Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Vendor
Joined
·
46,256 Posts
"The idle speed is set to 600rpm, yet even at this pace the unit serves up so much torque it will actually drive the R8 right the way into fourth gear without the need to touch the accelerator and by only using the clutch."
I could set off in 5th gear with my mums Corsa 1.2 16v using no gas, only clutch, its not that impressive.. :lol:
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
46,256 Posts
Apparently one of the criticisms is that there's not enough engine noise!
Same criticism applies to the 4.2 V8 as well.. A supercar should sound like one IMO.. :)
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
46,256 Posts
Here's hoping Alfa's 3.0V6 diesel sounds like an Alfa should:thumbs:
I think the 5-pot diesel sounds good, nicer sounding than the Audi V6 TDI's. The BMW 6 cylinder diesel sounds good as well, but very different to the Alfa 5-pot.. :confused:

Lets just hope the 3.0 V6 diesel will be mounted the correct way and powering the correct wheels. :thumbs:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,866 Posts
the words 'diesel' and 'supercar' should never be used in the same sentance:cheese: :cheese: :cheese: an oxymoron if ever there was one
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,870 Posts
I just received the e-mail about this from Auto Express, and to be fair, I think this car looks even better then a petrol version. An added bonus is with it being a diesel it has got ridiculous amounts of power, and not to sound like a penny-pincher, but, it will have so much better miles per gallon then the petrol model... its rivalling the 2.4JTDm as my next car...
 
H

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
If anything, the diesel R8 comes across as having even less soul than the petrol version.

Supercars are supposed to have feel, they're supposed to be living, breathing things. They're supposed to be flame spitting, roaring untameable beasts.

The R8 is an engineering masterpiece, yes. But a supercar? No.


























And it still looks nasty
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,591 Posts
And why would you buy a super car if it just went without the enjoyment of the engine...sort of defeats the whole purpose of one....might as well buy a Diesel Jaguar...and drive in comfort and save megabucks for years of motoring ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
607 Posts
i would love to have a go but at 6ft6 i doubt id even get in it ,and i dont like audi's, but i could make an exception for this one though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,179 Posts
Is 0-60 in 4.4s impressive for a 6 Litre twin turbo with 4WD?

Thats only a tenth or so quicker than a relatively humble bog standard 3.6 litre normally aspirated Porsche GT3..

Am sure its fine for driving to the shops or towing a more involving car though. Pointless.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
46,256 Posts
Is 0-60 in 4.4s impressive for a 6 Litre twin turbo with 4WD?

Thats only a tenth or so quicker than a relatively humble bog standard 3.6 litre normally aspirated Porsche GT3..

Am sure its fine for driving to the shops or towing a more involving car though. Pointless.
I reckon I'd rather have the 6.0 twin turbo V12 than the 4.2 normally aspirated V8..

But its not exactly a fair comparison is it?

And I'd still rather have a Ferrari or a Lambo or an Aston or a 911 over either of them.
 
M

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Just to add to the diesel hating brigade....I agree...no point in putting a paraffin stove into a "supercar". They are all about noise. You get noise from diesels, but if you like that, buy a Massey Ferguson.

I'm currently driving a modern diesel and it is not as good or flexible as a petrol engine, despite what others might have you believe. You want fun a noise, go petrol. You want to cruise and look/sound like a skin flint, buy diesel.

On top of that, our 2litre 170bhp petrol 120 returns over 40mpg, even with me booting it and it's not too shabby with a 0-62 in 7.5 seconds apparently. How many diesel owners are getting much more than that with a heavy right foot ??

I know of one 156 owner who is getting 30-31mpg from his oil burner. So what's the point in them ??
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
46,256 Posts
I know of one 156 owner who is getting 30-31mpg from his oil burner. So what's the point in them ??
To be fair, that is just one owner. The performance of my remapped JTD wasn't too far behind that of my 3.0 V6 at legal speeds and around town, and it returned more than twice the fuel economy when you're absolutely caning it (14mpg in the V6 vs 30mpg in the JTD) and 33% better fuel economy when driving it like a grandma (30mpg in V6, 40mpg in JTD).

And it wasn't a bad engine at all, I'd have one again in a heartbeat. Certainly I would trust it to take the abuse for many years over a lot of miles more so than I would a petrol..

Still, I wouldn't have an oil-burner in a supercar, but for an everyday car, even ones with good performance its really hard to argue against the diesel.
 
M

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
But you were still getting less mpg than what our 120 170bhp petrol gives on average. The lowest I've had from the 120 is an average of 37.2mpg on a mad back road rage, which the car gets quite a lot, and I know that not many "normal" cars will keep up with it. Plenty have tried :lol:

So still, what is the point ?? Dearer fuel and less economy. The arguement for diesel is slipping still further ;)
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
46,256 Posts
Tell me where you can buy a 120 (I assume you mean BMW) for £2,500 and I'll have one.

Of course a newer car will be more economical, the technology is getting better every day.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top