Before I start, use the qoute button to quote what I'm saying as your method is really quite hard to respond to. 👍
As it has been said before, an Alfa is an Alfa.....i can't actually see what you do not get about that.
Because some Alfas are different from others - I don't see what you don't get about that.
Not quite, One is a cheap supermini from Malaysia, and the Alfa is a small/medium hatch, thats a class difference. You cannot compare something to what was, otherwise it defeats the purpose of cars like the Alfasud being an Iconic Classic if it was always in comparison. The whole point of comparing a 147 is to compare it with others in it's calss, otherwise many motoring journalists would have nothing to write about. Thats just like comparing a 300SL to an SL AMG 63 Black which you cannot because the latter is different.
I just did.
Hey, if they cost the same, or near it, they are in some form of competition. Finances are a huge piece of criteria when most people shop for cars. Thus, people will check out most of their options costing anywhere up to their set limit.
I really don't understand you point with the Alfasud. Are you saying that iconic classics by definition don't have any other car to compare too? I'm sure a few cars today that would be considered future classics, such as the R26R and maybe even the R8 are constantly compared to things like the Focus RS and the Porker 911.
Maybe you don't read the same Magazines as I, but in the rags I read, journalist do in fact compare new to old. I seem to remember off the top of my head - a 993 vs a Cayman, a 911 vs a 997 911 w.PDK and a supermini test with Corsa VXR and several other hot hatches against the HF Intergrale Evo II. Because you can't really test for performance as we know who's going to win, it is usually based around character and feel, and more often than not, the older versions come up trumps.
But no, in all seriousness, I don't know where you are going with the Alfasud point, sorry.
Well yes you did say the Alfasud and Alfasud Sprint were rubbish cars on many occasions, and i have defended them many times on these occasions. I agree that the Alfasud has more character because it is a cult classic, nothing will ever be the same as anything, if it was everything would be quite boring in the world of Motoring.
Rubbish to own on a daily basis - which I'll stand by. But if you were owning it just solely for taking it for a leisurely drive, it won't be beat by the 147.
Well, the Minis aren't a direct predecessor otherwise they would still be made by Rover and not BMW, Hence, why the Alfasud is a Direct predecessor to the 147 since it is made by the same parent company and has filled the same position that the Alfasud has held in it's day by the parent company.
Yes, but there was a different set of criteria when building the 147, as it should conform to new world standards. Hence it is also not a direct predeccesor. Probably only the bolt design on both cars is similar, and even then, they are probably made out of different materials. "Made to be sort of like a new Alfasud" I'll tend to agree on - "the direct predecessor" I won't.
Quite clearly, you should read more widely. And my arguement is not getting thin otherwise i still would not be debating this....
If thats all the response you come up with, maybe you should retract that last statement.
Thats kind of ironic you say that, what about when you harp on about the..ahem...older Alfa range. You seem to talk about the 1750's and how its wooden steering wheel is a form of passion and why it is so important as a point of support, so that makes you sound like a salesman also.
I give reasons why. All you have done is said something along the lines of "embosses the Alfa tradition" with no further explanation.
I stated my opinion, and why it is my opinion.
Well, maybe a 147 not to you it isn't an Achievement, but to me it is an Aspirational purchase, and to many others it is, so the 147 in a respect is an achievement, as is your 1750.
No, I said it is not an achievement that the Alfa stands out from Foci and Astras. I think you have misread the quote - as I never said it was an achievement of engineering like you seem to be alluding to - you're saying that the Alfa is the embodyment of passion and to show this, it stands out from a sea of Foci and Astras. New Flash: Most cars do - it isn't an achievement and its going to have to do more than that for the drivers to be considered motor heads.
Quite frankly it is not, you have just compared the the Satria GTi to the 147, so thats quite contradictory about what you said there.
LolWUT?
I was comparing it to a Satria Neo GTI as a response to your point, as a hypothetical fulcrum to pitch my opinions. You said it had sporting credentials inside and out. I said its not the only one and gave an example. Doesn't mean I was comparing them. Please read what I said and grasp the context properly next time. 👍
Well, you told me last Friday to join the thread
..so partly thats kind of your fault if you did not want this to happen then, and you just said the 147 is a proper Alfa
No, you've picked up on the wrong point is what you've done. The conversation between HFS and myself is more on the mark because were discussing the topic at hand - why I think the older ones show that you're a motor head. You've picked up on an example in my initial post and have run with it. I haven't seen much from you discussing the topic, all you've done is fight for the little 147.
My choice of vocabulary has nothing to do with this. I have to say, it is quite a poor arguement to use on your behalf...thats just being quite pedantic about proving your side of the arguement.
Granted, thats true, but you haven't backed up the claims. "Embosses" and "embodiment" aren't enough to give your claims credit. I'm not seeing enough backup, and thats what I'd like.
Yes, i can read quite well, and technological improvements does not change the fact that Alfa still makes thier cars the way they should. For Example, the Alfa 147 is made in the Promigliano di'Arco factory still, and thats where the Alfasud came from, so that backs up that they make thier cars even in the same factories as the old ones. This point also contradics about that you should compare a New Alfa Romeo to a Vintage Alfa Romeo.
So? A place doesn't mean quality. Pagani and Edonis are both built in Modena. Which one breaks down more? Sure Alfas are built in the same place, what process and the materials are included in making the new ones? Did Alfa have a row of robotic hands and spot welders 90 years ago? No other wise Italy would have wiped the floor with every other nation come a little disagreement in the 30s and 40s. You havent backed up anything by telling me they were built in the same place. My mum makes a mean Lemon Freeze (Alfasud), she also makes awesome Peri peri Chicken (147). They are both made in one kitchen (Promigliano diArco factory) by one woman (Alfa Romeo) does that mean that the Lemon Freeze and the Peri Peri Chicken are directly related? No, or at least not to me.
I also confess that I dont really know what is said in the bold part. Contradicting what? How? Who? Huh? I fail to see the relevance of that.
I am entitled to compare any car to any car in the world that has ever been made, regardless of what it does, who its made by, how old it is etc. If I want to compare mums Lemon Freeze to her Peri peri Chicken Ill do so. A meal is a meal. A car is a car.
Um, thats not to say the Giulia was to fill a market segment to make money, the same with the GT and the same with the Spider Duetto. Yes the car maker wants to make the car, but also it is the purpose to fill thier bank accounts. I'm sorry, I fail to see your arguement here?, Well, What about the Brera, Spider, The GT? They are quite original, especially the Brera.
Oh sure, you could be pedantic and say they all were developed to make money, and Id have to agree with you, because it is a fact. Thing is though, cars like the GT, the Brera ect, are more in tune with what I think an Alfa is. There is much more styling in the Brera and (Im assuming youre taking about the new GT as opposed to the old one) GT than a 147, they have a more sporty stance on the road and the driver ergonomics. I give a second look to a GT if it goes by, and Breras look great in the flesh too, but again, there isnt enough substance for you to be considered a motor head by driving one, although it much closer to the mark IMO. They are more pricey, sure but people who have no clue by expensive Mercs all the time, so it isnt a price thing. Motor heads will buy it but as I was saying to HFS, there isnt really anything to deter them once they bought it. It offers a nice enough drive and looks a bit special. This doesnt immediately mean that you are a petrol head IMO.
GTs and Breras show muvh more Alfa passion than th 147 IMO.
You never said in my opinion in any of the posts addressed to me, otherwise you would not have said this. Im sorry, wheres the in my opinion? because I cannot see one?
ORLY?
My arguement is that the 147 IS like every other car in its class, because it does the same thing. It is a represention of Alfa, but I don't think of it as an Alfa.
Much the same way I think of the new Mini as a representation of what they once were, but they aren't proper Minis
To see why I think not, read through my previous statements
I think the first cars were hand made - and you certainly can't tell me that todays are aswell.
See above point. Its lighter and a probably more involved drive. The Giulia Super had 4 doors. So its practical, but Alfa enthusiasts love them, and I think that is closer to what an Alfa is.
It is my opinion that while it is an Alfa, it isn't as much of an Alfa as the older stuff.
I think that the 147 isn't as emotive and passionate etc as previous Alfas sure, theres something there, but not what it once was.
I'd rather have an Alfasud if I would going to go on spirited drives, because its lighter and has more character than a 147
I dont think it has anything on the older ones
Read. My. Argument. I have stated my opinion I shall stick to my opinion, and it is my opinion that these new cars arent like Alfas once were.
but I feel all theyre there for is to make more money
and I dont think that that is enough to be considered a petrol head.
I love the idea of cracking out the overalls and the huge toolbox, and setting to work on your weekend weapon with the radio blaring, the birds chirping and endless supply of Vino in the setting sun.
but the notion of setting to work on your own car sounds like the people who did it were petrol heads IMO
They werent only popular because of the restoration (and I think youd have to be an enthusiast to restore a car),
I dont think so, otherwise itd be a more renowned drivers car
Im afraid I dont see as much passion in the new Alfas like the older ones. I dont think that every Alfa is the epitome of the brand. I dont think enough drivers of the 147 bought it for the reasons you are stating. I agree with it all if I were applying it to ownership of an older one, but not for the newer ones.
I dont want Alfa to be a rusty old bomb, as Ive said. Im saying that if you are going to drive a car purely to be considered a car enthusiast, todays models wont do it for me the same as the older ones.
Im all for discussion on cars and will state my opinion to anyone that wants
This one is referring to the whole post:
All of this is my opinion (^)
And just because you threw some particular ones in:
I think it does...and I explained it, showing you didn't read my posts.
There aren't any breakdowns (unless you run selespeed) and I highly doubt running one would reveal any unique characteristics to that one car (little imperfections that give it character).
All of the these quotes were from me directed to you. The word think instead of know means opinion. When I refer to my self as it I, I am talking about my self, not about everybody. Feel is the same as think etc. They are there, and at the end I said all of it is my opinion.
Perhaps now Ive accounted for all of mine, youd like to explain why you are not totalitarian, yet use words such as clearly and obviously? Nothing apart from the fact is clear it seems, because we are having this conversation in the first place.
Also, just because I read your posts, doesnt mean I necessarily have to agree with you. And I never said the brochure is "the bible of truth", your just putting words in my mouth and blurring the true argument here by choosing pedantic points of argument that are irrelevant.
From what I already explained, I dont think you actually know the true argument.
And besides, why did you say this:
Actually, It is quite true what the brochure says
?
Youre right you never said it was a bible of truth, but you seem to be acting as though it is, giving references and expecting them to stand up in this sort of discussion. You should never really bring up brochures in a car argument they never work.
Yes, and neither did I, I merely explained why they became unreliable and why they have a stigma of unreliability. Well if you say you wanted a reliable Alfa to live with, then why did you say this;
..What you have said kind of contradicts your argument.
No. To me, the 147 is a better car the older stuff are better Alfas. If you really want to know, read my previous response to HFS, as we touch on this, and I doubt that you have been, leading me to rewrite things over and over again, which is the height of tedium.
I have used facts in every part of this discussion, as you call it. I will be the realistic one in this conversation, if todays Alfas were like that, I think a lot of people would be quite unhappy with their cars. It takes quite a lot of time and money to have a weekend machine on your hands. Todays arent like that because they are everyday machines. Also great to finally see you pointed out you opinion in our conversation for once.
I dont think you have. Oh and well done for picking up on point that I have been making with HFS for some time now. Read all that I say, not just the stuff directed at you. Look for the reference to TVRs. Its not Alfas fault, but it doesnt stop me from liking the older ones more.
Also, well done for finding a reference to my opinion in a response.
I never said it did, you said it was practical, and I was pointing out the reality of its practicality. Again, read some of the previous posts on drive oriented cars. Homeforsummers videos prove that the 147 has more than just pep. Well, many of the Golf GTis are city run-abouts and they are drivers cars, so whos to say the 147 isnt.
.someone comparing it to an older, more involving Alfa, Alfasud included. Golf GTIs are internationally recognised as a pretty complete hot hatch in terms of driving feel the 147 is not.
Well, there is quite a lot of passion in the newer cars, its probably one of their major selling points. You obviously cannot see this like me and HFS can. You really have to experience the 147 to really understand where Im coming from. Well, why not? Its a good looking car, its practical, it has a great engine even though its getting on; so why wouldnt the buyers of a 147 take this into their criteria?
Well, thats practically what you are saying entails in an enthusiasts Alfa, which it does not. To be an Alfa enthusiast, you will remain loyal to the brand regardless; so considering that you think to be an Alfa enthusiast you just have to like one specific model segment and rule out all others Id say thats quite premature. Many Alfa enthusiasts have newer cars like the 156, the 166, or the last model GTV, so are they not enthusiasts because they dont have, in your terms, a pure enthusiast?
First of all, quit the whole you obviously dont understand this malarkey. Ive had enough of it and it doesnt do anything to prove your point. And besides, if your argument was full enough of good points, you wouldnt need to resort to it.
You say there is quite a lot of passion in the new cars, I say there isnt as much as the older stuff. Sure, its enough to make it stand out over the other newer stuff from other brands, but not the older stuff IMO. Ive said this time and time again, and Im not budging, so you can quit while youre ahead with it.
Heres another thing. We arent talking about Alfa enthusiasts we are talking about CAR enthusiasts. I would really like you to use the quote function, because I dont know what you are referring to in the second paragraph. Ive already said to HFS that car enthusiasts can drive wha-
.look, yknow what? Read all of my posts to you and HFS, Ive had enough of saying things twice. I have referred to this.
How on earth is it premature? Thats what Id like to know. Im picky about cars, and I dont care. You have absolutely no right to come in here and tell me Im premature just because I like certain cars. Stick on topic.
Well, maybe it is because I have had this argument on a countless number of occasions and its like listening to Number Nine Revolution on loop. Im not going to stop because this is an area I am actually really passionate about, and you know this very well, I am quite the enthusiast when it comes to Alfa Romeos and I will defend every part of their brand to the highest degree.
Errr..hmmm sooo, why ask me to quit if you arent willing to yourself?
I'd tend to agree, but it did illustrate my point.
To some extent. But I think these patterns change from car brand to car brand.
Again, I can see what you're getting at, even to the point where I can acknowledge that a 147 (substitute with "any modern Alfa" where necessary) doesn't perhaps have the passion of an old Giulia... but that also doesn't mean it's devoid of character and certainly not compared to it's rivals.
Yes, as Ive said, the 147 has something over its rivals, but that doesnt mean it has anything over other Alfas. I think its the opposite.
Heh, it's amusing how that happens. Funnily enough I haven't seen many Alfas around since this discussion started, though my local (to uni) Alfa garage seems to be making a killing on the MiTo, as there are loads of those about. Perhaps the MiTo is really the first truly mainstream Alfa?...
Re: the 156, I've loved it from the moment I saw sketches of it in a magazine back in about 1997. It's one of the most beautiful saloon cars ever and I'm rather jealous of my brother for owning one.
I think you could call the 147 mainstream. Of course this changes from country to country.
I think that can be put down to poor video quality partly, and secondly down to how he's driving it, letting the revs drop a fair bit. I don't think it's on butterflies though, just a new filter.
Hmmm maybe, but in the first few corners it doesnt sound very natural. The only thing it could be other than butterflies (IMO) would be an extremely (like
.really) responsive engine, and the speed doesnt add up to that I dont think.
It does sound like personal preference, I guess (sounds obvious, but I'm rather enjoying the discussion so I've wanted to expand on most of your points so far). Personally if I had a 147, I'd spend a lot of time just driving it for the hell of it. I've driven or been in a fair few Alfas (146 1.8TS, 147 jtd, 156 1.8TS and 159 JTDM on the road, and sat in dozens more), enough to know I like the experience of being in and around them.
Ahhh yes, but if you had an older one possibly RWD would you enjoy the drive more? Of course you probably wouldnt if all you were doing is the daily grind to work, but grinds dont come into the equation when youre talking about enthusiasts cars
.
The French still are. Clios must have won more hot hatch group tests than virtually any other hot hatch ever, when you consider the 16v, the Williams, 172, 182, Cup models, Trophy models, 200 etc. And Peugeot have a fair few more, and even Citroen have had a couple of hits.
I am well aware of this
..but I lurrrrve the 205GTI
. It was lighter and considered more enthusiastic than most of todays attempts, although yes, the French know how to make an awesome hot hatch.
And I'd agree, an Alfa wouldn't be too high up on my list of FWDs to thrash (not when there are Integras and Racing Pumas still in the world), but then I'm personally prepared to sacrifice a little chassis composure for the other things an Alfa offers. Some (like Stotty) might not.
The Alfa would be a better cruiser, but not a better drivers car. I think wed have to leave it at that.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this - I can see what you're getting at but I think the TVR example is a poor one (and I can't immediately think of a better one).
I tried
.its all I can do
.
The majority of buyers of pretty much anything aren't going to explore the limits of grip so it's largely academic - which is where something like the steering ratio comes in, as when you're not extending the chassis to the full, an Alfa will generally feel more sporty thanks to the quicker racks they fit.
Also, I didn't say numb steering, I mentioned a poor turning circle, as did Stotty:
Though in my brief experience I didn't experience what Stotty mentions - the 146 I drove seemed to have very quick steering (as in, a small input had a larger result than it would in a car with a slower rack) so maybe they toned it down a bit in the 156.
Yes, I agree. But those who are car enthusiasts might, and I think there is a bigger demographic of car enthusiasts driving the older Alfas.
Whatever. Numb steering was a backhanded umbrella referance of any day to day driving shortfalls. I know the steering feels special, dont worry.
I know you've painted a very general picture here so I won't read into it too much, but I just thought I'd add that my mum recently bought a 147
Why? Because she's wanted an Alfa for
years. She almost bought a 155 ten years or so ago but settled for a Pug 406 in the end, and she previously gave the 147 consideration a couple of times before buying a Merc A-Class and latterly two different Saabs. She'll never approach the limits of grip in it and she's even bought a diesel one (you would, with a 40mpg average compared to around 25mpg in the Saab) but she loves the way it drives, the way it looks, the look of the interior and the fact that the badge is a bit special.
Fair enough, our family is a bit car obsessed (though not massively so, mainly me and my brother) but she certainly didn't choose it for any overtly "girly" reasons. I'm sure some do, but I can't believe they're the majority.
Cool. What does she like about it? That it has the flair, passion etc and stand out from the other alternatives? Or something else?
But again, this discounts the owners of numerous cars that don't go wrong. There are plenty of enthusiasts cars that you don't have to "put up" with, so there can't be any real correlation between a car going wrong all the time and it being an enthusiasts car.
I said before that car enthusiasts can drive whatever they want, but I think youd find a bigger demographic of owners of the older ones as car enthusiasts because nothing has driven them away. If a 147 was terribly unreliable, on the same grounds as a TVR, most of the people owning it would love the car despite having to put up with it constantly breaking down, or havent a clue about at, or havent experienced the major problems yet but will sell it if it gets too much. Thats not to say that because itd be unreliable, its an enthusiasts car, but instead saying the people who have held on must really like it for whatever reason.
Perhaps the Elise wasn't the best example but it's a watered-down illustration of what I'm getting at.
Yer, but
.I know where youre coming from. Perhaps the Civic Type Rs? I know the new ones pretty soft in comparison to the older versions.
Easier said than done, I'm afraid. The market is difficult enough at the moment as it is, so once a company is headed in a set direction it's difficult to deviate too much. Only the most profitable can afford to take risks, so unfortunately we're unlikely to see a remake of the Giulia GT just yet.
However, if the current trend for reducing weight and downsizing engines continues, you never know...
We can hope. I believe Alfa can pull something great off. Something closer to what I think a proper Alfa is while being up to date technology and safety wise.
I was being a little tongue-in-cheek with my TVR comments, hence the
smily. I love the look and sound of TVRs but it's passion and flair in a different way - it's British passion and flair that's given us Triumph TR models, rather than Italian passion and flair that's given us Duettos and Spiders. That sounds picky but they are different things.
And again, if TVR did family hatchbacks I wouldn't expect them to be quite the same as Tuscans and Tamoras...
No, I know. Unlike you, though, I see the TR6 (as an example) as a sedate sports car in terms of passion. The passion is there, and I love the car, but its sort of different to the TVRs, which I see as more flamboyant passion, like the Alfas and Abarths.
I look forward to seeing the pictures. I've driven four Compacts now and enjoyed every one of them - they're excellent little cars and a lot of fun, even with the smaller engine. Parked next to a 145/146/147 though? I reckon I'd struggle...
Grrr
the panning shots have revealed that I need to clean the sensor, which Im not doing by myself. I dunno, I reckon the 316 is about as good a car in all areas as you could hope for with that size and price. Opinions I know, but Mete001s has enough character to keep me happy
.and I have a soft spot for Bimmers as much as Alfas.
The Focus probably is better at full chat, but more fun? Perhaps. At more sane speeds? Unlikely. The engine and steering have a lot to do with that.
Maybe we have differing opinions on where an Alfa should excel.
Tell me about it, this post has taken half an hour to concoct and I've tried to keep it short!
Youre lucky! I have to respond to two full blown responses each time! Next time, remind me to not go with my own opinion and we can just bypass all this next time
Ok, i'm going to have to be the one to say this, but 8OY, i think we have to agree to disagree because i could argue that every new Alfa is a proper Alfa and the same and not comparable with the classic Alfa's untill i am blue in the face, and you know i could as I have done this numerous amounts of times with you (though not to that extreme, but pretty close lol). To be quite frank, this 'discussion' is really not going to achieve anything exuberant, and it's not going to change me or you in any way. I'm still going to wake up in the morning and love both Alfa's (by that i mean all of them
) and my Brilliant Bimmer (another BB abbreviation lol), and your still going to wake up and love your 1750 Giulia and your 850 Estate.
Thats all I have to say about this from now on.
Fine, whatever. Ill respond if I see fit.
! Ohhhh I love it! So short in fact, I could resond to the whole thing here right now without being automatically logged out of GTP - no MS word, and manually typing out "[ QUOTE] [ /QUOTE]" for me!
No 33s either. Can't be many of those '80s Alfas left, unfortunately. Plenty of 145s and 146s about cheap though, always brings a smile to my face when I see one of those about.