Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 20 of 47 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
As promised here is a review of my latest venture, as the title may suggest the main focus will be how it compared to one of my other all-time favorites an Alfa 159 2.4JTDM.

Ok, let’s get started:

Interior and ICE:

The swooping metallic interior dash of a 159 will always be a sight to behold, it’s an ageless design that I’ve yet to see re-created in a modern sedan with so much flair. The same goes for current iterations in comparison (the Giulia), the BMW is smart and well defined but lacks the panache of the 159.

Like comparing a pretty modern house to an Italian villa, whilst the modern house is a nice place to be the holiday villa always gives a better sense of occasion. In no way does the BMW not feel modern, well designed and / or look out of place / un-pretty but the 159 had that je ne sais quoi!.

As for ICE, well it’s a little bit of an unfair comparison with the 159 being dated in that department. So I’ll have to compare the Giulietta QV in that department.

The BMW navigation system is auto-updated via a 3 / 4G network automatically, it has real time traffic information and auto diversion. There is an SOS system that automatically detects if you’ve been in an accident and will contact help. The sub-menu has en mass car configuration options, from lights to suspension setups etc.

I’m a tech geek and I think it’s cool, although I find it excessively fiddly. I admire simple ergonomic design as much as new cool tech, which the BMW seems to be lacking in the quick access department. So I kind of prefer the Giulietta's setup day to day, luckily there is a preset bar where you can hold different setups of various systems. Yeah the BMW is "technically" superior, but it doesn't always mean better..

I will mention, even with HK audio I still think the 159 had a better stereo system.

Steering and suspension:

Anyone who thought I was unfairly harsh on the Giulietta QV, well you’re about to see this goes for any car. WHAT WERE THEY THINKING? The steering is comically light, yeah the handling is precise and it’s chuckable but unnervingly without any actual feel. I’ve begun to get used to it, but it’s still a major bug bear. To add insult, you have to pay for them to correct their own mistake with VSS (Variable sport steering).

The 159 was more “soft” and “wafty”, it can’t handle corners as well but for day to day fun driving was composed and competent enough that it didn’t matter massively. But on the flip side the 159 had 100HP less than the BMW.! The 159 drifted more towards understeer as opposed to the BMW which focusses more on oversteer (even with AWD).

Drivetrain and refinement:

This is where everything starts to make sense, this is why they cost what they do and anyone who thinks a BMW 335D is boring must be mad. The AWD system is incredible, no matter how much power you chuck at it, it’s always composed. There’s no sign of torque steer, it never wheel spins even in the wet so in summation an extremely competent system.

Brakes are simply phenomenal, even at quarter travel you’re starting to feel G force as it grinds quite a heavy car to a halt. The engine, oh my word!.. Talk about split personality, for cruising about it’s like a refined econobox. Then press that pedal down and it literally goes ballistic and becomes utterly relentless. The amount of torque and G it can produce when you get the banding right is surreal. Even with a RWD biased AWD system, you want to poke the beast and it will poke back at you.! Although it never feels out of hand.

There is a note I have to make, this pertains to the LCI (2015 model) onwards, some of the older BMW’s I tried were utterly dismal in many areas when it came to drive train. Either that or I tried two broken cars..
The 159 can’t quite compete in this area, not to say it was an unfulfilling or poor to drive. Because it was far from it, the brakes were capable and the drive was comfortable and relaxed just like the BMW is although the 159 didn’t have the mad man split personality.

As for the gearbox, I said in the Alfa QV review the automatic was a big issue for me. Whilst the ZF is better, some of the characteristics I didn’t like still exist. For e.g. in D or (sport mode), the BMW will still artificially for no reason hang on really high revs when it should upshift. Ultimately it turns out I might be manual biased, but in M/S mode you can have automatic assisted semi-manual.. Where it’s fully manual until you slow down and it’ll fill the gaps in for you, which I like it combines the best of both worlds and something the TCT is lacking.

The 159 manual was awesome, which I can’t really say too much more on the matter.
In terms of refinement, the BMW is extremely quiet but surprisingly has more road noise than I imagined (I don’t have runflats either). The 159 wasn’t too far off in terms of refinement, although I have to admit the BMW is a far comfier place to be.

Looks:

Looks are always highly subjective, in Msport guise it’s a pretty car but nothing bar a Maserati Gran Turismo will beat a 159 in TI guise.

Q&A:

“Do you actually like the BMW?”

It might sound like I have a mixed opinion on it, but it’s in my top three cars and so is the 159. Forgetting Alfa for a minute, compared to modern day hot hatches it can do everything they can and it’s better at it.

With the cost of some hot hatches today (ironic as they’re supposed to be low cost pocket rockets), you’d be hard pressed for me to ever consider one again.

“So which do you prefer, BMW or Alfa”?

That’s a tricky question, they’re both fantastic cars in their own right. I’d say if you have a re-mapped 2.4 159 hang onto it, if the Giulia doesn’t do it for you then I’d highly recommend checking out a 335D / 340I. The issue being price and age, for the money you'd expect the BMW to be all round better right?

Well in reality not as much as you may believe, yes the latest iteration BMW is ultimatley the better car. But it was supposed to compete with the E90 335D / pre-LCI which in my opinion I'd of taken the 159 over both of them with little consideration. Even now factoring everything, it's still a difficult choice...

Don't get me wrong, as a new proposition the BMW is worth every penny just to experience the drive train alone. As a second hand car, I'd still go 159 over a BMW..

So, my conclusion is buy both..! I'm going to :).

P.S I still don’t like the Giulietta QV :D..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
As promised here is a review of my latest venture, as the title may suggest the main focus will be how it compared to one of my other all-time favorites an Alfa 159 2.4JTDM.

Ok, let’s get started:

Interior and ICE:

The swooping metallic interior dash of a 159 will always be a sight to behold, it’s an ageless design that I’ve yet to see re-created in a modern sedan with so much flair. The same goes for current iterations in comparison (the Giulia), the BMW is smart and well defined but lacks the panache of the 159.

Like comparing a pretty modern house to an Italian villa, whilst the modern house is a nice place to be the holiday villa always gives a better sense of occasion. In no way does the BMW not feel modern, well designed and / or look out of place / un-pretty but the 159 had that je ne sais quoi!.

As for ICE, well it’s a little bit of an unfair comparison with the 159 being dated in that department. So I’ll have to compare the Giulietta QV in that department.

The BMW navigation system is auto-updated via a 3 / 4G network automatically, it has real time traffic information and auto diversion. There is an SOS system that automatically detects if you’ve been in an accident and will contact help. The sub-menu has en mass car configuration options, from lights to suspension setups etc.

I’m a tech geek and I think it’s cool, although I find it excessively fiddly. I admire simple ergonomic design as much as new cool tech, which the BMW seems to be lacking in the quick access department. So I kind of prefer the Giulietta's setup day to day, luckily there is a preset bar where you can hold different setups of various systems. Yeah the BMW is "technically" superior, but it doesn't always mean better..

I will mention, even with HK audio I still think the 159 had a better stereo system.

Steering and suspension:

Anyone who thought I was unfairly harsh on the Giulietta QV, well you’re about to see this goes for any car. WHAT WERE THEY THINKING? The steering is comically light, yeah the handling is precise and it’s chuckable but unnervingly without any actual feel. I’ve begun to get used to it, but it’s still a major bug bear. To add insult, you have to pay for them to correct their own mistake with VSS (Variable sport steering).

The 159 was more “soft” and “wafty”, it can’t handle corners as well but for day to day fun driving was composed and competent enough that it didn’t matter massively. But on the flip side the 159 had 100HP less than the BMW.! The 159 drifted more towards understeer as opposed to the BMW which focusses more on oversteer (even with AWD).

Drivetrain and refinement:

This is where everything starts to make sense, this is why they cost what they do and anyone who thinks a BMW 335D is boring must be mad. The AWD system is incredible, no matter how much power you chuck at it, it’s always composed. There’s no sign of torque steer, it never wheel spins even in the wet so in summation an extremely competent system.

Brakes are simply phenomenal, even at quarter travel you’re starting to feel G force as it grinds quite a heavy car to a halt. The engine, oh my word!.. Talk about split personality, for cruising about it’s like a refined econobox. Then press that pedal down and it literally goes ballistic and becomes utterly relentless. The amount of torque and G it can produce when you get the banding right is surreal. Even with a RWD biased AWD system, you want to poke the beast and it will poke back at you.! Although it never feels out of hand.

There is a note I have to make, this pertains to the LCI (2015 model) onwards, some of the older BMW’s I tried were utterly dismal in many areas when it came to drive train. Either that or I tried two broken cars..
The 159 can’t quite compete in this area, not to say it was an unfulfilling or poor to drive. Because it was far from it, the brakes were capable and the drive was comfortable and relaxed just like the BMW is although the 159 didn’t have the mad man split personality.

As for the gearbox, I said in the Alfa QV review the automatic was a big issue for me. Whilst the ZF is better, some of the characteristics I didn’t like still exist. For e.g. in D or (sport mode), the BMW will still artificially for no reason hang on really high revs when it should upshift. Ultimately it turns out I might be manual biased, but in M/S mode you can have automatic assisted semi-manual.. Where it’s fully manual until you slow down and it’ll fill the gaps in for you, which I like it combines the best of both worlds and something the TCT is lacking.

The 159 manual was awesome, which I can’t really say too much more on the matter.
In terms of refinement, the BMW is extremely quiet but surprisingly has more road noise than I imagined (I don’t have runflats either). The 159 wasn’t too far off in terms of refinement, although I have to admit the BMW is a far comfier place to be.

Looks:

Looks are always highly subjective, in Msport guise it’s a pretty car but nothing bar a Maserati Gran Turismo will beat a 159 in TI guise.

Q&A:

“Do you actually like the BMW?”

It might sound like I have a mixed opinion on it, but it’s in my top three cars and so is the 159. Forgetting Alfa for a minute, compared to modern day hot hatches it can do everything they can and it’s better at it.

With the cost of some hot hatches today (ironic as they’re supposed to be low cost pocket rockets), you’d be hard pressed for me to ever consider one again.

“So which do you prefer, BMW or Alfa”?

That’s a tricky question, they’re both fantastic cars in their own right. I’d say if you have a re-mapped 2.4 159 hang onto it, if the Giulia doesn’t do it for you then I’d highly recommend checking out a 335D / 340I. The issue being price and age, for the money you'd expect the BMW to be all round better right?

Well in reality not as much as you may believe, yes the latest iteration BMW is ultimatley the better car. But it was supposed to compete with the E90 335D / pre-LCI which in my opinion I'd of taken the 159 over both of them with little consideration. Even now factoring everything, it's still a difficult choice...

Don't get me wrong, as a new proposition the BMW is worth every penny just to experience the drive train alone. As a second hand car, I'd still go 159 over a BMW..

So, my conclusion is buy both..! I'm going to :).

P.S I still don’t like the Giulietta QV :D..
Give me the GQV TCT any day of the week and twice on Sunday's. The 159 is old and heavy and the BMW is a dime a dozen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,688 Posts
Nice write up. Only been in my 159 since October. Really is one of the nicest (daily hack) cars I've had the pleasure of so far.
It is smooth and quiet. I don't notice corners being a problem. Perhaps I don't push it hard enough :D.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadowamd

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,196 Posts
The swooping metallic interior dash of a 159 will always be a sight to behold, it’s an ageless design that I’ve yet to see re-created in a modern sedan with so much flair. The same goes for current iterations in comparison (the Giulia), the BMW is smart and well defined but lacks the panache of the 159.

This.

That dash design, first seen in the 156 phase 2 (or possibly the GTV phase 2 or 166?), and refined in the 159, is one of the very best ever in my book.

It's part of the reason I have a 156 and not a GT. The GT and 147 dash design, while not awful, does not compare at all well with the 156. I have never understood why they fitted such a different dash to the 147 and GT.
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
4,556 Posts
Perhaps OP can explain this to me, because I really don't get the "tech in cars" meme that seems to be everywhere.

I have a very good, bang up to date satnav in my phone, for free. It does real time speed cameras, real time traffic, the whole 9 yards. Most importantly, I can leave the car with it in my hand - when you can't find parking near to where you are going, park half a mile away, and get the phone to guide you there on foot. The downside is that I pay for a data connection for my phone, but most people have that anyway.

So why do people value another data connection (that presumably has to be paid for?) in their car, and a satnav that will update itself for while, then go out of support and be useless after a few years? It's not as though the car satnavs are cheap either. Vauxhall are really pushing the "internet bubble in car" thing - I have an "internet bubble" wherever I go, car or otherwise. I really don't need two of them.

OK, it can call for help in the vanishingly rare event of an accident that no one sees. I'll live with that risk!

Agree entirely on the interior - there is little to beat 156/159 interiors out there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,196 Posts
Perhaps OP can explain this to me, because I really don't get the "tech in cars" meme that seems to be everywhere.

I have a very good, bang up to date satnav in my phone, for free. It does real time speed cameras, real time traffic, the whole 9 yards. Most importantly, I can leave the car with it in my hand - when you can't find parking near to where you are going, park half a mile away, and get the phone to guide you there on foot.

OK, it can call for help in the vanishingly rare event of an accident that no one sees. I'll live with that risk!

This too. :thumbup:

I want a car. Not an entertainment or navigation system. I want to drive - not have the car "inform" me about things. I already have that capability on my phone, as has virtually everybody who wants it and can also afford a new car.

Yes, satnav and the like was a fairly good thing on cars many years ago when phones did not have that capability, but the rationale for having it in cars, driving up cost, is now much lower than before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38,319 Posts
Perhaps OP can explain this to me, because I really don't get the "tech in cars" meme that seems to be everywhere.
+1


As long as it has Bluetooth for phone and music: Job jobbed.


Although working in the tech sector I do understand that we need to sell
pointless tat state-of-the-art electronics to car manufacturers
and their customer base.....



Having said that, things like HUDs are pretty cool and aid in overall safety.



Back on topic: I could never see myself in a BMW.
It's one of the reasons I didn't have a company car for many years,
when the list consisted of: BMW or Renault.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,688 Posts
Reeeenulllttt :irked:

I quite like BMW's, my daughter just bought herself a 1 series Coupe. Very nice, thing is I'm a bit fixated on Italian cars. I have no reason other than that I am.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Philjay50

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Give me the GQV TCT any day of the week and twice on Sunday's. The 159 is old and heavy and the BMW is a dime a dozen.
Well as the GQV is a sub par "warm" hatch, I can live without exclusivity for the sake of a decent drive.. Top end BMW's (340I / 335D) wipe the floor with the QV, as for the 159 well a decent re-map and maybe a suspension upgrade and that "heavy" car would give that QV a run for it's money in terms of performance.

Even though the 159 is old, doesn't make it a bad car. P.S the 335D / 340I is not quite "dime a dozen".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Perhaps OP can explain this to me, because I really don't get the "tech in cars" meme that seems to be everywhere.

I have a very good, bang up to date satnav in my phone, for free. It does real time speed cameras, real time traffic, the whole 9 yards. Most importantly, I can leave the car with it in my hand - when you can't find parking near to where you are going, park half a mile away, and get the phone to guide you there on foot. The downside is that I pay for a data connection for my phone, but most people have that anyway.

So why do people value another data connection (that presumably has to be paid for?) in their car, and a satnav that will update itself for while, then go out of support and be useless after a few years? It's not as though the car satnavs are cheap either. Vauxhall are really pushing the "internet bubble in car" thing - I have an "internet bubble" wherever I go, car or otherwise. I really don't need two of them.

OK, it can call for help in the vanishingly rare event of an accident that no one sees. I'll live with that risk!

Agree entirely on the interior - there is little to beat 156/159 interiors out there.
It doesn't cost anything, it has free auto updates. I have to admit though I'm not keen on a phone setup, I have a galaxy note and soon as you put the sat nav on it drains the battery.

So I had to keep it on a wired charge, it doesn't interact with speaker systems. I'm getting older so the nice big screen helps, but I did use a phone setup for a while so it works and I see your point.

Ultimatley it's a nice to have and not a necessity, so if BMW didn't do it for free I wouldn't of probably bothered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,838 Posts
Well as the GQV is a sub par "warm" hatch, I can live without exclusivity for the sake of a decent drive.. Top end BMW's (340I / 335D) wipe the floor with the QV, as for the 159 well a decent re-map and maybe a suspension upgrade and that "heavy" car would give that QV a run for it's money in terms of performance.

Even though the 159 is old, doesn't make it a ad car. P.S the 335D / 340I is not quite "dime a dozen".

I must have missed when somebody asked you the questions you are answering here!

A comparison between cars of seriously different eras?
I still find the praise given to the 159 interior quite difficult to understand when you consider it couldn't have taken long to model up. But then that's part of the appeal of Italian design. No attempt to get the dash to relate to the doors but that didn't matter. There was nice leather and a sense of occasion but it was pretty dated even when it came out that dash and door trims. And those door releases were quite naive silver plastic things. The Bmw is cleverly designed to allow for personalisation of finishes etc.
Still, thanks for an interesting read.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Well as the GQV is a sub par "warm" hatch, I can live without exclusivity for the sake of a decent drive.. Top end BMW's (340I / 335D) wipe the floor with the QV, as for the 159 well a decent re-map and maybe a suspension upgrade and that "heavy" car would give that QV a run for it's money in terms of performance.

Even though the 159 is old, doesn't make it a bad car. P.S the 335D / 340I is not quite "dime a dozen".
Horses for courses. Sorry, but no one has ever been able to convince me a Beemer is special in any way. Besides, a natural comparison between the Giulietta and a Beemer would be the 1-series. Which is a hideous piece of garbage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,769 Posts
Horses for courses. Sorry, but no one has ever been able to convince me a Beemer is special in any way. Besides, a natural comparison between the Giulietta and a Beemer would be the 1-series. Which is a hideous piece of garbage.
Sales of the 135i compared to the GQV say otherwise. ;)

Even the 125i will give the GQV TBi a run for it's money, and the 135i will cane it. Good cars, and you get that straight 6 sound with approximately the same efficiency as the GQV. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Horses for courses. Sorry, but no one has ever been able to convince me a Beemer is special in any way. Besides, a natural comparison between the Giulietta and a Beemer would be the 1-series. Which is a hideous piece of garbage.
Nobody is trying to convince you of anything, yeah I'll agree with 1 series ain't a pretty car. But the drive train of a 135i is light years ahead of the QV.. It's not even worth comparing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,786 Posts
as for the 159 well a decent re-map and maybe a suspension upgrade and that "heavy" car would give that QV a run for it's money in terms of performance.
I doubt that, as the 210 bhp 159 is about par with a 170 bhp giulietta, and with q4 markedly slower..

Alfa Romeo 159 2.4JTDm SW Q4 vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 2.0 JTDm [22523446]


against a QV tct there's no comparison

Alfa Romeo 159 2.4JTDm SW Q4 vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 2.0 JTDm [22523446]


and just for laughs, a 335d against the qv:

Alfa Romeo 159 2.4JTDm SW Q4 vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 2.0 JTDm [22523446]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Discussion Starter #16 (Edited)
I doubt that, as the 210 bhp 159 is about par with a 170 bhp giulietta, and with q4 markedly slower..

Alfa Romeo 159 2.4JTDm SW Q4 vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 2.0 JTDm [22523446]


against a QV tct there's no comparison

Alfa Romeo 159 2.4JTDm SW Q4 vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 2.0 JTDm [22523446]


and just for laughs, a 335d against the qv:

Alfa Romeo 159 2.4JTDm SW Q4 vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 2.0 JTDm [22523446]
I think you copied the same link there three times, firstly the Z-perfs stuff is wrong (Even the QV should be faster than what they say 0-62 is 6.1 seconds not 6.6 also it weighs 1320KG's not whatever Zperfs says it is). ACS (endorsed tuning) / magazines and BMW both show completely different stats for the BMW).

Secondly it's only for the heavier 335D touring, thirdly them links are just a load of rubbish.

The Giulietta QV is 1320KG, has a 0-62 of 6.1 seconds (TCT) and a BHP / Torque ratio of: 178 BHP Per tonne and 190 LB FT per tonne.

The BMW has a 0-60 of 4.8 seconds and a BHP / Torque per tonne ratio of 192 BHP per tonne / 282 LB FT torque per tonne.

The Alfa with a remap should be: 0-62 (around 6.8 seconds) and at 260 BHP has around 160BHP per tonne.

The QV is of course a fair bit quicker than the 159, but with a re-map enough to care about that much? Well that's up to the person driving it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,786 Posts
Oops, I must have been in toomuch of a hurry.

159 vs QV TCT:
Alfa Romeo 159 2.4JTDm SW Q4 vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 1750 QV TCT [22525432]

and 335d vs QV TCT
BMW 335 d xDrive Touring (F31) vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 1750 QV TCT [51435432]


Zeperfs uses only results frm tests in magazines (or their online versions) and not from manufacturers except for the "claimed" figures.

Weight goes up if you select more options, there for the highest verified weight can be substantial. Think electric seats and glass roofs here. And there's of course the porkies being told about weight.

I would have preferred links to sedan tests but they're not there. How much heavier is the estate vs the sedan officially?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Oops, I must have been in toomuch of a hurry.

159 vs QV TCT:
Alfa Romeo 159 2.4JTDm SW Q4 vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 1750 QV TCT [22525432]

and 335d vs QV TCT
BMW 335 d xDrive Touring (F31) vs Alfa Romeo Giulietta III 1750 QV TCT [51435432]


Zeperfs uses only results frm tests in magazines (or their online versions) and not from manufacturers except for the "claimed" figures.

Weight goes up if you select more options, there for the highest verified weight can be substantial. Think electric seats and glass roofs here. And there's of course the porkies being told about weight.

I would have preferred links to sedan tests but they're not there. How much heavier is the estate vs the sedan officially?
Off top of my head, I think in it's latest iteration there's around 100KG's in it. In real world, the 335D sedan when dyno'd has been spitting out about 320 - 330HP and 0-60 is about 4.6 (from various sources) but I just went by BMW's official stats. There's tons of dyno's on the 330D as well, every one of them seems to be over a decent amount.

Obviously factoring in that dyno's aren't always accurate, but one had 325HP based on a conservative dyno.

It's early days, but I just got a rough fuel figure from it after a fill. I'm getting 35MPG (the meter says) and I got 440 miles on a 60 liter tank. I figured it out to be 34.64 MPG.. Its only done 500 miles though so far, so it should ease up a bit.

I've not tried to conserve fuel in any way shape or form, been pressing on every chance I get.
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
4,556 Posts
It doesn't cost anything, it has free auto updates. I have to admit though I'm not keen on a phone setup, I have a galaxy note and soon as you put the sat nav on it drains the battery.

So I had to keep it on a wired charge, it doesn't interact with speaker systems. I'm getting older so the nice big screen helps, but I did use a phone setup for a while so it works and I see your point.

Ultimatley it's a nice to have and not a necessity, so if BMW didn't do it for free I wouldn't of probably bothered.
I just stick the phone on a USB cable, it sits on the passenger seat, and the instructions come via Bluetooth as the phone is generally my source of music. I'd counter the 'old' issue - with a phone you can squint at the screen at whatever distance you like! :beer:

I think you have to remember that we are comparing two very different cars here - the price of a 159 Ti was £28k, a base 335D is £48k, and can be easily optioned up to £58k. My take on saloons is simple - you very quickly get to a point where the car is more than good enough. The 159 is quiet, fast enough, reasonably economical in 2.4 form, and looks fantastic, both inside and out. Is the BMW better? Almost certainly, but then it costs double what the 159 cost - if it wasn't better, something would be seriously wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
974 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
I just stick the phone on a USB cable, it sits on the passenger seat, and the instructions come via Bluetooth as the phone is generally my source of music. I'd counter the 'old' issue - with a phone you can squint at the screen at whatever distance you like! :beer:

I think you have to remember that we are comparing two very different cars here - the price of a 159 Ti was £28k, a base 335D is £48k, and can be easily optioned up to £58k. My take on saloons is simple - you very quickly get to a point where the car is more than good enough. The 159 is quiet, fast enough, reasonably economical in 2.4 form, and looks fantastic, both inside and out. Is the BMW better? Almost certainly, but then it costs double what the 159 cost - if it wasn't better, something would be seriously wrong.
Yeah I mainly agree, thing is though even with pro-nav / Msport / Xdrive and HK audio. It only actually cost me 32K. The base price is 42K (well list) but in reality they never come anywhere close to it..

Which when you consider that, you do get a lot of car for your money. I actively avoided BMW's for years due to the "considered" cost, whereas when they cost around the same as a fully loaded Mondeo things start to make more sense.

I hope the Giulia gets out there at a good price (deal wise), it'll make all the difference. I might be in the minority here considering diesels but the next iteration of 335D is going to be 320HP, so it's not really worth upgrading. The Giulia 340HP V6 Bi-Turbo (if it becomes a thing) might be worth considering if the price is right. Or even the 330HP petrol would be fine, again it all comes down to cost.
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
Top