Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Looks like I may go the diesel route . 2.2 petrol engine looks to have heavy fuel and tax costs ,flawed chain design and poor driveability thanks to Alfa Romeo's mapping.

Forget the 3.2 , I have to pay my way.

So is the 2.4 more common diesel fine or is the 2.0 better and lighter ,better handling?

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,589 Posts
the 2.4 is a good strong engine - I wouldn't worry about that. The 2.2 seems more prone to problems than the 2.4 and the 2.4 benefits from the F40 gearbox where 2.2 has the problematic M32 GM unit made from cream cheese.

You'll find the 2.4 should be slightly more economical, although she can be a bit of a hungry beast, but it has slightly more BHP and much more torque so will move you along nicely. Being a 5 cylinder they're actually very smooth and worryingly make a rather tasty noise too! You won't be disappointed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,126 Posts
The 2.2 seems more prone to problems than a 2.4 diesel?

WTF had you been drinking when you posted that:lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
269 Posts
My understanding is that, although the 2.2 has the M32 gearbox, due to less torque compared to the 1.9 diesel, it doesn't have as many problems.

Regular oil changes can also help with the chain as far as I'm aware (although I don't own one, I'm going off what I have read here) a remap will also sort out the AR mapping.

Alternatively, the 2.4 is a beauty, don't listen to Squadrone and Tata.. they don't know what they are talking about :cheese::lol:

The tax on the 2.4 is still pretty high (around the £220 mark)

If you're doing short runs, get the petrol, if you're not doing short runs, get the diesel.

The 2.0 diesel has the F40 gearbox and good fuel economy, along with a decent amount of torque.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
I think the 2.2 is a nice little engine. Yes it has its "characteristics" but on the reliability front, once the chain is done I have never heard of one breakdown/have any major problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,345 Posts
Looks like I may go the diesel route . 2.2 petrol engine looks to have heavy fuel and tax costs ,flawed chain design and poor driveability thanks to Alfa Romeo's mapping.

Forget the 3.2 , I have to pay my way.

So is the 2.4 more common diesel fine or is the 2.0 better and lighter ,better handling?

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
What's with your avatar pic?
Is the GT Blackline a previous car or another dream?

I have a 2.2 but I wouldn't have another, way too many flaws without throwing loads of money at it to cure problems that should never have been there in the first place...

I'd certainly never touch a diesel for a car that's supposed to be all about pleasure and fun.
Could you seriously put up with the clatter every morning and people looking out of their windows thinking their taxi's arrived? :lol:

A 2.0 petrol GT could be the answer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I had a GT black line 1.9 diesel. Not perfect. Noisy on right lock not on left,rattle from rear boot lid area cured when osr seatbelt wouldn't unroll and I changed it. Worst problem was driver's seat wasn't me shaped and heavy clutch. My leg was aching constantly. Even so, l loved it.
But I don't want to be stung again.

So info much appreciated.


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
Might as well throw my five eggs in the 2.4 diesel and i'm not a diesel lover but went this route for the amount of miles I travel each year is IMHO a great car, has a lovely exhaust note on regen performance wise look at the facts is not that far off the 3.2 for top speed etc

Fell like a tank but is that a bad thing! the five cylinder is fairly rattle free average 33mpg compared to just above 22 got the same looks.

If I had money to burn a 3.2 otherwise it has to be the 2.4

pulls like a train but doesn't sound like one :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,345 Posts
How many 1750 owners have you seen posting on here with gearbox problems??
How many 1750 units are there compared to the 1.9 and 2.2?
A hell of a lot less I'd guess.
And didn't the 1750 only come out around 2010?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
270 Posts
What's with your avatar pic?
Is the GT Blackline a previous car or another dream?

I have a 2.2 but I wouldn't have another, way too many flaws without throwing loads of money at it to cure problems that should never have been there in the first place...

I'd certainly never touch a diesel for a car that's supposed to be all about pleasure and fun.
Could you seriously put up with the clatter every morning and people looking out of their windows thinking their taxi's arrived? :lol:

A 2.0 petrol GT could be the answer.
Clatter ?.....?.
Mine purrs nicer than a petrol . , remap it , decent exhaust , no clatter. I've owned petrol V8s and no issues with the way a 2.4 Brera sounds when set up right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,179 Posts
I am one of very few people who have actually driven all of them.

To be honest, at launch, I was unimpressed by all the engines in early 2006, so I just got the 150 Jtd, which sounded awful.

However, when the 2.4 210 bhp came along, I had one ordered straight away, with Ti trim, it is, in my opinion, head and shoulders above the rest, it only sounds like tractor when cold, and unlike the V6, doesn't need a kazoo in the inlet to generate a pleasing induction note.

It's not perfect by any means, it simply has to be given a good run every couple of days to avoid DPF problems and you may end up needing a cylinder head rebuild on early 210's before they redesigned the valve seats.

TBi is a nice car, but disappointing in character and not a huge amount of performance considering the fuel burn rate.

Some people hate them, fair enough.
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top