is that what Alfa is all about in your opinion? I think not.

 

[symon]

With regard to the MA, Like any downsized engine if you use the power it will drink fuel like a larger engine. If you pootle along off the turbo it will give a decent MPG.

If you drive the diesel hard however you will struggle to get much less than 40mpg. But there isn't much fun in driving it in that way due to the extra weight and the lack of aural excitement. It is more of a cruiser than a warm hatch.

 

[Honx]

Thank you all very much for your feedback. I viewed both a 2.0 JTDm (170bhp) as well as a 1.4 TB Multiair (170bhp as well). In my opinion, the petrol definitely had more character and a better feel to it, not to mention a much nicer engine note, which is why I decided to go for that. In terms of consumption (coming from a 1.6 Twin Spark) I think I'll be able to live with the petrol (MPG seems very reasonable, actually). Here's my 2013 1.4 TB Multiair Sportiva Thanks again!

 

[cue2]

Good move, as suggested by my wife back in my 2014 thread!

 

[Valentino46]

I had a sportiva (albeit jtdm) and it's a very nice spec.
Silver wheels on yours look much better than turbines imho.
If I was buying again I would certainly go petrol.
Looks great - enjoy 👍

 

[cue2]

Looks like it’s got spacers.