Brera on TV next week.

On Fri, 05 May 2006 23:19:17 +0100, Muxton
>, wrote:

>what's it really like? Does it fall far short of expectations or
>were expectations set unrealistically high to start with?

Just like your list of possible buys, everyone has different ideas.
Even among the Alfisti the Brera receives differing views. Many
critical comments have been on the nasty German interior.
Something that certainly can't be down to expectations surely. Many
of the views expressed are not based on actual driving experience of
the Brera.

The only way to see how the Brera measures up is to take it out on an
extended test drive and see how it measures to Your standards. If it
does not equal or better Your desires then Don't buy it. Don't
mistake Alfa passion with brand loyalty. I see no conflict in loving
the marque with a life-long passion and loathing some models, being
indifferent to others and drawling over an exceptional beauty.

Pete
--
>
156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso

In article >,
> wrote:

> On Fri, 05 May 2006 23:19:17 +0100, Muxton
> >, wrote:
>
> >what's it really like? Does it fall far short of expectations or
> >were expectations set unrealistically high to start with?
>
> Just like your list of possible buys, everyone has different ideas.
> Even among the Alfisti the Brera receives differing views. Many
> critical comments have been on the nasty German interior.
> Something that certainly can't be down to expectations surely. Many
> of the views expressed are not based on actual driving experience of
> the Brera.
>
> The only way to see how the Brera measures up is to take it out on an
> extended test drive and see how it measures to Your standards. If it
> does not equal or better Your desires then Don't buy it. Don't
> mistake Alfa passion with brand loyalty. I see no conflict in loving
> the marque with a life-long passion and loathing some models, being
> indifferent to others and drawling over an exceptional beauty.
>
> Pete
> --
> >
> 156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso

Well put. In my humble opinion, Alfa hasn't made a car worthy of the
name since the Fiat takeover in 1987. Let's face it, WWD (Wrong-Wheel
Drive) might be suitable for Minis (thank you Sir Alec), Honda Civics,
and VWs, but its disaster for a "drivers" car (again, IMHO, of course).
Torque steer, terminal understeer, horsepower limits, etc. are simply
not what Alfa Romeo has been traditionally about. Unlike practically all
Americans, I've driven EVERY new Alfa to come along since the 156, up
to, but not incluiding, the 159 and the Brera coupe/Spider. That
includes the V-6 Spider, the V-6 FWD GTV, the 166, the 147 (2-liter
Selespeed, 1.6-liter manual, 147-GTA) and V-6 Alfa GT - all courtesy of
either the Alfa Romeo press relations department in Torino or the
Mantovani e Giorotti Alfa dealership in Bastia Umbria. While all of them
are pleasant cars to drive (much better than current VWs or any Japanese
FWD offering) with quick steering and good roadholding, none of them
either perform or handle as an Alfa Romeo should. For instance, with all
its power, I doubt seriously is a 147 GTA could catch a well-driven
4-cylinder "Bertie" with decent tires on a twisting country road. And
even if it could, the guy in the Bertie would be having the most fun.

No, until Alfa returns to full RWD (AWD is merely lip-service to those
who criticize FWD, as its based on FWD), they will never be the great
marque that they used to be.

However, to put this in perspective, I'd still trade my VW in on a 147
GTA or, better yet, an AWD Brera or Brera Spider in a heartbeat were
they available in the US.

--
George Graves
The health of our society is a direct result of the men
and women we choose to admire.

George Graves wrote:

> In article >,
> > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 05 May 2006 23:19:17 +0100, Muxton
>> >, wrote:
>>
>> >what's it really like? Does it fall far short of expectations or
>> >were expectations set unrealistically high to start with?
>>
>> Just like your list of possible buys, everyone has different ideas.
>> Even among the Alfisti the Brera receives differing views. Many
>> critical comments have been on the nasty German interior.
>> Something that certainly can't be down to expectations surely. Many
>> of the views expressed are not based on actual driving experience of
>> the Brera.
>>
>> The only way to see how the Brera measures up is to take it out on an
>> extended test drive and see how it measures to Your standards. If it
>> does not equal or better Your desires then Don't buy it. Don't
>> mistake Alfa passion with brand loyalty. I see no conflict in loving
>> the marque with a life-long passion and loathing some models, being
>> indifferent to others and drawling over an exceptional beauty.
>>
>> Pete
>> --
>> >
>> 156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso
>
> Well put. In my humble opinion, Alfa hasn't made a car worthy of the
> name since the Fiat takeover in 1987.

OK, I've been drinking but that's twaddle. The 156 is a great car. It's
not a Sprint, but it's every bit as good *everyday* as a 116 and in many
ways *much* better. Not as direct, certainly not as raw, but ti is, IMHO a
worthy Alfa.
Oh, and two great advantages it has over a Sprint (which is also WWD)
1) It's useable between October and May
2) It doesn't dissolve in winter

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7 75 TS 156 TS S2
Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

On Sat, 06 May 2006 21:38:47 GMT, Catman
>, wrote:

>The 156 is a great car.
I agree. Especially before the nasty nose job :-)
I would have loved it more is they had left the chain
in the cam though :-(

Pete
--
>
156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso

Catman > wrote:

> > Well put. In my humble opinion, Alfa hasn't made a car worthy of the
> > name since the Fiat takeover in 1987.
>
> OK, I've been drinking but that's twaddle. The 156 is a great car. It's
> not a Sprint, but it's every bit as good *everyday* as a 116 and in many
> ways *much* better. Not as direct, certainly not as raw, but ti is, IMHO a
> worthy Alfa.
> Oh, and two great advantages it has over a Sprint (which is also WWD)
> 1) It's useable between October and May
> 2) It doesn't dissolve in winter

Indeed. The 155 had an iffy start, but the widebody version were well
sorted - better than anything else as a 'drivers' car in the class - the
156 refined this further. The 146Ti and 145 Cloverleaf are an absolute
scream to drive, too. I've not driven a 156 V6, but the TSpark is an
amazing car - class leading handling and lovely engines.

Alfa are sporting cars for the man on the street, they've moved on with
the times, and FWD is king these days - Alfa do FWD better than anyone
else, which is how it should be.
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Fiat Marea 20v HLX - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

Pete wrote:

> On Sat, 06 May 2006 21:38:47 GMT, Catman
> >, wrote:
>
>>The 156 is a great car.
> I agree. Especially before the nasty nose job :-)
> I would have loved it more is they had left the chain
> in the cam though :-(

In some respects, yes, in other, what difference does it make? The 8 valve
is a superb engine, but the belt driven one starts, stops and lasts (at
least IM 132k E) as well as the older lump and is more efficient, cleaner
and cheaper to run. It *may* not be as emotionally satisfying, but I
*really* think you'd need to drive them back to back to tell.

And then, just wind the window down on the 156..........

Actually I just thought: Induction roar. I miss that........
--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7 75 TS 156 TS S2
Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

Catman > wrote:

> Pete wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 06 May 2006 21:38:47 GMT, Catman
> > >, wrote:
> >
> >>The 156 is a great car.
> > I agree. Especially before the nasty nose job :-)
> > I would have loved it more is they had left the chain
> > in the cam though :-(
>
> In some respects, yes, in other, what difference does it make? The 8 valve
> is a superb engine, but the belt driven one starts, stops and lasts (at
> least IM 132k E) as well as the older lump and is more efficient, cleaner
> and cheaper to run. It *may* not be as emotionally satisfying, but I
> *really* think you'd need to drive them back to back to tell.

Hmmm, I'd go with the non oil burning, non rubber belt snapping chain
driven lump given a choice, it's just a shame the emissions control
****e blunted it.

Yes, I have rose tinted views of the transaxle cars, but that's because,
given a choice of car 156 or 75, I'll almost always take the 75....
unless it's over 20 degrees outside and I want climate control ;-)
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Fiat Marea 20v HLX - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

In article > ,
Catman > wrote:

> George Graves wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 05 May 2006 23:19:17 +0100, Muxton
> >> >, wrote:
> >>
> >> >what's it really like? Does it fall far short of expectations or
> >> >were expectations set unrealistically high to start with?
> >>
> >> Just like your list of possible buys, everyone has different ideas.
> >> Even among the Alfisti the Brera receives differing views. Many
> >> critical comments have been on the nasty German interior.
> >> Something that certainly can't be down to expectations surely. Many
> >> of the views expressed are not based on actual driving experience of
> >> the Brera.
> >>
> >> The only way to see how the Brera measures up is to take it out on an
> >> extended test drive and see how it measures to Your standards. If it
> >> does not equal or better Your desires then Don't buy it. Don't
> >> mistake Alfa passion with brand loyalty. I see no conflict in loving
> >> the marque with a life-long passion and loathing some models, being
> >> indifferent to others and drawling over an exceptional beauty.
> >>
> >> Pete
> >> --
> >> >
> >> 156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso
> >
> > Well put. In my humble opinion, Alfa hasn't made a car worthy of the
> > name since the Fiat takeover in 1987.
>
> OK, I've been drinking but that's twaddle. The 156 is a great car. It's
> not a Sprint, but it's every bit as good *everyday* as a 116 and in many
> ways *much* better. Not as direct, certainly not as raw, but ti is, IMHO a
> worthy Alfa.
> Oh, and two great advantages it has over a Sprint (which is also WWD)
> 1) It's useable between October and May
> 2) It doesn't dissolve in winter

While what you say is true, Modern Alfas are better cars in EVERY way as
far as a daily driver is concerned, they just aren't as good "sports
cars" (again IMHO) as were the sporting Alfas of yore. I.E. is a 156
better than an Alfetta sedan? You bet. Is it better than a 155, or an
Alfasud? You better believe it!, but are any of the FWD models as good
drivers cars as a GTV-6 NO. Is the 156 as good as 75 Verde? Again NO. Is
any recent Alfa Sedan as good as a Giulia Super (what is?) absolutely
not. I'm talking here about the driving experience, not the build
quality, not the creature comforts, not rust protection and not the
reliability.

--
George Graves
The health of our society is a direct result of the men
and women we choose to admire.

In article > ,
(SteveH) wrote:

> Catman > wrote:
>
> > Pete wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 06 May 2006 21:38:47 GMT, Catman
> > > >, wrote:
> > >
> > >>The 156 is a great car.
> > > I agree. Especially before the nasty nose job :-)
> > > I would have loved it more is they had left the chain
> > > in the cam though :-(
> >
> > In some respects, yes, in other, what difference does it make? The 8 valve
> > is a superb engine, but the belt driven one starts, stops and lasts (at
> > least IM 132k E) as well as the older lump and is more efficient, cleaner
> > and cheaper to run. It *may* not be as emotionally satisfying, but I
> > *really* think you'd need to drive them back to back to tell.
>
> Hmmm, I'd go with the non oil burning, non rubber belt snapping chain
> driven lump given a choice, it's just a shame the emissions control
> ****e blunted it.
>
> Yes, I have rose tinted views of the transaxle cars, but that's because,
> given a choice of car 156 or 75, I'll almost always take the 75....
> unless it's over 20 degrees outside and I want climate control ;-)

I agree. My 3-liter GTV-6 is a lovely, fast, great handling
balls-to-the-wall sports car and I'll NEVER sell mine. And, a 75 Verde
is one of the best handling 4-door sedans ever (though so ugly that it
has to grow on you).

Yes Alfa does FWD better than anybody, but its still wrong for a
sporting machine (again, in my humble opinion)

--
George Graves
The health of our society is a direct result of the men
and women we choose to admire.

George Graves wrote:

> In article > ,
> Catman > wrote:
>
>> George Graves wrote:
>>
>> > In article >,
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 05 May 2006 23:19:17 +0100, Muxton
>> >> >, wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >what's it really like? Does it fall far short of expectations or
>> >> >were expectations set unrealistically high to start with?
>> >>
>> >> Just like your list of possible buys, everyone has different ideas.
>> >> Even among the Alfisti the Brera receives differing views. Many
>> >> critical comments have been on the nasty German interior.
>> >> Something that certainly can't be down to expectations surely. Many
>> >> of the views expressed are not based on actual driving experience of
>> >> the Brera.
>> >>
>> >> The only way to see how the Brera measures up is to take it out on an
>> >> extended test drive and see how it measures to Your standards. If it
>> >> does not equal or better Your desires then Don't buy it. Don't
>> >> mistake Alfa passion with brand loyalty. I see no conflict in loving
>> >> the marque with a life-long passion and loathing some models, being
>> >> indifferent to others and drawling over an exceptional beauty.
>> >>
>> >> Pete
>> >> --
>> >> >
>> >> 156 2.0 TS (2001) - Proteo Rosso
>> >
>> > Well put. In my humble opinion, Alfa hasn't made a car worthy of the
>> > name since the Fiat takeover in 1987.
>>
>> OK, I've been drinking but that's twaddle. The 156 is a great car. It's
>> not a Sprint, but it's every bit as good *everyday* as a 116 and in many
>> ways *much* better. Not as direct, certainly not as raw, but ti is, IMHO
>> a worthy Alfa.
>> Oh, and two great advantages it has over a Sprint (which is also WWD)
>> 1) It's useable between October and May
>> 2) It doesn't dissolve in winter
>
> While what you say is true, Modern Alfas are better cars in EVERY way as
> far as a daily driver is concerned, they just aren't as good "sports
> cars" (again IMHO) as were the sporting Alfas of yore. I.E. is a 156
> better than an Alfetta sedan? You bet. Is it better than a 155, or an
> Alfasud? You better believe it!, but are any of the FWD models as good
> drivers cars as a GTV-6 NO. Is the 156 as good as 75 Verde? Again NO. Is
> any recent Alfa Sedan as good as a Giulia Super (what is?) absolutely
> not. I'm talking here about the driving experience, not the build
> quality, not the creature comforts, not rust protection and not the
> reliability.
>

See,I would never class Alfas as 'sports cars'. We have a slighly odd
preception of them over here

I still maintain that the Sprint is the best driver's car that I've ever
driven.
--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
Alfa 116 Giulietta 3.0l (Really) Sprint 1.7 75 TS 156 TS S2
Triumph Speed Triple: Black with extra black bits
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk