When Alfa Romeo first announced it was returning to North America, Bill Clinton was still president! Eleven years and much procrastination, stalling and dithering later, North America still remains an Alfa-free zone. Sure, there has been a handful of hyper-expensive 8C sports cars sold through selected Ferrari/Maserati dealers but where are the affordable Alfas that can be bought by mere mortals?
Kudos to Car and Driver for assembling a timeline of Alfa Romeo's broken promises and highlighting some historic events that have taken place during all those years Alfa has been jerking us around, just to provide some context to how long we've been waiting.
I love Alfa Romeos but I am so pissed off at the company for stringing us along for more than a decade. The latest announcement is that Alfa will be here sometime in 2013 (presumably for the 2014 model year). That's just 10 years off from the original launch date of 2003! At this point I will only believe Alfa Romeo's return is for real when I am able to walk into a showroom and lay hands on a car myself.
Link to article here.......
http://blog.caranddriver.com/decade-of-delays-a-timeline-of-alfa-romeos-u-s-relaunch-8675309/ (http://blog.caranddriver.com/decade-of-delays-a-timeline-of-alfa-romeos-u-s-relaunch-8675309/)
Can you blame 'em? Virtually nobody would buy their cars, and that's precisely why they didn't follow through.
Will the brand even be relevant by the time it gets here?
By the way, remarketing a brand takes a shit-ton of time, money, and energy. Come on, Fiat isn't even doing that well because it wanted freestanding dealers to sell them. And now, they're paying the price for it.
Selling cars is a tough business.
Does it really matter? The average American will always prefer the drab blandness of a Toyota Corolla or Nissan Versa (and other Japanese boxes) to a beautiful masterpiece that is an Alfa Giulietta. Alfa will be a small niche brand catering to a handful of purists or people who want to be different in terms of automotive style. I might be wrong, but I don't see a market for Alfa Romeo in the US.
The same goes for other European brands like Seat, Skoda, Citroen etc.
Quote from: the Teuton on May 06, 2011, 11:16:23 PM
By the way, remarketing a brand takes a shit-ton of time, money, and energy. Come on, Fiat isn't even doing that well because it wanted freestanding dealers to sell them. And now, they're paying the price for it.
Selling cars is a tough business.
Isn't doing well? The 500 has only just gone on sale and supplies are very limited. Unless your name happens to be Nostradamus, I don't think you (or anyone else, for that matter) can predict how well the 500 will do. It's simply too early to tell.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on May 07, 2011, 05:46:22 AM
Does it really matter? The average American will always prefer the drab blandness of a Toyota Corolla or Nissan Versa (and other Japanese boxes) to a beautiful masterpiece that is an Alfa Giulietta. Alfa will be a small niche brand catering to a handful of purists or people who want to be different in terms of automotive style. I might be wrong, but I don't see a market for Alfa Romeo in the US.
The same goes for other European brands like Seat, Skoda, Citroen etc.
Quote from: Madman on May 07, 2011, 07:16:56 AM
Isn't doing well? The 500 has only just gone on sale and supplies are very limited. Unless your name happens to be Nostradamus, I don't think you (or anyone else. for that matter) can predict how well the 500 will do. It's simply too early to tell.
By most all measures those are crappy cars borne of hyper government regulation and taxation. THAT'S why they'd fail in the US and THAT'S why they are not sold here. Car companies are very, very smart in these things.
Quote from: GoCougs on May 07, 2011, 08:50:50 AM
By most all measures those are crappy cars borne of hyper government regulation and taxation. THAT'S why they'd fail in the US and THAT'S why they are not sold here. Car companies are very, very smart in these things.
Alfa Romeo is a luxury make, that competes with Volvo, Saab and in some respects BMW and MB.
It's not like we'd be getting Dacias badged as Alfa's; we'd be getting essentially an Italian version of BMW.
It's not like Fiat would send over a 1.2L Alfa 166 for 60K USD and say it's good enough for us.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on May 07, 2011, 05:46:22 AM
Does it really matter? The average American will always prefer the drab blandness of a Toyota Corolla or Nissan Versa (and other Japanese boxes) to a beautiful masterpiece that is an Alfa Giulietta. Alfa will be a small niche brand catering to a handful of purists or people who want to be different in terms of automotive style. I might be wrong, but I don't see a market for Alfa Romeo in the US.
The same goes for other European brands like Seat, Skoda, Citroen etc.
Alfa won't be mainstream.
I think Alfa would do better here than Volvo or Saab.....that is if they can get a solid dealer network.
Even so, the Giuletta looks horrible.
Quote from: GoCougs on May 06, 2011, 11:11:41 PM
Can you blame 'em? Virtually nobody would buy their cars, and that's precisely why they didn't follow through.
I don't think that's true, either. The market for small compacts is starting to grow again, and that's all Fiat group makes. I think missing out on a piece of the pie would be dumb of them, especially when they're marketing them on nostalgia and emotion. (Fiat 500)
Quote from: 2o6 on May 07, 2011, 11:33:06 AM
Even so, the Giuletta looks horrible.
Design is subjective. Have you also seen one in person? My guess is that you have not. They look stunning in person. I turn my head everytime I see one.
Quote from: Madman on May 07, 2011, 07:16:56 AM
Isn't doing well? The 500 has only just gone on sale and supplies are very limited. Unless your name happens to be Nostradamus, I don't think you (or anyone else. for that matter) can predict how well the 500 will do. It's simply too early to tell.
The two Western Pa. dealers that were supposed to sell them backed out because neither believed in building new, free-standing dealers for one little car. Fiat has no product support, and being honest, they should be selling Fiats at Chrysler dealers as a joint thing like what BMW does with MINI -- having its own floor space. We don't know when the Panda is coming out, and since Alfa is now back to 2015, there is no sign of complements for the cars.
Chrysler has no small cars other than the 500. And unlike the rest of the world, we don't have much history and heritage. People knew what Mini Coopers were here before they were sold here. Most people don't have a clue what a Fiat 500 is. When I saw an original one for the first time, I couldn't believe how small it was. No one knows what they are (or were), and Fiat isn't pushing the car hard enough in the marketplace.
Fiat/Chrysler isn't doing itself any favors by its strictness with dealer support.
Quote from: GoCougs on May 06, 2011, 11:11:41 PM
Can you blame 'em? Virtually nobody would buy their cars, and that's precisely why they didn't follow through.
I'd replace my Jetta with a 159 in a heartbeat.
Yeah, I would totally buy an Alfa.
Quote from: Rupert on May 07, 2011, 05:11:42 PM
Yeah, I would totally buy an Alfa.
Actually, forget the 159, I'd rather have one of these:
(http://pictures.topspeed.com/IMG/crop/200705/autodelta-gt-3-2-sup_460x0w.jpg)
(http://alfaromeolombarda.co.uk/images/462225.gif)
(http://www.babez.de/wp-content/myfotos/autodelta-gt37super/autodelta-gt37-super-01.jpg)
With the 3.2, of course.
Quote from: the Teuton on May 07, 2011, 12:32:35 PM
Chrysler has no small cars other than the 500. And unlike the rest of the world, we don't have much history and heritage. People knew what Mini Coopers were here before they were sold here. Most people don't have a clue what a Fiat 500 is. When I saw an original one for the first time, I couldn't believe how small it was. No one knows what they are (or were), and Fiat isn't pushing the car hard enough in the marketplace.
No, hardly anyone in America knew what a Mini was prior to 2002. BMW had to educate American consumers about the Mini's History and Heritage?. Despite their efforts, I'm positive at least half the MINI owners in America know nothing about the Alec Issigonis-designed original. Likewise, I doubt very many Fiat 500 buyers will see their new "cute little cars" as paying homage to the 1957 Nuova 500. Like the thousands of MINI buyers across America, they will buy the 500 based on looks, fun and frugality.
Quote from: GoCougs on May 07, 2011, 08:50:50 AM
By most all measures those are crappy cars borne of hyper government regulation and taxation. THAT'S why they'd fail in the US and THAT'S why they are not sold here. Car companies are very, very smart in these things.
Did it ever occur to you that some people, even here in America, DON'T want a gas-guzzler? Do us all a favour and save your radical, far-right propaganda for somebody who gives a shit.
With gas prices being what they are, I [heart] my 35 mpg, thank you very much.
Quote from: Madman on May 07, 2011, 06:47:03 PM
Did it ever occur to you that some people, even here in America, DON'T want a gas-guzzler? Do us all a favour and save your radical, far-right propaganda for somebody who gives a shit.
Uh, and you'd waltz into a newly-christened Alfa dealer an plop down $30k for $20k worth of car? No, you wouldn't/couldn't.
It's a crappy car and that's why they don't sell it here. If you disagree, you're on the side of wrong. :huh:
Quote from: GoCougs on May 07, 2011, 08:18:44 PM
Uh, and you'd waltz into a newly-christened Alfa dealer an plop down $30k for $20k worth of car? No, you wouldn't/couldn't.
It's a crappy car and that's why they don't sell it here. If you disagree, you're on the side of wrong. :huh:
It's no more "unreliable" than say any other European make.
Quote from: Madman on May 07, 2011, 06:47:03 PM
No, hardly anyone in America knew what a Mini was prior to 2002. BMW had to educate American consumers about the Mini's History and Heritage?. Despite their efforts, I'm positive at least half the MINI owners in America know nothing about the Alec Issigonis-designed original. Likewise, I doubt very many Fiat 500 buyers will see their new "cute little cars" as paying homage to the 1957 Nuova 500. Like the thousands of MINI buyers across America, they will buy the 500 based on looks, fun and frugality.
There is one very big difference between the Mini and the 500. The Mini was featured prominently in the film
The Italian Job. The original film used the original Mini and the remake used the new Mini. An original Mini was also featured in the first Bourne film (which came out at the same time as the new Mini) and the new Mini was used in the second Austin Powers film (also released at the same time as the new Mini). Americans at large have had no such exposure to the 500.
Quote from: MX793 on May 07, 2011, 09:09:21 PM
There is one very big difference between the Mini and the 500. The Mini was featured prominently in the film The Italian Job. The original film used the original Mini and the remake used the new Mini. An original Mini was also featured in the first Bourne film (which came out at the same time as the new Mini) and the new Mini was used in the second Austin Powers film (also released at the same time as the new Mini). Americans at large have had no such exposure to the 500.
Yeah, but the 500 is 5K cheaper for a car that is almost as nice inside.
It's also super cute and isn't old (Beetle).
Quote from: MX793 on May 07, 2011, 09:09:21 PM
There is one very big difference between the Mini and the 500. The Mini was featured prominently in the film The Italian Job. The original film used the original Mini and the remake used the new Mini. An original Mini was also featured in the first Bourne film (which came out at the same time as the new Mini) and the new Mini was used in the second Austin Powers film (also released at the same time as the new Mini). Americans at large have had no such exposure to the 500.
Um, Ikea uses an original 500 in many of their in-store advertisements on the ease of transport of flat pack furniture.
Quote from: 2o6 on May 07, 2011, 08:49:48 PM
It's no more "unreliable" than say any other European make.
What I meant by "crappy" was small, under-performing and especially, relatively expensive - the exact kind of cars Americans reject in great measure. They want the Cruze, Corolla, and to a lesser extent the Civic.
Quote from: GoCougs on May 07, 2011, 09:23:02 PM
What I meant by "crappy" was small, under-performing and especially, relatively expensive - the exact kind of cars Americans reject in great measure. They want the Cruze, Corolla, and to a lesser extent the Civic.
The smallest car Alfa Romeo makes is the MiTo, which is larger than the Mini Cooper.
The Giuletta is directly comparable to the Golf.
The 159 is actually bigger than the Saab 9-3 and competition.
Alfa isn't mainstream....
Quote from: MX793 on May 07, 2011, 09:09:21 PM
There is one very big difference between the Mini and the 500. The Mini was featured prominently in the film The Italian Job. The original film used the original Mini and the remake used the new Mini. An original Mini was also featured in the first Bourne film (which came out at the same time as the new Mini) and the new Mini was used in the second Austin Powers film (also released at the same time as the new Mini). Americans at large have had no such exposure to the 500.
The MINI Cooper/Cooper S was released in the US in March of 2002. The Italian Job (remake) hit the screens on 30 May 2003, more than a year after the car went on sale in America. Likewise, The Bourne Identity was released on 14 June 2002, some three months after the MINI's debut. And it was actually the third Austin Powers film "Goldmember" that featured a new MINI but it wasn't released until 26 July 2002, four months after the MINI's American launch.
No doubt these films helped to publicise the new MINI, but they did nothing to educate the American public about the original BMC Mini's status as a British motoring icon. That task was left to BMW/MINI dealers who referenced the original car in brochures and in-showroom display graphics. The car sold (and continues to sell) on it's own merits.
Check out this 2001 article about the MINI Cooper.
http://www.cars.com/mini/cooper/2002/reviews/?revid=34760
Pay close attention to this paragraph........
"But other buyers seem confused by Mini-mania. "If it's a BMW, why doesn't it say so?" asked Shari Lemonious, a 36-year-old Detroit resident who checked out the Mini at the 2001 North American International Auto Show as part of the Detroit News 2001 Consumer Panel. "If Im going to drive a BMW, I want everyone to know it's a BMW." "
This woman was obviously oblivious to the Mini's History and Heritage?. And, I suspect, most American MINI owners still are. Some may only have a vauge understanding of MINI's past, thanks to the salesman who sold them the car. But I'm willing to bet only a handful of MINI owners are real enthusiats who have a comprehensive understanding of the Mini's place in motoring history.
Fiat is sure to put up plenty of posters featuring the original Nuova 500 in their showrooms. They're sure to tap into that "La Dolce Vita" vibe and educate potential buyers about their unique brand of retro-Italiana. But this alone won't sell Americans on the new 500. The merits of the car itself will be the ultimate selling point. And, given how irresistibly fun the baby Fiat is, I think that will be more than enough.
Honestly, if Fiat's people had half a brain, they would have started co-marketing the 500 with Cars when it came out in 2006 -- because the movie was still an international sensation, and it would have made sense at the time despite the fact that Fiat's return was only a rumor.
This is what a good PR team does.
And even now, all we're hearing about in the new Cars movies are about the new featured cars. What they should do is introduce Luigi's grandson, the new 500. It's a huge missed opportunity.
People buy MINIs for the same reason people bought 318tis and C230Ks: because the fact that it's a cheap car with a recognizable premium image (BMW). The H&H? is there -- BMW won't let you forget it -- but all of its business is based around aspirational marketing. Why else would they be introducing a Goodwood Edition MINI? (OMG! It's a Rolls-Royce on the cheap!)
Where MINI got it right, though, is that a MINI looks distinct in that it isn't going to be cross-shopped with CPO 4-door lux cars. It is what it is. People like it because it's cute and it just happens to be a BMW. But make no mistake: It is an entry-level BMW. What is a 500 an entry-level model to? A Maserati? [See also: brand extension, mofos]
I would buy a Giulietta if it came in a 200hp+ performance model...but it doesn't.
Quote from: Madman on May 07, 2011, 10:10:59 PMPay close attention to this paragraph........
"But other buyers seem confused by Mini-mania. "If it's a BMW, why doesn't it say so?" asked Shari Lemonious, a 36-year-old Detroit resident who checked out the Mini at the 2001 North American International Auto Show as part of the Detroit News 2001 Consumer Panel. "If Im going to drive a BMW, I want everyone to know it's a BMW." "
Here's the perfect car for her.
(http://www.jimmy540i.com/moron93.jpg)
Cheap buying price, but with the BMW badge on it everyone will know that she's driving a BMW! :praise:
The MINI doesn't sell on the merits of the car itself - given it pretty much has some of the worst reliability of any car available people would do just the opposite if "merit" was a primary driver. People buy it primarily because it is a well-known British icon. I'm sure it has its driving appeal, but then so do lots and lots of other cars.
Quote from: GoCougs on May 08, 2011, 12:13:14 PM
The MINI doesn't sell on the merits of the car itself - given it pretty much has some of the worst reliability of any car available people would do just the opposite if "merit" was a primary driver. People buy it primarily because it is a well-known British icon. I'm sure it has its driving appeal, but then so do lots and lots of other cars.
Mini has styling advantage, and it really has that market all by itself.
The Mini is really in essence a more expensive (and better) Beetle, and the driving prowess just adds to it's appeal.
The Fiat isn't as well known, but it's still pretty well into consumers minds (Did everyone forget about the movie "Cars"?) and it's cheaper and arguably cuter.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on May 08, 2011, 11:58:06 AM
Here's the perfect car for her.
(http://www.jimmy540i.com/moron93.jpg)
Cheap buying price, but with the BMW badge on it everyone will know that she's driving a BMW! :praise:
Wow, the new 5 Series really
does look like shit! :wtf:
Quote from: Madman on May 08, 2011, 09:01:08 PM
Wow, the new 5 Series really does look like shit! :wtf:
Have you not heard of the new BMW-Ford alliance? Watch the news! :nono:
Quote from: GoCougs on May 08, 2011, 12:13:14 PM
The MINI doesn't sell on the merits of the car itself - given it pretty much has some of the worst reliability of any car available
Inaccurate.
Alfa Romeo's North American launch date has been pushed back yet again. Alfas were due to arrive in 2013 but now it looks like we won't see any until 2014 (marketed as 2015 model year cars). Meanwhile, US Fiat dealers (with only one car to sell) are growing impatient with Alfa's repeated launch delays.
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/20/fiat-dealers-irked-by-alfa-romeos-delayed-return-to-u-s/
They'll get here.
Ah, the joys of living in Europe and seeing various Alfas, old and new (Suck it, Consumer Reports!), everyday. :praise:
My buddies Alfa Romeo 156 GTA is still for sale. Who wants to buy it and have it shipped over to America? :praise:
I have a EVO magazine buyer's guide... if I remember when I get home I will post some of the little problems they noted with the 156/147 GTA. Little things like electric harnesses frying, head gaskets going, timing equipment breaking etc, you know, minor stuff.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 21, 2011, 08:02:58 AM
I have a EVO magazine buyer's guide... if I remember when I get home I will post some of the little problems they noted with the 156/147 GTA. Little things like electric harnesses frying, head gaskets going, timing equipment breaking etc, you know, minor stuff.
My friend had far more problems with his Honda Civic than I did with my Volkswagens.
Honestly, that Alfa would be so worth it.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=24815.msg1584178#msg1584178 date=1316614483
My friend had far more problems with his Honda Civic than I did with my Volkswagens.
Exceptions to the rule.
Quote from: 2o6 on September 21, 2011, 09:11:01 AM
Exceptions to the rule.
True. But I'm on like 7 years of relatively problem free Volkswagen ownership, and he got rid of the Honda because it was problematic.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 21, 2011, 08:02:58 AM
I have a EVO magazine buyer's guide... if I remember when I get home I will post some of the little problems they noted with the 156/147 GTA. Little things like electric harnesses frying, head gaskets going, timing equipment breaking etc, you know, minor stuff.
And I have the "owners guide". The car has about 170,000 km and he's never had a problem with it. The only thing that needed fixing is some cloth lining falling off the sunvisors. Wow, such an unreliable car! :lol:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 21, 2011, 11:43:58 AM
And I have the "owners guide". The car has about 170,000 km and he's never had a problem with it. The only thing that needed fixing is some cloth lining falling off the sunvisors. Wow, such an unreliable car! :lol:
When converted to miles, that is not impressive.
Quote from: 2o6 on May 07, 2011, 11:33:06 AM
Alfa Romeo is a luxury make, that competes with Volvo, Saab and in some respects BMW and MB.
It's not like we'd be getting Dacias badged as Alfa's; we'd be getting essentially an Italian version of BMW.
Um, no. I hate to be "that guy", but as long as they're FWD, Alfas won't be on the same level as BMW in performance, ride, and handling.
Even if I could overlook the potential reliability issues, I'm still not sure I understand the point of a premium sporty FWD car.
Quote from: Vinsanity on September 21, 2011, 12:56:44 PM
Um, no. I hate to be "that guy", but as long as they're FWD, Alfas won't be on the same level as BMW in performance, ride, and handling.
Then just replace "BMW" with "Audi" in that statement -- problem solved.
Purdy
(http://www.fiatforum.com/gallery/data/500/medium/156_6.jpg)
(http://www.autoscorner.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/alfa-romeo-autodelta-147-gta-am-37-super-engine.jpg)
Quote from: Raza on September 21, 2011, 08:14:43 AM
My friend had far more problems with his Honda Civic than I did with my Volkswagens.
Statistically, EVO's buyer's guide, w/info compiled from Alfisti + their rich mechanics >>>>>>>>>>>>> your one buddy.
I blew up 2 Honda Accord motors, but I'm an anomaly (I ran the cars ragged + modified them).
Quote from: 2o6 on September 21, 2011, 12:14:35 PM
When converted to miles, that is not impressive.
170,000 km isn't "impressive"? That's quite a mileage.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 21, 2011, 03:24:27 PM
170,000 km isn't "impressive"? That's quite a mileage.
105K miles isn't that much, really. Maybe by European standards, but in the US it's not uncommon to see cars with over 150K miles on them. My Mazda has close to 90,000 on it. My 240SX had 120K on it when I sold it. I was just talking to a co-worker who mentioned he was looking to pick up a car as a winter-rat for his son that had about 200,000 miles on it.
Quote from: Raza on September 21, 2011, 09:22:29 AM
True. But I'm on like 7 years of relatively problem free Volkswagen ownership, and he got rid of the Honda because it was problematic.
You never had either of them for more than 4 years and have any of them cleared 50K miles? You have to have a real lemon of a car to have a lot of major issues in less than 4 years/50K miles.
Quote from: MX793 on September 21, 2011, 06:21:40 PM
105K miles isn't that much, really. Maybe by European standards, but in the US it's not uncommon to see cars with over 150K miles on them. My Mazda has close to 90,000 on it. My 240SX had 120K on it when I sold it. I was just talking to a co-worker who mentioned he was looking to pick up a car as a winter-rat for his son that had about 200,000 miles on it.
I thought the Mazda recently blew up, though?
While I agree with the your general point, it's also important to avoid the Wimmer standard of "existence = reliability." A 200,000-mile car has probably needed work.
I'm not impressed until a car has seen 250 kmiles on the original engine and transmission. I fully expect my cars to go 200 kmiles without major work engine/transmission work.
Quote from: Rupert on September 21, 2011, 08:33:54 PM
I'm not impressed until a car has seen 250 kmiles on the original engine and transmission. I fully expect my cars to go 200 kmiles without major work engine/transmission work.
Agreed.
I found the EVO buyer's guide. Here are some of the problems one should look out for when buying a 147/156 GTA:
- Factory timing belt recommendation is at 72K, but EVO recommends 45K as they've been known to fail as early as 49K :wtf:
- Oil filter is in bad spot, which keeps people from changing... which results in main bearing failures :wtf:
- Gearbox differentials overheat + explode :wtf:
- Front suspension AND subframe have to be removed for clutch job :wtf:
- Hood had a recall for opening at speed :wtf:
By comparison, the E39 M5 and DC2 ITR basically had NO problems. "Find one in good shape and you will be fine"
There's DEFINITELY a difference in reliability. Alfa STILL doesn't seem to have got it together. This is all from a European magazine too, for enthusiasts. So please spare us the CR crap Wim. Alfas are economy cars that are more temperamental than Ferraris :wtf:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 21, 2011, 03:24:27 PM
170,000 km isn't "impressive"? That's quite a mileage.
My focus has 147k. My old neon had 105k when I sold it.
Accords routinely do 200K+ miles here. More cracks show in the German auto market psychology.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 21, 2011, 08:48:15 PM
Agreed.
I found the EVO buyer's guide. Here are some of the problems one should look out for when buying a 147/156 GTA:
- Factory timing belt recommendation is at 72K, but EVO recommends 45K as they've been known to fail as early as 49K :wtf:
- Oil filter is in bad spot, which keeps people from changing... which results in main bearing failures :wtf:
- Gearbox differentials overheat + explode :wtf:
- Front suspension AND subframe have to be removed for clutch job :wtf:
- Hood had a recall for opening at speed :wtf:
By comparison, the E39 M5 and DC2 ITR basically had NO problems. "Find one in good shape and you will be fine"
There's DEFINITELY a difference in reliability. Alfa STILL doesn't seem to have got it together. This is all from a European magazine too, for enthusiasts. So please spare us the CR crap Wim. Alfas are economy cars that are more temperamental than Ferraris :wtf:
To be fair, difficult maintenance and tough access are hardly reliability problems.
Quote from: MX793 on September 21, 2011, 06:23:55 PM
You never had either of them for more than 4 years and have any of them cleared 50K miles? You have to have a real lemon of a car to have a lot of major issues in less than 4 years/50K miles.
50K on the Passat and I'm at 66K on the Jetta. I forget the mileage on his car, but I admit, I remember it being more than that. 90,000-105,000, something like that.
Quote from: ifcar on September 21, 2011, 07:41:35 PM
I thought the Mazda recently blew up, though?
While I agree with the your general point, it's also important to avoid the Wimmer standard of "existence = reliability." A 200,000-mile car has probably needed work.
Didn't say the car has been spotless, just that 105K miles isn't some impressive number of miles.
And as it turned out, what I thought was a "blow up" was refrigerant venting out of a pressure relief valve due to the compressor being stuck on. No parts needed to actually fix it, just had to free up the clutch on the compressor.
Quote from: MX793 on September 21, 2011, 06:21:40 PM
105K miles isn't that much, really. Maybe by European standards, but in the US it's not uncommon to see cars with over 150K miles on them. My Mazda has close to 90,000 on it. My 240SX had 120K on it when I sold it. I was just talking to a co-worker who mentioned he was looking to pick up a car as a winter-rat for his son that had about 200,000 miles on it.
170,000 km is a lot for our standards. If a car holds up well to that mileage it's definitely also an indication of how it'll hold up in the future.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 21, 2011, 08:48:15 PM
Agreed.
I found the EVO buyer's guide. Here are some of the problems one should look out for when buying a 147/156 GTA:
- Factory timing belt recommendation is at 72K, but EVO recommends 45K as they've been known to fail as early as 49K :wtf:
- Oil filter is in bad spot, which keeps people from changing... which results in main bearing failures :wtf:
- Gearbox differentials overheat + explode :wtf:
- Front suspension AND subframe have to be removed for clutch job :wtf:
- Hood had a recall for opening at speed :wtf:
By comparison, the E39 M5 and DC2 ITR basically had NO problems. "Find one in good shape and you will be fine"
There's DEFINITELY a difference in reliability. Alfa STILL doesn't seem to have got it together. This is all from a European magazine too, for enthusiasts. So please spare us the CR crap Wim. Alfas are economy cars that are more temperamental than Ferraris :wtf:
The Alfa 156 wasn't perfect. It has weak spots like every other car. The 156 GTA of this guy has held up well. I've ridden in the car when we had lunch in the city and the car felt more solid than the new Mito I drove recently. There were no squeaks or rattles, no damage to the interior, no cracks etc. The car was in perfect shape. Only on the passenger side sun visor was some cloth coming off. Big deal. The owner has a garage for his car and he does regular maintenance. He used this car as his daily driver in a CITY ENVIRONMENT and for touring across Europe on vacations (including shitty quality Eastern European roads).
All to often people ignore regular maintenance and then blame problems on the car. Some cars need more precise maintenance than others. And anyone who ignores regular maintenance and then blames the car/brand should be bitch slapped until they need to take off their shirt to shit.
I'm surprised the transmission in your Honda didn't blow up and maim you or your house burned down because of...oh, Honda engine fires.... :devil:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 22, 2011, 05:44:56 AM
170,000 km is a lot for our standards.
If true, that speaks volumes to why you can't understand American concerns about German cars' reliability.
Quote from: ifcar on September 22, 2011, 06:23:32 AM
If true, that speaks volumes to why you can't understand American concerns about German cars' reliability.
We have tons of high-mileage German and European cars in Europe. So what's the problem? :huh:
If our cars are so shitty at high mileage, then why would some people here still drive them? Why not buy a used Japanese car that are sooooooooooooo reliable and hold up so well that they're quite popular at classic car shows....oh wait. :devil:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 22, 2011, 05:52:21 AM
All to often people ignore regular maintenance and then blame problems on the car. Some cars need more precise maintenance than others. And anyone who ignores regular maintenance and then blames the car/brand should be bitch slapped until they need to take off their shirt to shit.
I'm surprised the transmission in your Honda didn't blow up and maim you or your house burned down because of...oh, Honda engine fires.... :devil:
If Car A and B are in the same class + price point, there is no reason Car A should require 100x more maintenance than Car B. Blaming the owner for shitty design & quality is asinine. If Honda can build a low maintenance family sedan, it makes no sense that Alfa's family sedans that cost MORE and have the same level of tech/equipment should require the maintenance of a Ferrari.
I know you have beef w/CR but some cars really ARE less inherently reliable than others for a given level of maintenance.
Perfect example- Porsche- most Porsche owners are 100% diligent and enthusiastic about their cars, and yet so many of their engines completely grenaded. You don't see that kind of shit even in the most high performance Japanese or even American cars these days.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 22, 2011, 06:26:30 AM
We have tons of high-mileage German and European cars in Europe. So what's the problem? :huh:
If our cars are so shitty at high mileage, then why would some people here still drive them? Why not buy a used Japanese car that are sooooooooooooo reliable and hold up so well that they're quite popular at classic car shows....oh wait. :devil:
You just said 170,000 km is "a lot" by German standards. So what exactly constitutes high mileage there? 50,000 km? 100,000 km? Most cars sold in America aren't even out of warranty at that point. I've had a range of cars at about 90-130 thousand miles (160-200 thousand km) that have all been relatively trouble free... all Japanese... would you have the same confidence in buying a 200,000 km Alfa?
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 07:01:59 AM
If Car A and B are in the same class + price point, there is no reason Car A should require 100x more maintenance than Car B. Blaming the owner for shitty design & quality is asinine. If Honda can build a low maintenance family sedan, it makes no sense that Alfa's family sedans that cost MORE and have the same level of tech/equipment should require the maintenance of a Ferrari.
What exactly affects reliability? The material quality? A particular design? The weather? A generous bribe from Toyota to
Consumer Reports?
Assuming both cars are built to the same standard, one would assume that both would have the same quality. But in everyday conditions, different factors can affect the longevity of certain components etc. And all to often things can break because of a simple design flaw or weak material. It's always fun to read about someone in sunny California bragging about no rust on their car as opposed to their friends car in rainy Oregon. Yeah, genius.
Alfa Romeo is first and foremost an emotional brand. People who value heritage, design, class and spirited performance go for these cars and are willing to pay for it. I'd go as far to say that they're bought for their individuality and the individuality it gives the owner. A Toyota Corolla might be dead reliable, but it's crap compared to Alfa Romeo in all other regards. Crap styling, crap comfort, crap handling, crap interior design - no passion. This is a good car for someone who wants something to get them from A to B with minimal fuzz. It's not a good car for the car enthusiast with other priorities and more emphasis on other aspects of the car.
A modern Alfa Romeo is pretty reliable overall. They have improved tremendously since the '80s. The terrible times of the '70s and '80s are practically over for Italian cars. I have friends with high mileage Fiat Stilos and Puntos etc. and these cars keep running, running and running. In fact they're popular amongst students because they're reliable and cheap to maintain and have cheaper taxes attached to them.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 07:01:59 AMPerfect example- Porsche- most Porsche owners are 100% diligent and enthusiastic about their cars, and yet so many of their engines completely grenaded.
Eh, I believe only the 996 had engine issues in the beginning with cracked blocks.
For the most part, Porsche engines are very well-made and reliable.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 07:01:59 AMYou don't see that kind of shit even in the most high performance Japanese or even American cars these days.
Oh please. Cars like the Supra etc. are so overrated. This whole "Toyotas never break" is just a bunch of bullshit. People automatically assume a 1,000-hp Supra will be dead reliable just because it is made by Toyota. Sure.
High performance cars are high maintenance and their high horsepower output means these engines will never be as long-lasting as weaker engines that aren't under stress. A Formula One engine only lasts for about 500-1,000 km maximum. Granted, it's not made for daily driving and longterm reliability but the extreme performance stress these engines endure causes this limited lifespan. I have a hard time believing a 1,000-hp Supra can be used as a daily driver without developing issues even if it's designed as a daily driver.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 07:01:59 AMYou just said 170,000 km is "a lot" by German standards. So what exactly constitutes high mileage there? 50,000 km? 100,000 km? Most cars sold in America aren't even out of warranty at that point. I've had a range of cars at about 90-130 thousand miles (160-200 thousand km) that have all been relatively trouble free... all Japanese... would you have the same confidence in buying a 200,000 km Alfa?
100,000 km is a reference number just like 60 mph is used as a reference measure acceleration in the US. For a sports car, lower mileages are more desirable here but for everyday family cars 100,000 km is just a reference. It's considered high mileage but anything between 100,000 and 200,000 and higher is also considered high mileage. Naturally, people ANYWHERE when buying second hand cars are interested in getting "lower mileages", probably for psychological reasons.
I'm not making this up, but my experience with Japanese cars is the opposite of yours. On all our Mitsubishi cars in the Philippines the A/Cs failed pretty much in the 50-60,000 km region nad had issues of some kind. Our Nissan Cefiro was a complete POS with electrical issues here and there. I don't have this "soooooooooooooo reliable" experience with Japanese cars that people claim are Gods gift to mankind.
And a 200,000 km Alfa [or car from any brand] is something I wouldn't buy if I didn't know the owner. How any owner treats their car is important when buying second hand. In this case, I know the guy. I know he treats his cars with respect and he treated this Alfa with respect. The car runs great, is solid inside and out. I wouldn't have any qualms buying THIS car (in this case an Alfa) from this guy if I had the money and need for it. In this case I don't need the car since it is a performance car and quite thirsty in terms of fuel consumption.
QuoteAssuming both cars are built to the same standard
That's the whole point Wimmer. They're not.
EVO's buyer's guide is about as anti-CR a source of reliability data as you can get. And they acknowledge all the problems the GTAs have. Yes, you're right that a Corolla might not be as fun to drive. But less comfortable? That's bogus. And everything else you said is purely opinion. But never mind that. Yes the Japanese make some boring cars. But they also make some passionate cars too, like the Integra Type-R. That has just as much "design" and "passion" as any Alfa, but they have NO reliability problems. So what the hell are you talking about?
My mom's Lexus had a transmission failure and my dad's Infiniti didn't start one day. Statistically, someone is gonna get a dud. But when MOST people have the SAME problems with a certain car, it's UNRELIABLE. As much as you hate CR, there is validity and truth in their measurements, and for most people things like reliability are important. What good are passion or whatever when you don't know if your car will get you to work every day + safely?
And 1000 HP Supras do last as every day cars... hell a 500 HP Supra on stock internals will last because they are crazy overbuilt. Plus it's not like people are flooring a 1000 HP car everywhere they go. So assuming mostly normal driving, why would an engine built to put down 1000HP blow up if it mainly doesn't see more than 200-300HP of load?
The bottom line is, you have a wholly emotional irrational beef w/Japanese cars (most specifically Toyota). Get the fuck over it.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 22, 2011, 07:29:38 AM
It's always fun to read about someone in sunny California bragging about no rust on their car as opposed to their friends car in rainy Oregon. Yeah, genius.
Oregon cars don't rust much, either.
Quote from: Rupert on September 22, 2011, 12:30:06 PM
Oregon cars don't rust much, either.
I can attest to that. I once owned a 76 Capri that had lived 30 years in Portland. No rust problems.
Wimmer, you need to seriously work on some European cars, then Japanese cars. It'll become pretty clear why, for the most part, Japanese cars are more reliable.
Working on one's own car is for idiots! Better to pay ?200/hr for an oil change and ensure proper maintenance procedure :praise:
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 08:27:59 AM
EVO's buyer's guide is about as anti-CR a source of reliability data as you can get. And they acknowledge all the problems the GTAs have. Yes, you're right that a Corolla might not be as fun to drive. But less comfortable? That's bogus. And everything else you said is purely opinion. But never mind that. Yes the Japanese make some boring cars. But they also make some passionate cars too, like the Integra Type-R. That has just as much "design" and "passion" as any Alfa, but they have NO reliability problems. So what the hell are you talking about?
I've driven Corollas in the past. Hard and noisy suspensions. Nothing impressive. Maybe they've improved their comfort (they probably have) but I skip most Toyota car reviews because those cars don't interest me. Look, the Corolla is good for the non-car guy who wants something reliable to get them from A to B with minimal costs. They don't care about the drive, they don't care about looks. They only care about costs for the most part. That's fine. I prefer a bit of styling excitement. Alfa Romeo and Fiat, Citroen etc. make cars that are stylish and visually exciting and also fun to drive in their own way. Part of what makes them fun is their cool styling. It adds a smile to your face. And they've got some peppy engines to. That's my direction. I like a blend of styling and dependability and these cars are reliable enough. I can put up with a few hiccups along the way to.
I can't relate to the Integra or any other Japanese performance car because they aren't very popular here. There's no large tuning community here that worships the performance cars from Honda, Nissan etc. Every performance car the Japanese have tried to sell here has failed: the Supra, the NSX, the Silvia, the 3000GT, the RX-7 etc. All sales flops, basically.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 08:27:59 AMMy mom's Lexus had a transmission failure and my dad's Infiniti didn't start one day. Statistically, someone is gonna get a dud. But when MOST people have the SAME problems with a certain car, it's UNRELIABLE. As much as you hate CR, there is validity and truth in their measurements, and for most people things like reliability are important. What good are passion or whatever when you don't know if your car will get you to work every day + safely?
If a car develops a certain similar problem over and over again, it must definitely be due to a DESIGN FLAW of a certain component. Fix the design flaw and the problem should go away.
Reliability is important to me, but I can make sacrifices for the sake of enjoying my cars design, drive etc. If I know that Alfa Romeo improved their quality and reliability, which they have, then I'll gladly take my chances with a gorgeous and sleek 159 Sportwagon instead of the fat and pig-like and ugly Toyota Avensis for example - which leaves me cold. No design passion went into that thing. It's an appliance (for the lack of a better word). It's the right car for the guy who doesn't care about cars and needs good value and cheap ownership costs.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 08:27:59 AMAnd 1000 HP Supras do last as every day cars... hell a 500 HP Supra on stock internals will last because they are crazy overbuilt. Plus it's not like people are flooring a 1000 HP car everywhere they go. So assuming mostly normal driving, why would an engine built to put down 1000HP blow up if it mainly doesn't see more than 200-300HP of load?
I cannot believe this. High performance engines will never be as reliable compared to a "normal engine" with a normal output (aka no insane horsepower/liter output). Why do you think those old Mercedes' diesels lasted so long? 55-hp out a 2.0 engine = no stress on the engine components - literally.
Here Subaru Impreza WRX STis and Mitsubishi Lancer EVOs aren't known for their engine reliability and hence their piss poor resale value (also because of high tax and insurance rates etc.). In fact every most used car reviews here will tell buyers to stay away from these
hochgez?chtet (highly tuned) engines because of their shaky long-term reliability.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 08:27:59 AMThe bottom line is, you have a wholly emotional irrational beef w/Japanese cars (most specifically Toyota). Get the fuck over it.
I have no beef with Japanese cars. They're good cars. But they're not perfect. No car is.
My opinion about Toyota is that they're overrated. Overrated to the point where anything they produce is deemed "unbreakable bla bla bla". People seem to think the Japanese are the only race on this planet capable of producing reliable machinery.
In North Africa and the Middle East the most popular old school European taxis are from Mercedes and Peugeot. They're appreciated because of their reliability and durability and ease of maintenance. Nobody talks about this. It's always "European cars suck in North Africa where the Toyota Hilux rules" bla bla bla... People who know shit, basically.
Hell, some of those older Fiats are also known for their reliability and durability in Europe (and Eastern Europe). The most famous are the Fiat 124 (which became the Lada 1200/Riva) and the Polski Fiat 125. These cars handled the crap roads and weather conditions in Eastern Europe quite well and even today are still cherished for their simplicity and reliability. So Fiat sold a bunch of rust buckets in the US in the '80s and then everyone
assumes that Fiat has
always made unreliable and poor quality cars. Most of the Fiats produced in the late 1970s and 1980s used cheap quality SOVIET STEEL that was supplied to them for their assistance in setting up the Soviet car industry with Lada etc.
Quote from: MrH on September 22, 2011, 01:18:57 PM
Wimmer, you need to seriously work on some European cars, then Japanese cars. It'll become pretty clear why, for the most part, Japanese cars are more reliable.
Tell me why.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 01:59:32 PM
Working on one's own car is for idiots! Better to pay ?200/hr for an oil change and ensure proper maintenance procedure :praise:
If you're concerned about costs, then a luxury car isn't for you.
I find it funny how people always bitch about costs at the dealerships, yet they drive the most fuel inefficient gas guzzlers on the market that require three fill-ups (I am exaggerating here) a week. As if that doesn't put a dent into their wallet. After all, it COSTS to fill that car up.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 22, 2011, 07:58:14 PM
Tell me why.
Okay, simply from my limited personal experience, my largely German Designed Focus is much harder to work on in comparison to my American designed Neon (which in itself was not the pinnacle of engineering prowess, in fact it's near the back of the pack)
Another illustration: Before I bought my Neon and Focus, I considered the VW Jetta III and IV, respectively. Nearly all of them suffered from:
Prematurely dead waterpumps (2.0L)
Sticky lifters (VR6)
Transmission failures, most notably losing 2nd or Reverse (Manual models, but Automatics seem to like losing 3rd or 4th)
Dodgy electrics in general
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 22, 2011, 08:00:30 PM
If you're concerned about costs, then a luxury car isn't for you.
I find it funny how people always bitch about costs at the dealerships, yet they drive the most fuel inefficient gas guzzlers on the market that require three fill-ups (I am exaggerating here) a week. As if that doesn't put a dent into their wallet. After all, it COSTS to fill that car up.
Fuel costs and repair costs aren't in the same realm of comparison.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 22, 2011, 08:00:30 PM
If you're concerned about costs, then a luxury car isn't for you.
I find it funny how people always bitch about costs at the dealerships, yet they drive the most fuel inefficient gas guzzlers on the market that require three fill-ups (I am exaggerating here) a week. As if that doesn't put a dent into their wallet. After all, it COSTS to fill that car up.
The presumable payoff to having a fuel-inefficient car is having an engine with ample power (not that I'd expect you to understand that, though). Whereas, what is the payoff to having to pay twice as much to service an Alfa or even a BMW, compared to servicing a Lexus?
Bah, it's like talking to a brick wall.
Wim, believe what you want to believe. But please stop with the corny ass stupid jokes. I'm not even gonna bother with the rest, I've already said my piece 100 times.
Quote from: 2o6 on September 22, 2011, 08:14:01 PM
Okay, simply from my limited personal experience, my largely German Designed Focus is much harder to work on in comparison to my American designed Neon (which in itself was not the pinnacle of engineering prowess, in fact it's near the back of the pack)
Another illustration: Before I bought my Neon and Focus, I considered the VW Jetta III and IV, respectively. Nearly all of them suffered from:
Prematurely dead waterpumps (2.0L)
Sticky lifters (VR6)
Transmission failures, most notably losing 2nd or Reverse (Manual models, but Automatics seem to like losing 3rd or 4th)
Dodgy electrics in general
What a POS! :lol:
Quote from: 2o6 on September 22, 2011, 08:14:01 PMFuel costs and repair costs aren't in the same realm of comparison.
No they are not. But with the amount of times someone has to gas up their gas-guzzling luxury car, the financial sum this equates to will be more than the cost of a spare part. People argue about the price of things all the time, yet have no issues when dumping $60 worth of gas into their car three times a week (making up the fill times here).
Quote from: Vinsanity on September 22, 2011, 08:36:12 PM
The presumable payoff to having a fuel-inefficient car is having an engine with ample power (not that I'd expect you to understand that, though).
Power is subjective. I find the power of the 118i to be decent for example. Everyone else here would claim their Honda Lawnmower is faster to 60 mph than this underpowered and overpriced BMW. :devil:
Still, they're paying a lot of money for fill-ups. Depending on how often and how aggressive they drive, those are going to be a lot of expensive fuel costs.
And when they need a broken cup holder fixed for $ 15 they throw a tantrum. Now that I don't get.
Quote from: Vinsanity on September 22, 2011, 08:36:12 PMWhereas, what is the payoff to having to pay twice as much to service an Alfa or even a BMW, compared to servicing a Lexus?
Why do people buy Alfas and BMWs over Lexus in Europe for example?
Aside from the many weaknesses Lexus has here and the lack of brand prestige and cache, BMW and Alfa Romeo have far more emotional appeal through their distinctive design and, you guessed it, HISTORY & HERITAGE. BMW and Alfa make cars people aspire to own. They might not be as 100% reliable as an overrated Lexus, but they give their customers something in return (emotional appeal, satisfaction etc.).
A typical non-car enthusiast may gain satisfaction from buying a Lexus. It's soooooooo reliable. That equates to satisfaction.
Other people, who are a bit more emotional about cars, derive satisfaction from other aspects of the car or brand such as styling, their history and what that makes the car for them etc.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2011, 09:12:18 PM
Bah, it's like talking to a brick wall.
Wim, believe what you want to believe. But please stop with the corny ass stupid jokes. I'm not even gonna bother with the rest, I've already said my piece 100 times.
Brick walls don't talk back and have opinions. :devil:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 23, 2011, 03:56:32 AM
No they are not. But with the amount of times someone has to gas up their gas-guzzling luxury car, the financial sum this equates to will be more than the cost of a spare part. People argue about the price of things all the time, yet have no issues when dumping $60 worth of gas into their car three times a week (making up the fill times here).
More fallacies. If your car is broken + in the shop a lot, the costs of parts,
labor, rental cars and lost time far exceeds that of added gas. The difference in fuel costs between a big SUV & an economy car is ~$1000-1500 a year... you can easily spend that on one repair; especially for the kind of stuff EVO says breaks on Alfas.
Everything you've said in here has kind of been nonsense... you
hate Toyotas because you feel like the Japanese "race" gets unfair praise :wtf: you throw ALL practical considerations out the window for H&H :wtf: you're mindlessly xenophobic.... and on top of all that in any thread even remotely related you have to throw in your irrational two cents in in the most obnoxious + intrusive way. Cmon now. How many times
a day do you post a stupid CR joke? We stopped laughing a good 5 years ago
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 23, 2011, 05:59:35 AM
More fallacies. If your car is broken + in the shop a lot, the costs of parts, labor, rental cars and lost time far exceeds that of added gas. The difference in fuel costs between a big SUV & an economy car is ~$1000-1500 a year... you can easily spend that on one repair; especially for the kind of stuff EVO says breaks on Alfas.
Ok. Alfas suck then. Buy a Toyota and live the dream. :ohyeah:
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 23, 2011, 05:59:35 AMEverything you've said in here has kind of been nonsense... you hate Toyotas because you feel like the Japanese "race" gets unfair praise :wtf:
I don't hate Toyotas. I think they're overrated. Big time.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 23, 2011, 05:59:35 AMyou throw ALL practical considerations out the window for H&H :wtf:
Wrong. Dependability is important to me, but I can live with the occasional failure etc. because there are more things to enjoying a car than reliability.
And H&H gives a car brand something appealing to it. Maybe you should visit a museum like the Porsche Museum or Benz Museum some time. It might spark some emotions in you. Try getting those emotions from the world famous Lexus museum. Wait. What Lexus museum?
I'm going to scan some used car buyer guides here for you on Japanese cars. There's for example a Euro Honda Civic with 67,000 km that's already falling apart, suffering premature rust, electric issues etc. 67,000 km? That's nothing.
There's a Toyota Yaris in it that has some build quality issues. Apparently these are common for them in Europe. You know, in recent years Toyota kept getting negative consumer feedback here. Build quality and reliability has supposedly not been as good as it was in the past.
All cars have problems. There's no such thing as a perfectly reliable car. I'm just sick of all this BS about how European cars are so unreliable bla bla bla and ANY Japanese car is automatically super duper reliable. Last I checked, Toyota and Honda are the brands with that reputation whereas Nissan and Mazda are so-so and the other Japanese brands are basically average or below average.
I'd block Wimmer, but I just can't get myself to do it. Kind of like watching someone run head first into a brick wall, you can't not watch.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 23, 2011, 02:17:14 PM
All cars have problems. There's no such thing as a perfectly reliable car. I'm just sick of all this BS about how European cars are so unreliable bla bla bla and ANY Japanese car is automatically super duper reliable. Last I checked, Toyota and Honda are the brands with that reputation whereas Nissan and Mazda are so-so and the other Japanese brands are basically average or below average.
Here's the thing. Well a couple of things.
One, nobody said anything was automatic. Toyota and Honda have both had some problematic cars. The W124, W126 and all the Benzes of that era are bulletproof. Same with Beemers. Any car that is popular in 3rd world countries = solid, and there was a time when German manufacturers made cars fit for that level of duty.
But at the end of the day, you are backing up your views with individual examples and "gut feelings". You essentially say, 'hey here is a Civic in bad shape. All Civics are unreliable'. :wtf:
When we in the US say cars are unreliable, there's a litany of real world evidence to back it up as more than a fluke. After about 8 years, a 3, 5 and 7 series all cost the same. Why? Because the more expensive the car was to start, the more problems it will have down the line. You hate CR, probably only because they make the Fatherland look bad. But German brands really took a dip in quality in the 90s, at least here, and their poor ratings in CR reflect that. You can argue all you want, call CR invalid, go to a junkyard and find a crashed Civic to use as an example of a typical one, but at the end of the day
you're wrong. The sooner you get over it and stop trolling the forums the better off we will all be here.
On the one hand Wims is right that reliability is both relative and not the most important thing to enthusiasts like us. On the other, it's pretty hard to argue with CR and their (as far as I know) empirical data.
I think the most important thing, though, is that we're all sick and fucking tired of Wims' repetitive and pointless trolling against CR and for H&H.
There is such thing as a perfectly reliable car:
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/320342_10150280108310756_730385755_8217581_615100837_n.jpg)
There's a REASON we pleaded for it not to be totaled. It's a 100% reliable vehicle that has never once failed us. It has never failed to start. It has never failed to get us somewhere. It has never failed us in any way. We've had ONE bulb burn out. One. We never had a warranty claim.
What's wrong with it being totalled? You get a nice check, and you can just buy the wreck back. :huh:
Quote from: CJ on September 23, 2011, 03:31:51 PM
There is such thing as a perfectly reliable car:
Sure, many of them. There's no such thing as a perfectly reliable model of car, though.
Quote from: Laconian on September 23, 2011, 03:36:14 PM
What's wrong with it being totalled? You get a nice check, and you can just buy the wreck back. :huh:
Then the car is stuck with a salvage/rebuilt title. No big deal if you plan to drive it until it dies but, if you ever want to sell or trade it, most private buyers and dealers will refuse to touch it with a bargepole.
With a car that old, it's practically worthless after the wreck anyways
Quote from: Laconian on September 24, 2011, 12:44:51 AM
With a car that old, it's practically worthless after the wreck anyways
Yea that thing is well past the event horizon of the depreciation curve
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 23, 2011, 03:12:28 PM
But at the end of the day, you are backing up your views with individual examples and "gut feelings". You essentially say, 'hey here is a Civic in bad shape. All Civics are unreliable'. :wtf:
Wrong.
I am pointing out that Civic is a car like any other. It's not perfect, it has problems.
There are people who have problem-free Japanese, Korean, German, French, Italian, RUSSIAN etc. cars and there are people who have problematic cars from those same countries. What simply annoys me is this bullshit about how a car from Europe is automatically considered "unreliable" compared to "anything" out of Japan.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 24, 2011, 08:48:57 AM
Wrong.
I am pointing out that Civic is a car like any other. It's not perfect, it has problems.
There are people who have problem-free Japanese, Korean, German, French, Italian, RUSSIAN etc. cars and there are people who have problematic cars from those same countries. What simply annoys me is this bullshit about how a car from Europe is automatically considered "unreliable" compared to "anything" out of Japan.
No, you're still wrong. Everything is based on the track record of a company's history of making (un)reliable cars. If a new car comes out, that car's reliability will be predicted by its predecessors. Considering many European makes have had less than stellar reliability while Asian makes have had much better track records in that regard, it's not a stretch to say that a new European car will be less reliable than a new Asian car.
It's like insurance. Sure there are teenagers who are safe drivers, and unsafe adult drivers, but they are exceptions to the norm. Insurance companies will still charge way more for insuring the teenager than the adult, just by going off of the known track record of that age group (holding all else equal, not considering accidents or tickets or anything).
Quote from: Rupert on September 23, 2011, 03:20:31 PM
On the one hand Wims is right that reliability is both relative and not the most important thing to enthusiasts like us. On the other, it's pretty hard to argue with CR and their (as far as I know) empirical data.
I think the most important thing, though, is that we're all sick and fucking tired of Wims' repetitive and pointless trolling against CR and for H&H.
I don't know, I'd never put up with a car that wasn't reliable. Perhaps a "toy" car that I only took out once or twice a month. But not a car I used every day.
That's why I used a Miata for so long. It worked every time and was fun too.
As for Alfa, just like the Fiat 500 I don't get the love for them. Perhaps they are all that but I can't see it. And I don't think most of them look good either. I'd never take a chance on one to find out.
Quote from: Onslaught on September 24, 2011, 03:00:28 PM
I don't know, I'd never put up with a car that wasn't reliable. Perhaps a "toy" car that I only took out once or twice a month. But not a car I used every day.
That's why I used a Miata for so long. It worked every time and was fun too.
As for Alfa, just like the Fiat 500 I don't get the love for them. Perhaps they are all that but I can't see it. And I don't think most of them look good either. I'd never take a chance on one to find out.
I think almost any new car is going to be plenty reliable. I don't think anyone sells a horrendously unreliable car anymore. :huh:
Quote from: Rupert on September 24, 2011, 03:20:43 PM
I think almost any new car is going to be plenty reliable. I don't think anyone sells a horrendously unreliable car anymore. :huh:
I'm not sure. Perhaps it's more reliable then cars from 10-20 years ago. But it could be far less reliable then other modern day cars. And that makes it unreliable in the modern world.
Most cars won't spill oil all over the place and not run when you need it. But they can have those little things that drive you nuts happen.
I don't know if Alfa's are that way or not. And I won't go by what a tv show says. But I'd have to see how they do over say 10 years before I'd give them my money.
Hey, I drive a car that's a big POS that won't start or last 100K if you take everything on the internet as the truth. So who am I to say?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 24, 2011, 08:48:57 AM
Wrong.
I am pointing out that Civic is a car like any other. It's not perfect, it has problems.
There are people who have problem-free Japanese, Korean, German, French, Italian, RUSSIAN etc. cars and there are people who have problematic cars from those same countries. What simply annoys me is this bullshit about how a car from Europe is automatically considered "unreliable" compared to "anything" out of Japan.
Again, some makes and models consistently have more problems than others. If you have 100 Honda owners and 100 Alfa owners, more Alfa owners would have problems. Some might have none, but more Honda owners would have none. It's a very, very, very simple concept. Nobody said ALL European cars will have problems. But a higher percentage of them do than the likes of Honda/Toyota. There are tons of stats to back this up. Why is this so hard for you to understand?
Quote from: Onslaught on September 24, 2011, 07:12:38 PM
I'm not sure. Perhaps it's more reliable then cars from 10-20 years ago. But it could be far less reliable then other modern day cars. And that makes it unreliable in the modern world.
Most cars won't spill oil all over the place and not run when you need it. But they can have those little things that drive you nuts happen.
I don't know if Alfa's are that way or not. And I won't go by what a tv show says. But I'd have to see how they do over say 10 years before I'd give them my money.
Hey, I drive a car that's a big POS that won't start or last 100K if you take everything on the internet as the truth. So who am I to say?
:lol:
According to The Intenets, my car is either supposed to be totally bombproof through 200 kmiles, or super unreliable and a huge money pit no matter the mileage.
Thread revival time.
Alfa's now dozen-year-old quest to once again cross the Atlantic is in a state of shambles.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/09/alfa-romeo-u-s-launch-in-shambles/#more-458886
No Alfa MiTo for North America. Oh, and forget the Giulietta, too, because it's US launch has been cancelled. Looks like the only Alfa confirmed for America is the 4C.
Yeah, that will pack them into the showrooms! :facepalm:
Quote from: Madman on September 05, 2012, 01:06:03 PM
Thread revival time.
Alfa's now dozen-year-old quest to once again cross the Atlantic is in a state of shambles.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/09/alfa-romeo-u-s-launch-in-shambles/#more-458886
This entire thing is so silly. I can see why there were delays 12 years ago, but the U.S. market in 2012 is eating Alfa type cars up like Cheerios. Despite the economy, if ANY of these brands want to return to the US market, this is pretty much the time to do it.
Why would Alfa want to bring over the stylish Giulietta when there's the bland Dart? Same car, just much, much, much duller-looking.
The Dart looks great.
Quote from: CJ on September 06, 2012, 05:54:39 PM
The Dart looks great.
I think it looks dull.
But still, if the Dart exists in the US then there is no need for the Alfa Romeo version to be brought over. The Giulietta will probably sell in extremely small numbers anyway just like the Fiat 500 or MINI Cooper. Stylish lifestyle cars aren't popular yet in America AFAIK. Economy cars need to look boring and dull, then they'll sell tot he un-enthusiasts masses. <--- My impression. ;)
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 06, 2012, 07:10:33 PM
I think it looks dull.
But still, if the Dart exists in the US then there is no need for the Alfa Romeo version to be brought over. The Giulietta will probably sell in extremely small numbers anyway just like the Fiat 500 or MINI Cooper. Stylish lifestyle cars aren't popular yet in America AFAIK. Economy cars need to look boring and dull, then they'll sell tot he un-enthusiasts masses. <--- My impression. ;)
500 and mini sells in similar proportion here as it does elsewhere. 500 and Mini are niche products, as well as to a lesser extent Guiletta.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 06, 2012, 07:10:33 PM
I think it looks dull.
But still, if the Dart exists in the US then there is no need for the Alfa Romeo version to be brought over. The Giulietta will probably sell in extremely small numbers anyway just like the Fiat 500 or MINI Cooper. Stylish lifestyle cars aren't popular yet in America AFAIK. Economy cars need to look boring and dull, then they'll sell tot he un-enthusiasts masses. <--- My impression. ;)
Small cars need style. Americans are all about image. Manufacturers keep failing with small cars because they make them miserable penalty boxes. Its only recently with cars like the Honda Fit + Ford Fiesta that feel premium (as well as sky high gas prices) that they've begun to catch on.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 06, 2012, 08:51:32 PM
Small cars need style. Americans are all about image. Manufacturers keep failing with small cars because they make them miserable penalty boxes. Its only recently with cars like the Honda Fit + Ford Fiesta that feel premium (as well as sky high gas prices) that they've begun to catch on.
Europe is far more image conscious; our models are usually dumbed down compared to other markets.
Quote from: 2o6 on September 06, 2012, 09:05:50 PM
Europe is far more image conscious; our models are usually dumbed down compared to other markets.
Wrong. We're far, far more image-conscious. BMW and MB, for example, are scared to death to even bring their lower end trims here because they think it will make the image of the brand cheaper and more accessible.
Our models are dumbed down because vehicles that are considered "entry level" cars for young people here are considered a mid-level vehicle elsewhere. See: Jetta. Hisorically, people have been unwilling to pay for loaded and/or pricier mainstream small vehicles here so they were dumbed down in order to make them cheaper. The fact that this is changing and Americans are buying more higher-end small vehicles in both the mainstream and luxury segments is sort of the entire crux of this argument.
Quote from: TurboDan on September 06, 2012, 09:15:51 PM
Wrong. We're far, far more image-conscious. BMW and MB, for example, are scared to death to even bring their lower end trims here because they think it will make the image of the brand cheaper and more accessible.
I don't think so; the fact that BMW and MB's 3-series and C-classes are considered legitimate competitors to Mondeo, Avensis, Insignia and friends despite being worse for that specific purpose in almost every way speaks volumes. The fact that people will pay price premiums for the cheapest Benz or BMW versus a typical midsizer says that they value the badge more than anything.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 06, 2012, 07:10:33 PM
I think it looks dull.
Dull? I know you Euros like ugly cars, but good looking /= dull.
Quote from: 2o6 on September 06, 2012, 07:24:53 PM
500 and mini sells in similar proportion here as it does elsewhere. 500 and Mini are niche products, as well as to a lesser extent Guiletta.
Exactly. Niche product.
Niche product = low sales.
Quote from: SVT666 on September 07, 2012, 12:18:44 AM
Dull? I know you Euros like ugly cars, but good looking /= dull.
No offense, but the new Dodge Dart doesn't look good in my eyes compared to the Alfa it is based on. ;)
Quote from: SVT666 on September 07, 2012, 12:18:44 AM
Dull? I know you Euros like ugly cars, but good looking /= dull.
I have to agree with Wimmer, I think the design looks five years old in person.
Quote from: 2o6 on September 07, 2012, 05:56:30 AM
I have to agree with Wimmer, I think the design looks five years old in person.
Agreed. The Dart looks dated. Had this car been introduced back in 2006 or so as a real Neon replacement, it would have been the best car in it's class. But today, the Dart just looks stale. Hard to believe it's based on the gorgeous Alfa Giulietta. They took a silk purse and turned it into a sow's ear!
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 07, 2012, 03:32:44 AM
No offense, but the new Dodge Dart doesn't look good in my eyes compared to the Alfa it is based on. ;)
Compared to what it's based on it's hideous. The Alfa is hot. But the Dart is still a good looking car and pictures really do not do it justice.
Quote from: SVT666 on September 07, 2012, 10:15:25 AM
Compared to what it's based on it's hideous. The Alfa is hot. But the Dart is still a good looking car and pictures really do not do it justice.
I'm not saying the Dart is ugly. It looks pretty "unique" for a compact car sold in the US (not like a "penalty box") but I still don't find it that interesting in terms of design compared to the Alfa it's based on.
Quote from: SVT666 on September 07, 2012, 10:15:25 AM
Compared to what it's based on it's hideous. The Alfa is hot. But the Dart is still a good looking car and pictures really do not do it justice.
The proportions suck and the interior is ugly.
Quote from: 2o6 on September 07, 2012, 09:35:40 PM
The proportions suck and the interior is ugly.
That's rich coming from you.
Quote from: 2o6 on September 07, 2012, 10:41:29 PM
Cop out.
No it's not. How can you possibly criticize something for poor proportions and an ugly interior when all you ever design is exactly that? Not to mention the multitude of oddly proportioned ugly ass Chinese shit that you post on here and call "cute". The Dart's proportions are fine. The interior is fine.
Quote from: SVT666 on September 07, 2012, 10:45:58 PM
No it's not. How can you possibly criticize something for poor proportions and an ugly interior when all you ever design is exactly that? Not to mention the multitude of oddly proportioned ugly ass Chinese shit that you post on here and call "cute". The Dart's proportions are fine. The interior is fine.
Why do you get so personally offended when someone doesn't agree with you?
It shares the Crap proportions that all Fiat c segments have; super log front overhang too high rear end. It looks old, and the interior looks bad.
They both have excessively long front overhangs
(http://fancytuning.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/novitec-alfa-romeo-giulietta-complete-kit-19-660x440.jpg)
(http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/autopia/2012/01/2013-Dodge-Dart-red-660x371.jpg)
Its worse on the Delta and Bravo.
I think the Delta and Bravo are styled better, though. Especially Bravo; from some angles the proportions actually work.
I like the Dart a lot. I've driven two now, an they're really quite good. Engine is a little pokey, but once the turbo spools up, it's got great power.
Alfas do have really bad overhang, so do Peugeots and big Renaults...
And Americans are way more image conscious, I don't think any American would be caught dead in a Twingo... we buy the most of cars that make no sense (big sedans, small SUVs and pickup trucks) and run from cars that make sense (wagons, hatchbacks, MPVs). Americans are image conscious to a fault.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 10, 2012, 09:35:11 AM
Alfas do have really bad overhang, so do Peugeots and big Renaults...
And Americans are way more image conscious, I don't think any American would be caught dead in a Twingo... we buy the most of cars that make no sense (big sedans, small SUVs and pickup trucks) and run from cars that make sense (wagons, hatchbacks, MPVs). Americans are image conscious to a fault.
I don't think so. Look at the Brits. Look at Wimmer! Everything's about history and heritage and if something isn't a hundred years old, it's not worth buying.
They may not have the same hang-ups over vehicle types, but it's image consciousness, just in a different way.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 10, 2012, 09:35:11 AM
And Americans are way more image conscious
No fucking way.
Wimmer's sozialneid bullshit is all the evidence I need.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 10, 2012, 09:35:11 AM
And Americans are way more image conscious, I don't think any American would be caught dead in a Twingo... we buy the most of cars that make no sense (big sedans, small SUVs and pickup trucks) and run from cars that make sense (wagons, hatchbacks, MPVs). Americans are image conscious to a fault.
Big sedans make more sense than wagons and hatchbacks for people who care more about passenger space and comfort than cargo space. You're developing a tendency to project your personal beliefs onto other people's decisions, here, Sport :nono:
Quote from: CALL_911 on September 10, 2012, 06:32:19 PM
No fucking way.
Wimmer's sozialneid bullshit is all the evidence I need.
:hesaid:
Quote from: CALL_911 on September 10, 2012, 06:32:19 PM
Wimmer's sozialneid bullshit is all the evidence I need.
:facepalm:
It exists. It's not bullshit.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 11, 2012, 03:27:15 AM
:facepalm:
It exists. It's not bullshit.
You misunderstood. The fact that it exists is bullshit, he's not saying that it doesn't exist.
Junk
Most Alfa's are ugly as hell. And Alfa's emblem is hideous.
Fuck them.
So, MAYBE we'll the 4C and a yet-to-be-named crossover someday. Maybe.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/09/09/alfa-romeos-u-s-rebirth-delayed-again/
Quote from: Onslaught on September 11, 2012, 08:58:46 PM
Most Alfa's are ugly as hell. And Alfa's emblem is hideous.
Fuck them.
That is kind of silly to say, considering how well revered their styling is by most in Europe (and here too). The emblem is also more legit than most.
Don't pay attention to the news, they don't know sh*t about what is planned for this brand.
Quote from: LonghornTX on September 11, 2012, 11:00:49 PM
That is kind of silly to say, considering how well revered their styling is by most in Europe (and here too). The emblem is also more legit than most.
Don't pay attention to the news, they don't know sh*t about what is planned for this brand.
I just don't get the love. Perhaps they do have something to them as far as driving. I can't say because I've never been in one. But to look at? Only a very few have done anything for me and most of the ones people drool over just look darn ugly to me.
I have to say the Alfa love is something I'll never understand.
Quote from: Onslaught on September 12, 2012, 05:01:01 AM
I just don't get the love. Perhaps they do have something to them as far as driving. I can't say because I've never been in one. But to look at? Only a very few have done anything for me and most of the ones people drool over just look darn ugly to me.
I have to say the Alfa love is something I'll never understand.
Alfa Romeo has built more beautiful cars than almost any other manufacturer (and certainly better than Mazda!). Also, they have one of the best logos in the business, imo.
Quote from: Onslaught on September 12, 2012, 05:01:01 AM
I just don't get the love. Perhaps they do have something to them as far as driving. I can't say because I've never been in one. But to look at? Only a very few have done anything for me and most of the ones people drool over just look darn ugly to me.
I have to say the Alfa love is something I'll never understand.
I love them. You and 2o6 are the only ones who don't. Hmm...
Quote from: Raza link=topic=24815.msg1777622#msg1777622 date=1347456881
I love them. You and 2o6 are the only ones who don't. Hmm...
Since when do I not like Alfa Romeos?
The only Alfa I don't like is the Giuletta, and I'm lukewarm on the MiTo. Otherwise, the 159, 147 and others are sexy
Quote from: 2o6 on September 12, 2012, 08:14:34 AM
Since when do I not like Alfa Romeos?
The only Alfa I don't like is the Giuletta, and I'm lukewarm on the MiTo. Otherwise, the 159, 147 and others are sexy
Hmm.
Quote from: Raza on September 11, 2012, 06:41:03 AM
You misunderstood. The fact that it exists is bullshit, he's not saying that it doesn't exist.
My bad. Sorry.
Quote from: Onslaught on September 12, 2012, 05:01:01 AM
I have to say the Alfa love is something I'll never understand.
It's like the love those Mazda RX guys who love their rotary engines and who also put up with their frequent maintenance needs (higher oil consumption etc.).
The same is true for brands like Alfa Romeo or Citroen. They just manage to captivate their (most) owners. Alfa Romeo has always been an emotional and technologically innovative brand. Before going FWD they offered more advanced and - some say - better balanced driving layouts than even BMW (Many past RWD Alfa Romeos had a longitudinal front engine + transaxle transmission layout).
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 12, 2012, 08:33:09 AM
It's like the love those Mazda RX guys who love their rotary engines and who also put up with their frequent maintenance needs (higher oil consumption etc.).
And terrible gas mileage, the whole no-short-trips-or-the-engine-may-never-start-again thing, the low torque, and lack of reliability.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=24815.msg1777647#msg1777647 date=1347461650
And terrible gas mileage, the whole no-short-trips-or-the-engine-may-never-start-again thing, the low torque, and lack of reliability.
I'm not to informed regarding Mazda rotary engines.
I just hear from many NSU Ro-80 owners that their motors are very reliable now and can be used as daily drivers because modern high-quality seals mean the engine lasts longer and needs less overhauling. Poor fuel economy and high oil consumption remain, though, and are inherent to the rotary engine.
Quote from: mzziaz on September 12, 2012, 05:23:52 AM
Alfa Romeo has built more beautiful cars than almost any other manufacturer (and certainly better than Mazda!). Also, they have one of the best logos in the business, imo.
I never said Mazda made great looking cars. They just make better built cars then Alfa. Sorry, they do nothing for me. A few look great, but most are ugly.
I just wish they drove as good as they look.
(http://topwalls.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/AlfaRomeo8cCompetizione.jpg)
(http://www.automotorblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Alfa-Romeo-8C-Spider-by-Novitec-2.jpg)
(http://cardriven.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/New-Alfa-Romeo-Giulietta.jpg)
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_FoXyvaPSnVk/SqiA5YR6LsI/AAAAAAACBH8/lYyCuqke8Cg/s800/Alfa-MiTo-QV-0.jpg)
Quote from: SVT666 on September 12, 2012, 09:40:27 AM
I just wish they drove as good as they look.
Then you need to get this. The Alfa 75. The last RWD Alfa Romeo.
(http://motoburg.com/images/alfa-romeo-75-03.jpg)
(http://alfaclub.de/Register/alfa75/fotos/75%20Register-Startbildschirm-tt.jpg)
(http://www.carsablanca.de/files/medias/filename/081015%20kuppi%201_8697_big.jpg)
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 12, 2012, 08:33:09 AM
It's like the love those Mazda RX guys who love their rotary engines and who also put up with their frequent maintenance needs (higher oil consumption etc.).
The same is true for brands like Alfa Romeo or Citroen. They just manage to captivate their (most) owners. Alfa Romeo has always been an emotional and technologically innovative brand. Before going FWD they offered more advanced and - some say - better balanced driving layouts than even BMW (Many past RWD Alfa Romeos had a longitudinal front engine + transaxle transmission layout).
I have no doubt there's a reason people love them so much. But for many of them it's not because of how they look.
To me the 8C is the only one out of those that's good looking. And I'm not in love with it's grille to tell you the truth.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 12, 2012, 09:48:12 AM
Then you need to get this. The Alfa 75. The last RWD Alfa Romeo.
(http://motoburg.com/images/alfa-romeo-75-03.jpg)
That's a perfect example of an ugly car.
Yea, if I wanted a shoe box with wheels I'd buy a Volvo.
Quote from: Onslaught on September 12, 2012, 09:51:48 AM
To me the 8C is the only one out of those that's good looking. And I'm not in love with it's grille to tell you the truth.
I don't get the love for their sedans. I really don't. They are not pretty cars at all.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SayTRPDIAA0/TqcU5ZL5-eI/AAAAAAAACQ0/CIb4FVl_A9k/s1600/Alfa-Romeo-159+%25282%2529.jpg)
BUT, I will change my mind if this is really what the next Alfa sedan is going to look like:
(http://carreleasedates.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/2012-Alfa-Romeo-Giulia.jpg)
I consider Alfa to be the leader in looks among passenger cars....
The Brera is sublime too.
Quote from: SVT666 on September 12, 2012, 10:11:09 AM
I don't get the love for their sedans. I really don't. They are not pretty cars at all.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SayTRPDIAA0/TqcU5ZL5-eI/AAAAAAAACQ0/CIb4FVl_A9k/s1600/Alfa-Romeo-159+%25282%2529.jpg)
In person the 159 is a very handsome and seductive car. I think you need to see it in person to really appreciate it. The wagon version is even better. :mrcool:
Quote from: Laconian on September 12, 2012, 10:18:24 AM
I consider Alfa to be the leader in looks among passenger cars....
The Brera is sublime too.
This thing?
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--gnBKNIM6EY/TtoHhlq6jAI/AAAAAAAAAjc/C22u-ZyDPFM/s1600/2009-Alfa-Romeo-Brera-Front-Angle-View-588x441.jpg)
I completely disagree.
Why is this in the luxury section? I don't think of Alfa's when I think of Luxury cars. Unless a really nice tow truck with leather picks one up.
Quote from: SVT666 on September 12, 2012, 10:08:21 AM
That's a perfect example of an ugly car.
I actually like that. It's not beautiful, but it's not ugly.
Definitely ugly.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 12, 2012, 09:48:12 AM
Then you need to get this. The Alfa 75. The last RWD Alfa Romeo.
(http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/544/408/images/2012/8/28/329/005/27268171641.329005140.IM1.MAIN.565x421_A.562x421.jpg)
Here's one in Pennsylvania. Damn, I really want this car! :wub:
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=37221&endYear=2013&modelCode1=MIL&startYear=1981&makeCode1=ALFA&listingType=used&searchRadius=0&listingId=329005140&Log=0
Quote from: Madman on September 12, 2012, 11:36:42 AM
(http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/544/408/images/2012/8/28/329/005/27268171641.329005140.IM1.MAIN.565x421_A.562x421.jpg)
Here's one in Pennsylvania. Damn, I really want this car! :wub:
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=37221&endYear=2013&modelCode1=MIL&startYear=1981&makeCode1=ALFA&listingType=used&searchRadius=0&listingId=329005140&Log=0
That's only an hour and a half from me.
Quote from: Raza on September 12, 2012, 10:45:27 AM
I actually like that. It's not beautiful, but it's not ugly.
I actually like it a lot. I've always liked Alfas, and I've always thought of them as somewhat luxurious cars. If they come to the U.S., I'd be willing to consider one, especially the new roadster they're developing with Mazda. The idea of driving an Italian car intrigues me.
Quote from: TurboDan on September 12, 2012, 03:56:46 PM
I actually like it a lot. I've always liked Alfas, and I've always thought of them as somewhat luxurious cars. If they come to the U.S., I'd be willing to consider one, especially the new roadster they're developing with Mazda. The idea of driving an Italian car intrigues me.
It's intriguing to be in the shop all the time?
Hideous. Stay in Europe!
Quote from: Madman on September 12, 2012, 11:36:42 AM
(http://images.autotrader.com/scaler/544/408/images/2012/8/28/329/005/27268171641.329005140.IM1.MAIN.565x421_A.562x421.jpg)
Here's one in Pennsylvania. Damn, I really want this car! :wub:
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=37221&endYear=2013&modelCode1=MIL&startYear=1981&makeCode1=ALFA&listingType=used&searchRadius=0&listingId=329005140&Log=0
Sweet! :wub:
Quote from: Raza on September 12, 2012, 12:31:31 PM
That's only an hour and a half from me.
The Alfa 75 is still a popular sight at motorsport events due to its RWD + transaxle (therefore weight balance) layout. The QV (performance) versions are quite rare now.
Quote from: SVT666 on September 12, 2012, 04:16:41 PM
It's intriguing to be in the shop all the time?
Eh, it's 2012. How unreliable could they really be? I'd roll the dice if I really wanted one, probably.
Some brands still aren't reliable to this day. Why do you think Jaguar's depreciate so bad? I'd have to see how they held up over time before I spent money on one. I'm not sure I'd trust our European friends on this site because they're too biased about cars made over there.
Quote from: Onslaught on September 13, 2012, 03:33:59 AM
I'm not sure I'd trust our European friends on this site because they're too biased about cars made over there.
Eh, if our cars were problematic and constantly under repair we wouldn't buy them. It's that simple.
Brands like Fiat or Alfa Romeo have made great strides in the last decade in terms of quality.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 13, 2012, 09:52:48 AM
Eh, if our cars were problematic and constantly under repair we wouldn't buy them. It's that simple.
Brands like Fiat or Alfa Romeo have made great strides in the last decade in terms of quality.
You guys also drive way less than us, though.
Quote from: 2o6 on September 13, 2012, 10:07:14 AM
You guys also drive way less than us, though.
But I think we also place more emphasis on maintenance and basic car care. I don't wash my car every month but I do check my tire pressure every two weeks and my oil levels (because I drive a lot and fast).
If anyone is interested, here's that Autobild review of the Alfa Romeo 75. The review is crap because it doesn't really talk about the car but emotions, but the pictures and technical details are worth reading (if you can). :ohyeah:
(http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/513/dsc0137a.th.jpg) (http://img401.imageshack.us/i/dsc0137a.jpg/) (http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/4691/dsc0138je.th.jpg) (http://img59.imageshack.us/i/dsc0138je.jpg/) (http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/6692/dsc0139cg.th.jpg) (http://img717.imageshack.us/i/dsc0139cg.jpg/)
Zombiethread revival alert!!!
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f7/Fiat_Sergio_Marchionne.jpg/200px-Fiat_Sergio_Marchionne.jpg)
Fiat CEO and famed pullover sweater model Sergio Marchionne is now saying the Alfa Romeo 4C sports car will be in American showrooms by the end of the year.
I'll believe it when I see it.
http://jalopnik.com/5977331/bravissimo-the-alfa-romeo-4c-is-reportedly-coming-to-america-by-the-years-end (http://jalopnik.com/5977331/bravissimo-the-alfa-romeo-4c-is-reportedly-coming-to-america-by-the-years-end)
Well, here we are again.
Remember that article from January I posted about how the 4C was going to be in America by the end of the year? Yeah, well, forget that!
Once again, Alfa Romeo's long promised return to North America has been delayed. I'm sure all of you are shocked. :rolleyes:
Unnamed Fiat and Chrysler spokespeople are now saying the 4C will arrive in the "second quarter of 2014".
And they mean it this time. Seriously. No, Really!!! :facepalm:
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/09/25/alfa-romeo-4c-delayed/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2013/09/25/alfa-romeo-4c-delayed/)
When they do finally come here, this is a possible Z4 replacement.
Cant believe they are selling a car with a carbon monocoque for like $60K
How did Alfa beat everyone to the punch?
60k? I thought it was going to be more like 80k.
Quote from: MX793 on September 25, 2013, 11:31:00 AM
60k? I thought it was going to be more like 80k.
I think that is not yet clear. For 60k is would be almost a no brainer. 80K, well there are other intriguing cars at that price.
Quote from: Galaxy on September 25, 2013, 11:56:13 AM
I think that is not yet clear. For 60k is would be almost a no brainer. 80K, well there are other intriguing cars at that price.
M3? Last year's base model 911? F-Type? CLS, 6 series, 5 series? 80K doesn't buy what it used to.
Yea the only difference from 60 to 80K is options... at least for cars relevant to this (i.e. NOT the likes of the CLS etc)
Oh, good, now I have another few months to save up $80k.
Quote from: Raza on September 25, 2013, 01:03:23 PM
M3? Last year's base model 911? F-Type? CLS, 6 series, 5 series? 80K doesn't buy what it used to.
A $60K car on a lease wouldn't be so bad price wise. I wouldn't buy a 4C new, though, since their value will probably sink like a stone pretty quickly, at least until they establish themselves.
At $80K, I'd absolutely take an F-Type over this.
Read C&D's first drive report for the 4C. Sounds fantastic. Of course, when the car comes stateside it will weigh ~500 lbs more than the Euro version (closer to 2700 lbs) and who knows how much more expensive it will be.
Quote from: MX793 on October 03, 2013, 07:06:35 PM
Read C&D's first drive report for the 4C. Sounds fantastic. Of course, when the car comes stateside it will weigh ~500 lbs more than the Euro version (closer to 2700 lbs) and who knows how much more expensive it will be.
They might as make it the new Chrysler Crossfire at that point. What is this butchery
Maybe Fiat shouldn't bring the Panda over. It would be a miserable car if it didn't weigh 1900lbs
Dear lord, what would account for that weight gain? Seeing as that Alfa is an upmarket brand, I can't imagine the base model gets away with stripper shenanigans like deleted airbags.
Quote from: Laconian on October 03, 2013, 07:19:26 PM
Dear lord, what would account for that weight gain? Seeing as that Alfa is an upmarket brand, I can't imagine the base model gets away with stripper shenanigans like deleted airbags.
The Euro model is pretty well stripped. No A/C, no power seats, minimal airbags. The added pounds are due to side airbags, other equipment necessary to make it US legal, and apparently US models will have as standard equipment items that are optional on the Euro models (like A/C and power seats).
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on October 03, 2013, 07:16:19 PM
They might as make it the new Chrysler Crossfire at that point. What is this butchery
Maybe Fiat shouldn't bring the Panda over. It would be a miserable car if it didn't weigh 1900lbs
New Panda is about 2200lbs, just as a quick google check....
I still don't understand why the 4C gains so much damn weight. It makes no sense.
The weight gain is literally the modernization of cars.
It still sucks, but I wouldn't drive a car w/o A/C or air bags. If I'm gonna throw caution to the wind like that... well, you know what I'd rather have.
http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/290881/alfa_romeo_4c_review_price_and_specs.html (http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/290881/alfa_romeo_4c_review_price_and_specs.html)
Shame. Sounds like a great car, if a bit timid.
I've just read the article in CAR magazine and, in many ways, the 4C reminds me of my old Fiat X-1/9.
Quote from: Raza on October 04, 2013, 10:49:48 AM
http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/290881/alfa_romeo_4c_review_price_and_specs.html (http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/290881/alfa_romeo_4c_review_price_and_specs.html)
Shame. Sounds like a great car, if a bit timid.
CF car for the price of a Boxster..... I mean, I wouldn't do it, but it's a hell of a bargain
Anyone remember that Alfa Romeo 4C that was supposed to be in American showrooms by the end of 2013? Well, if you believe Alfa's PR Department (and, at this point, why should you?) the North American spec 4C will debut at the New York Auto Show in April and go on sale in June as a 2015 model.
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1091061_4c-to-lead-alfa-romeos-official-u-s-return-at-2014-new-york-auto-show (http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1091061_4c-to-lead-alfa-romeos-official-u-s-return-at-2014-new-york-auto-show)
North American 4Cs will weigh some 200 pounds more than the base European model (blame standard-fit air-con and additional safety gear) and will start at just $54,000. A carbon fibre monococque chassis for only $54,000? Now that's impressive! I can't see how they're making any money on it, though.
In other Alfa news, the Mazda MX-5 based Spider isn't going to happen. Instead, that car is going to wind up as a belated replacement for the Fiat Barchetta. A convertible 4C is also in the works, but what about after that? Fiat boss Sergio Marchionne is said to be unveiling another new five-year-plan for Alfa (the fourth in nine years, I might add) in April or May where is has been rumoured the existing MiTo and Giulietta will be phased out and not replaced. The new plan calls for Alfa to concentrate on larger cars (the long-overdue Giulia sedan and a yet-to-be-named BMW 5 Series-sized "Flagship Sedan" which may be called Alfetta) and a crossover-style SUV. It is said these larger cars will find more broad appeal in the US and China, two markets where Alfa Romeo is eager to expand.
As for when any of these will actually go on sale is anybody's guess. In the meantime, the 4C will be the only way to get your Alfa fix. Considering Alfa only has the capacity to build a limited number of carbon fibre tubs and the car will only be available through Ferrari/Maserati dealers (plus a handful of "specially selected" Fiat dealers), don't expect to see very many of them. This is hardly the "Big Splash" return that many Alfa Romeo enthusiasts were hoping for, but I guess it's better than nothing.
We get the Mito and Giulietta today and the 4C is confirmed already: http://www.alfaromeo.mx/mx/#/home (http://www.alfaromeo.mx/mx/#/home)
I'd love a 4C.
Thread revival time.
An Alfa Romeo sedan is supposedly due in US showrooms by 2016, and a crossover in 2017. Both are based on the RWD/AWD "Giorgio" platform. Expect turbocharged four and six cylinder engines. Looks like this is FINALLY going to happen.
Meanwhile, I have yet to see a 4C anywhere. The only other US-market car I can think of which I've never actually seen is the Mitsubishi i-MiEV.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/alfa-romeos-us-lineup-to-add-a-sedan-suv-by-2017-88082.html (http://www.leftlanenews.com/alfa-romeos-us-lineup-to-add-a-sedan-suv-by-2017-88082.html)
Alfa's compact executive sedan will be unveiled in Milan on 24 June.
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1091061_alfa-romeo-3-series-rival-coming-to-u-s-in-early-2016-to-be-followed-by-suv (http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1091061_alfa-romeo-3-series-rival-coming-to-u-s-in-early-2016-to-be-followed-by-suv)
Is Alfa Romeo Italian for "wolf tickets"?
Oh, what a surprise! Or not.
Looks like the Giulia sedan won't arrive in 2016 after all. We in North America will have to wait until at least 2017 for the sedan and 2018 for the crossover.
http://jalopnik.com/surprise-alfa-romeo-giulia-sedan-and-new-suv-delayed-1740653838 (http://jalopnik.com/surprise-alfa-romeo-giulia-sedan-and-new-suv-delayed-1740653838)
In other news, I still haven't seen a 4C anywhere. Until I do, I refuse to believe it actually exists.