A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Alfa Romeo
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

159 2.4 JTD



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 7th 07, 10:12 AM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
davea
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 88
Default 159 2.4 JTD

Is performance the first thing you consider when buying a diesel? I
wouldn't say so. 9 times out of 10 people going for a diesel want
economy first, obviously.

What I meant before is that no matter what I said when I was looking
at the 159 the salesman always tried to push the diesel. I went over
to the brera for a look and salesmen said "that's available in a
diesel as well!". I ended up not buying either.

My advice, test drive both petrol and diesel work out the difference
in purchase price and cost of fuel. Think the diesel is about 2K more
than the petrol to buy new and certainly round my area diesel is 5-10p
per litre dearer than petrol.


Ads
  #12  
Old June 7th 07, 10:53 AM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
cupra
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 199
Default 159 2.4 JTD

davea wrote:
<snip>
> round my area diesel is 5-10p
> per litre dearer than petrol.


Blimey, where do you live?


  #13  
Old June 7th 07, 10:55 AM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
GT[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 180
Default 159 2.4 JTD

"davea" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Is performance the first thing you consider when buying a diesel? I
> wouldn't say so. 9 times out of 10 people going for a diesel want
> economy first, obviously.
>
> What I meant before is that no matter what I said when I was looking
> at the 159 the salesman always tried to push the diesel. I went over
> to the brera for a look and salesmen said "that's available in a
> diesel as well!". I ended up not buying either.
>
> My advice, test drive both petrol and diesel work out the difference
> in purchase price and cost of fuel. Think the diesel is about 2K more
> than the petrol to buy new and certainly round my area diesel is 5-10p
> per litre dearer than petrol.


But when you look at second hand, the price difference closes right up, so
given the choice of 200hp with good fuel consumption or 170-180 + lower fuel
consumption, the 'on paper' choice is clear. Only a test drive will decide
it (in a couple of years time). Wrong group to say this, but I'm tempted by
a Jag X-Type or S-Type. I'm not sure which is which yet, but I like the one
that doesn't look like a big Rover!


  #14  
Old June 7th 07, 12:23 PM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
David A Stocks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default 159 2.4 JTD


"Ross" > wrote in message
...
>
> Maybe the Brera is too overweight and too
> sanitised but it didn't feel as "special" to drive as I was looking for
> from
> an Alfa and for that kind of money.
>

Perhaps it would be better to go for a late 156 with the same engine - if
you can find one?

David Stocks


  #15  
Old June 7th 07, 02:25 PM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
davea
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 88
Default 159 2.4 JTD

On 7 Jun, 10:53, " cupra" > wrote:
> davea wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > round my area diesel is 5-10p
> > per litre dearer than petrol.

>
> Blimey, where do you live?


Scotland, just checked nearest petrol station:

Unleaded 94.5p
Diesel 99.5p

Some are the same price for both at the moment but that has been the
norm for a while now

  #16  
Old June 7th 07, 02:52 PM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
GT[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 180
Default 159 2.4 JTD

"David A Stocks" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ross" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Maybe the Brera is too overweight and too
>> sanitised but it didn't feel as "special" to drive as I was looking for
>> from
>> an Alfa and for that kind of money.
>>

> Perhaps it would be better to go for a late 156 with the same engine - if
> you can find one?


Looking for a little more rear legroom and newer car (have a 2002 156 2.0
JTS)


  #17  
Old June 7th 07, 03:03 PM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
cupra
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 199
Default 159 2.4 JTD

davea wrote:
> On 7 Jun, 10:53, " cupra" > wrote:
>> davea wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> round my area diesel is 5-10p
>>> per litre dearer than petrol.

>>
>> Blimey, where do you live?

>
> Scotland, just checked nearest petrol station:
>
> Unleaded 94.5p
> Diesel 99.5p
>
> Some are the same price for both at the moment but that has been the
> norm for a while now


Ah - down here (Somerset) prices seem to range from parity (99.9/99.9 P/D)
to a penny or so (96.9/97.9)..... makes the diesel option a lot more
appealing cost wise!


  #18  
Old June 7th 07, 04:04 PM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
Zathras
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 742
Default 159 2.4 JTD

On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 02:12:28 -0700, davea >
wrote:

>Is performance the first thing you consider when buying a diesel?


Yes.

>I wouldn't say so. 9 times out of 10 people going for a diesel want
>economy first, obviously.


That depends on the car..surely? For example, an Audi A4 3.0 TDI
Quattro (chosen as a car with a reasonable diesel engine and serious
performance) *can* be had for 28000UKP if you can survive the
minimalism. It does 153 mph and 0-60 in 6.8 seconds. That Audi would
not be bought for economy! There are economy petrol and diesel cars
but there are also sporting petrol and diesel cars and some people
don't seem to be able to grasp that diesels can be sporting (even
though a diesel won Le Mans).

>What I meant before is that no matter what I said when I was looking
>at the 159 the salesman always tried to push the diesel. I went over
>to the brera for a look and salesmen said "that's available in a
>diesel as well!".


But the diesels sell rather well and the salesman would be presenting
it as an obvious alternative.

> I ended up not buying either.


So be it.

>My advice, test drive both petrol and diesel work out the difference
>in purchase price and cost of fuel. Think the diesel is about 2K more
>than the petrol to buy new and certainly round my area diesel is 5-10p
>per litre dearer than petrol.


Urghh. I didn't. I tried the 2.0TS then the 2.4JTD when buying mine.
The JTD destroyed the gutless 2.0TS with its huge torque so I bought
one. Anyone who buys an Alfa thinking for a minute of 'economy
motoring' is in deep trouble. The Alfa owners economy model is more
closely aligned with 'can I send the wife out on to the streets *and*
remortgage the house to pay for servicing and repairs' than 'run
forever on a penny'.

If you're going to buy an Alfa, my advice would be to buy the one you
want. I did, and, after 6 years, I have no regrets over my choice of
engine.

--
Z
Scotland
Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather
'Oil' be seeing you..
(Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
  #19  
Old June 7th 07, 04:51 PM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
davea
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 88
Default 159 2.4 JTD

> >Is performance the first thing you consider when buying a diesel?
>
> Yes.


If performance is your thing why not get the 3.2 V6 159. It's faster
than the diesel you can't argue with that.

> >I wouldn't say so. 9 times out of 10 people going for a diesel want
> >economy first, obviously.

>
> That depends on the car..surely? For example, an Audi A4 3.0 TDI
> Quattro (chosen as a car with a reasonable diesel engine and serious
> performance) *can* be had for 28000UKP if you can survive the
> minimalism. It does 153 mph and 0-60 in 6.8 seconds. That Audi would
> not be bought for economy!


That'll be the 1 out of 10 that would opt for the diesel! Alfa can't
match that for spec for there equivalent diesel but the 3.2 petrol
can.

>There are economy petrol and diesel cars
> but there are also sporting petrol and diesel cars and some people
> don't seem to be able to grasp that diesels can be sporting (even
> though a diesel won Le Mans).


I can grasp it and have many a shot in fast diesel cars, nothing
against them. Point I'm making is the equivalent sized petrol will
always outperform it. Why do you think manufacturers put turbo's in
most of the diesels, it's to make up for the lack of power to start
with. Put a turbo in the equivalent petrol or leave it naturally
aspirated and IT WILL outperform it. Look at your own example of the
Audi.

> But the diesels sell rather well and the salesman would be presenting
> it as an obvious alternative.


But I stated I didn't want a diesel car because of the price of the
stuff here, I don't do a lot of miles so it's not worth it for me. He
still pushed so I left!

  #20  
Old June 8th 07, 07:39 AM posted to alt.autos.alfa-romeo
Zathras
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 742
Default 159 2.4 JTD

On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 08:51:54 -0700, davea >
wrote:

>> >Is performance the first thing you consider when buying a diesel?

>>
>> Yes.

>
>If performance is your thing why not get the 3.2 V6 159. It's faster
>than the diesel you can't argue with that.


Lack of torque and poor residuals mainly but insurance also figured. I
didn't have the choice of a 159 in 2001 so the only faster candidate
was the 2.5 V6. This had less torque than the diesel but I wanted big
torque at 1800rpm far more than less torque and more power further up
the rev band. I could have spent less for a V6 as well but I wasn't
tempted..sorry if this doesn't make sense to you but, I no longer lust
after high revving engines to deliver performance in *road* cars. It's
pointless for the kind of driving I do.

>> >I wouldn't say so. 9 times out of 10 people going for a diesel want
>> >economy first, obviously.

>>
>> That depends on the car..surely? For example, an Audi A4 3.0 TDI
>> Quattro (chosen as a car with a reasonable diesel engine and serious
>> performance) *can* be had for 28000UKP if you can survive the
>> minimalism. It does 153 mph and 0-60 in 6.8 seconds. That Audi would
>> not be bought for economy!

>
>That'll be the 1 out of 10 that would opt for the diesel! Alfa can't
>match that for spec for there equivalent diesel but the 3.2 petrol
>can.


Eh..how do you work that out? Go and look up the official figures..the
3.2 has a lower top speed and is slower 0-60 than the Audi.

>>There are economy petrol and diesel cars
>> but there are also sporting petrol and diesel cars and some people
>> don't seem to be able to grasp that diesels can be sporting (even
>> though a diesel won Le Mans).

>
>I can grasp it and have many a shot in fast diesel cars, nothing
>against them. Point I'm making is the equivalent sized petrol will
>always outperform it.


Wrong..as already explained. Indeed a bigger petrol (3.2) doesn't
outperform a *smaller* (3.0) engined diesel in the same market
segment.

> Why do you think manufacturers put turbo's in
>most of the diesels, it's to make up for the lack of power to start
>with. Put a turbo in the equivalent petrol or leave it naturally
>aspirated and IT WILL outperform it. Look at your own example of the
>Audi.


I don't see the relevance. Alfa only do turbo diesels and normally
aspirated petrols so that's the comparison here. If Alfa did turbo
their petrols, there would be an improvement..but they haven't.

--
Z
Scotland
Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather
'Oil' be seeing you..
(Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.