Dear Santa......

siralfalot

I have been a very good boy.........

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpressnews/209215/alfas_rs4_beater.html

Joeface

Dear Santa...

Please give me a time machine so I can go back and stop my dad from selling the Aston Martin he once owned , and put in storage for me ( He did this in the 60's) I only just found out he cried as I beat it out of him and then beat him for doing it

never had anything even close since

Owen

Oh dear. I'd loved to have been in the meeting where Alfa decided to green light this one. Who in their right mind is going to buy an Alfa, with their history of reliability and residual values that's supposed to be able to compete with the M3 and the RS4? Very few people, that's who. This is going to hurt the Alfa Romeo wallet, and hurt it plenty.

Yes they've sourced the engine from a decent manufacturer, but it's Alfa. They're going to screw something up. I'll bet my left nut on it.

Eoin

ned78 wrote:

Oh dear. I'd loved to have been in the meeting where Alfa decided to green light this one. Who in their right mind is going to buy an Alfa, with their history of reliability and residual values that's supposed to be able to compete with the M3 and the RS4? Very few people, that's who. This is going to hurt the Alfa Romeo wallet, and hurt it plenty.

Yes they've sourced the engine from a decent manufacturer, but it's Alfa. They're going to screw something up. I'll bet my left nut on it.

This is going to seem a very stupid question, but are the likes of the M3 / RS4 / Superdoopercharged whatever, really the bread winners for the car companies or are they more just a show piece to try and sell the more common variations of the car?

Who in their right mind is going to buy an Alfa, with their history of reliability and residual values that's supposed to be able to compete with the M3 and the RS4?

By that logic, very few people would buy a standard 159 over a 3 series or a4, and I wonder if that's the case.

RobAMerc

Believe me when I say I am not an Alfa basher - far from it I love them but I doubt they'll put the money and resources into this to really make a RS4 beater out of this. I dont doubt their capable though.

I hope I am wrong but having seen how underdeveloped some Alfas have made it to the market leaves me worried for this car.
Anyone drive the 156GTA ( M3 beater ) ?

R.O.R

eoin_s wrote:

By that logic, very few people would buy a standard 159 over a 3 series or a4, and I wonder if that's the case.

Based on my stats YTD.

1 Alfa 159 delivered
20 BMW 3 Series
17 Audi A4

Think that tells the story, Alfa is just too expensive to compete due to the resale values.

RobAMerc

ned78 wrote:

Oh dear. I'd loved to have been in the meeting where Alfa decided to green light this one. Who in their right mind is going to buy an Alfa, with their history of reliability and residual values that's supposed to be able to compete with the M3 and the RS4? Very few people, that's who. This is going to hurt the Alfa Romeo wallet, and hurt it plenty.

Yes they've sourced the engine from a decent manufacturer, but it's Alfa. They're going to screw something up. I'll bet my left nut on it.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

siralfalot

sooo... what? nobody should bother to develop a car that is an the same catagory as an M3 or RS4? because no mater who the manufacturer is they will obviously never better the germans?? please :rolleyes:

Eoin

R.O.R wrote:

Based on my stats YTD.

1 Alfa 159 delivered
20 BMW 3 Series
17 Audi A4

Think that tells the story, Alfa is just too expensive to compete due to the resale values.

Wow - some stats alright. Given that the 159 is only since last year, I presume that you haven't included any 3 series or A4s older than that? Would never have thought that there were 20 3-series out there for every Alfa 156/9!

prospect

Wow,

Ned78, i think you are still living in the past:

This is from a German TV show, i know its not definative, but it says alot:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zON4bWsl2Ek

Also, residuals on the 159 and GT are much improved on older models. I am not sure about the Brera, but I can't imagine the new spider will suffer depreciation any worse than its competitors.

@Eoin_S, the figures could be right, i did hear before that the 3 series is one of the most common cars in europe.

peasant

ned78 wrote:

Yes they've sourced the engine from a decent manufacturer, but it's Alfa. They're going to screw something up. I'll bet my left nut on it.

What do you mean "sourced" the engine?

They didn't buy it in from somwhere else, if that's what you mean ...Maserati is owned by Fiat who also own Alfa

R.O.R

eoin_s wrote:

Wow - some stats alright. Given that the 159 is only since last year, I presume that you haven't included any 3 series or A4s older than that? Would never have thought that there were 20 3-series out there for every Alfa 156/9!

Figures are for Brand new 2007 registered vehicles delivered year to date. Might not acurately reflect the general market conditions, but gives a good idea - especially if you consider the number of Fiat/Alfa retailers compared to the number of Audi and BMW dealers.

Top 3 so far this year are:
VW
Ford
BMW

prospect

R.O.R wrote:

Top 3 so far this year are:
VW
Ford
BMW

So by your rationale, VW are better cars than BMW?

Eoin

prospect wrote:

So by your rationale, VW are better cars than BMW?

He never said that, he said that the residuals are poor. They may start improving, but that's pretty accurate at the moment.

prospect

eoin_s wrote:

He never said that, he said that the residuals are poor. They may start improving, but that's pretty accurate at the moment.

I'm confused, how does the number of units sold link with residuals?

Not being smart, genuine question.

roughan

My GF has an Alfa

if you press something..
something else falls off !!!!

Eoin

prospect wrote:

I'm confused, how does the number of units sold link with residuals?

Not being smart, genuine question.

I suppose that if residuals are seen as being very poor, it could affect sales?

Owen

prospect wrote:

Ned78, i think you are still living in the past:

Perhaps, but then why does every salesperson I know cringe when they see an Alfa rolling in the forecourt for appraisal?

prospect wrote:

Also, residuals on the 159 and GT are much improved on older models. I am not sure about the Brera, but I can't imagine the new spider will suffer depreciation any worse than its competitors.

Eh ...

bazz26

Haven't had an Alfa "good v evil" thread in ages.

I'm off to get some popcorn....

Owen

bazz26 wrote:

I'm off to get some popcorn....

Get some cheesy nachos too! This is shaping up to be fun, I'm going to bow out and spectate, I've said all I need to say

R.O.R

prospect wrote:

I'm confused, how does the number of units sold link with residuals?

Not being smart, genuine question.

I work in leasing so the figures are based on no. of cars delivered this year, nothing to do with who is better - just who is selling more via leasing.

As leasing is worked out as
Cost to buy minus what it will sell for at the end of contract, plus interest and servicing costs, Alfa's work out a lot more expensive than a similar priced BMW or Audi as (based on past performance) they will break down, fall apart and sell for peanuts. BMW's tend not to break down as much and sell well at the end. Audi's break down frequently but still sell well at the end.

Up front discount on the above marques is around the same so it's mainly resale values and servicing costs that are the big deciders.

Anan1

prospect wrote:

I'm confused, how does the number of units sold link with residuals?

Not being smart, genuine question.

I'm guessing ROR's figures are for leased, as opposed to sold, cars. Lower residuals = higher monthly lease rates.

RobAMerc

ned78 - I suspect the only reason you posted anything in this thread is because you know if you diss Alfa's you'll get some moron to agree with you, making you feel as though you have the slightest clue about cars.

Everyone else : Please dont let this thread be ruined too.

redman

A 159 GTA comes on the back of the popular, successful and reliable 147 GTA's and 156 GTA's .

Just wait till the 169 comes to be followed by the 169 GTA to trounce M5's

prospect

Thanks for the replies.

Funny, i bought my Alfa 14 months ago and sold it last week for €1,500 less than I paid. I must be the exception rather than the rule


I have no problem with Ned78's posts. It is obvious he is as passionate about BMW, which are fine cars, as I am about Italian cars. It is a pity that some peoples passion clouds their reasonable judgement at times.

Eoin

prospect wrote:

Thanks for the replies.

Funny, i bought my Alfa 14 months ago and sold it last week for €1,500 less than I paid. I must be the exception rather than the rule

You should know by now that every person here with something positive to say about them is the exception rather than the rule!

Owen

prospect wrote:

I have no problem with Ned78's posts. It is obvious he is as passionate about BMW, which are fine cars, as I am about Italian cars. It is a pity that some peoples passion clouds their reasonable judgement at times.

Oh Jesus H Christ. I've stated MANY times on this forum that I like a lot of cars. I love VW's, I like Audis, I like old Minis, I like Fords, etc,. what I don't like are people putting words into my mouth, or making assumptions about my loyalties and broadcasting them as fact.

For the record I'm passionate about Italian engineering too, I own a Ducati 916 with exceptionally low mileage, and long may it stay that way. I've owned a Moto Morrini, and I even spent 4 months driving an Alfa 156. I just wouldn't part with my own money for an Alfa. And I'm not the only negative-norman on here, lots of posters think the same.

Cyrus

i dunno i reckon it will be great, i may still buy a 156 gta and will def be looking at the 159 when it has depreciated a bit

RobAMerc

redman wrote:

A 159 GTA comes on the back of the popular, successful and reliable 147 GTA's and 156 GTA's .

I'm not sure the 159 or 147's were exactly considered to be great drives.

I drove a 159gta - and while it looked superb, sounded fab, and was unreal quick it damn near pulled me into the hedge with torque steer and loosened my fillings with the ride. ( I still would have bought it if I could have afforded it ).

But R32/Focus St or M3 beaters they were not.

Cyrus

personally i wouldnt take the 156 gta over an m3 but i would take it over a 330 (230 v 250bhp) or any similar saloon with similar power, for the engine note and beefy looks.

the 147 i would have over any hot hatch of its time, altho once the mk5 golf gti came along it was beaten and subsequently the focus st

the 3.2v6 is a reliable engine tho

prospect

ned78 wrote:

Oh Jesus H Christ.,..................., lots of posters think the same.

Alright, calm down.

Owen

prospect wrote:

Alright, calm down.

prospect

lol

MercMad

the 147 i would have over any hot hatch of its time, altho once the mk5 golf gti came along it was beaten and subsequently the focus st

..........I dont understand the fascination with the MkIV GTI. It looks just so bland and boring, and the standard wheels are hateful looking. Together with that silly red trimmed grille it just doesn't look right IMO !

Also I dont think the quality on the interior is anything to right home about. Its probably the first EVER Gold GTI that I would never consider buying !

Anyway unfortunatley for Alfa Romeo, it would take a lot more than a high quality, high performance car to temp buyers away from M3's and the like !

Cyrus

have you driven the mkv? one of the best fwd cars out there imo

whippet

MercMad wrote:

..........I dont understand the fascination with the MkIV GTI. It looks just so bland and boring, and the standard wheels are hateful looking. Together with that silly red trimmed grille it just doesn't look right IMO !

Also I dont think the quality on the interior is anything to right home about. Its probably the first EVER Gold GTI that I would never consider buying !

Anyway unfortunatley for Alfa Romeo, it would take a lot more than a high quality, high performance car to temp buyers away from M3's and the like !

the MK IV? I'am assuming you mean the MK V.

I actually quite like the little bit of red trim on the grille ... a harping back to the old MKI

The standard wheels again are a part of the car I hear most people actually love ... but as the Tayto ads says .. 'theres always one'

I would love that 159GTA but again .. I don't know if I would part with my own money to buy it !!

Owen

Cyrus wrote:

have you driven the mkv? one of the best fwd cars out there imo

I'll second that. A mate's sister has one, and I was very skeptical before driving it. This one had the DSG flappy paddle gearbox, and I was simply stunned. Power, quick crisp gear change, precision handling, and all from a FWD car. If I wasn't a MINI nut, it would be top of the shopping list.

Anan1

I love Alfas, but am distinctly unimpressed with the 159. It looks nowhere near as well as the 156, and it's not particularly good to drive (nowhere near the E90 3 series IMO) Build quality seems ok - better than VW but not as good as BMW.

OKenora

Another argument slating Alfas, driven along 70% by people who have never driven one and 25% by people who have never owned one but got a spin in their m8's...once....:)

The weakest point in an Alfa is usually the nut that connects the pedals to the steering wheel. If you get one of these that does not fail in it's operation then the Alfa is a great car to own and drive (though some models need carefully selected mods to get the best out of them)

Tell me all about the high servicing costs (£375 for the last 10k miles in my Alfa including a service and cambelt change ).
Tell me all about the unreliabilty, 0 breakdowns in the past 3 years in Alfas
Tell me all about the lower residuals, yes I know I bought cheap

All I'll say is BMW = bulletproof, until the turbo blows up at 65k and costs £1300 to replace :mad: and the servicing costs make my Alfa look like a bargain buy.

Maybe currently the BMW is the better car, but thats not usually what Alfas sell on anyway. Someone looking for an affordable car with a bit of design flair and individuality will no longer be tempted by a BMW or indeed a Merc as 3 series and C class are getting common as muck and have lost their premium status, but not their premium costs making them a less attractive option. The new Alfas enjoy a far better reliability rating and build quality than the old ones and this will over time filter through to the mass market.

10 years ago would you have bought a Skoda ? 20 years ago you had to give Fiats away before they rusted away. Seats were even worse 15 years ago being cheap Spanish knockoffs of old Fiat designs. Times, manafacturers and markets change. Judge on the model, not the pub chat. Even the latest Mondeo is being ranked alongside the 3 series now.

Owen

OKenora wrote:

Another argument slating Alfas, driven along 70% by people who have never driven one and 25% by people who have never owned one but got a spin in their m8's...once....:)

Actually, some of us have driven Alfas, and more than once.

OKenora wrote:

All I'll say is BMW = bulletproof, until the turbo blows up at 65k and costs £1300 to replace :mad: and the servicing costs make my Alfa look like a bargain buy.

What kind of 'fact' is that? The turbo affected a limited run of 320d's, and the odd 530d. It has nothing to do with the Petrol engines. And with the Service Inclusive Packages on BMWs, you can now buy 5 years of servicing up front for a hell of a lot less than it would cost to service your Alfa.

OKenora wrote:

10 years ago would you have bought a Skoda ? 20 years ago you had to give Fiats away before they rusted away.

You still have to give Fiats away, and Skodas still don't sell as well as they should. I had a guy trade a 07 Skoda Octavia Estate this week, and he lost 8k in the first year because I couldn't even find a Skoda garage who'd be willing to buy it back from me.

Anan1

OKenora wrote:

Maybe currently the BMW is the better car, but thats not usually what Alfas sell on anyway. Someone looking for an affordable car with a bit of design flair and individuality will no longer be tempted by a BMW or indeed a Merc as 3 series and C class are getting common as muck and have lost their premium status, but not their premium costs making them a less attractive option. The new Alfas enjoy a far better reliability rating and build quality than the old ones and this will over time filter through to the mass market.

I dunno. That was true 10 years ago, when the 156 compared very favourably against its German competitors. My mother bought one then, and enjoyed every one of the 120,000 miles she put on it. When the time came to change, we both drove the 159. With the equipment she wanted the 320d came out at around €63,000, some €10,000 more than the 159 2.4JTD. We were both disappointed to find that the BMW was worth the 20% premium. My feeling is that, relative to their competitors, Alfa Romeo are going backwards rather than forwards.

E92

Fiats used to be such a common car in this country. The Punto was the best selling car in its class about 9 years ago AFAIR. Fiat are the only ones with a 4 year warranty and the only ones which sell cars with the On the Road Price;the rest you have to add on at least €500 to the price as they are 'ex works'. Fiat have brought in 2 new cars in recent times to the Irish market which got a great reception in the Press, the Grande Punto and the Panda. Neither has been exactly what you might call a sales sucess.

I've no involvement in the motor trade, but I'd be lying if I didnt say that the decline in the number of Fiats on the road has surprised me, especially now that they make proper cars. And the fact that there are so many goodies being offered on a Fiat for free is indicitative of the fact that they are not the easiest car in the world to sell. Toyota have provided cars with SFA for as long as I can remember, if Toyota sold a covered in bicylcle as the replacement for any of their cars they would still fly out the door. IMO a Toyota will sell itself(because most Irish people dont care abpit cars and all they want is a car that will go from Ato B and never ever go wrong, which is what a Toyota will do). The right kind of BMW, Merc Audi(small engine, right colour, not an A8/7 series/S-class etc) etc will fly out the door too, but for a very different reason(an increasing number of people are becoming badge snobs, so they couldn't possibly be seen in anything less than a premium badged car)

And dont forget: FIAT is Fix It Again Tomorrow

Owen

E92 wrote:

And dont forget: FIAT is Fix It Again Tomorrow

And if that doesn't work, F*ck it all-together (Yes it's altogether, but it's poetic license).

E92

ned78 wrote:

And if that doesn't work, F*ck it all-together (Yes it's altogether, but it's poetic license).

lol thats hillarious never heard that one before

OKenora

Alfa Romeo are going backwards rather than forwards.

Based on the 159 with the current engines then possibly yes, at least it's definitely not a giant step, not even a small one really, forward....

BUT...

The 159 in current guise is a stopgap release and imo very little more than a facelifted and slightly re-vamped 156. I think that if the 156 had been facelifted again instead of a 159 release then it probably would be outselling the 159 to this day (despite it's "technical inferiority" and "dated" design).

Fact of the motor market is that Alfa will have to produce a total world beater to ever re-gain credibility. Most of the Joe Public car buying public still live in the world of the 70's and 80's where BMW and Merc were prestige cars, Skoda and Seat were cheap but total cr4p, Fiats rusted and Alfas looked great but couldn't run for more than a week without repairs. The world of motoring, and the cars, has changed but perceptions take a bit longer to catch up.

prospect

I think you are all missing one very improtant fact:

Ireland is a very small and rather unique market. You can not judge a car based soley on Irelands sales figures.

Go to Italy, there's thousands of old Fiats still running around fine, France has thousands of old Renaults, Peugeots and Citroens, etc. Are they different and more reliable cars in their home countries? Are their mechanics better?


* EDIT: An improtant fact is entirely different from an important one.

Owen

prospect wrote:

You can not judge a car based soley on Irelands sales figures.

You can however, judge a car by how well it lasts to the torment that is the Irish weather, and most importantly, the smooth, silky Irish roads.

prospect wrote:

Go to Italy, there's thousands of old Fiats still running around fine, France has thousands of old Renaults, Peugeots and Citroens, etc. Are they different and more reliable cars in their home countries? Are their mechanics better?

Eh, the weather has a lot to answer for there. The reason we don't have old Fiats/Pugs/Citroens here, is because they dissolve like Disprin in rain water.

eob

Just so you know, you're all being laughed at by people who actually know something about cars.

Cyrus

eh?

Anan1

ned78 wrote:

Eh, the weather has a lot to answer for there. The reason we don't have old Fiats/Pugs/Citroens here, is because they dissolve like Disprin in rain water.

Depends what you mean by old, ned. My mother bought a new FIAT Tipo TD in 1990, even after 160,000 miles the car didn't have any rust. Mercedes, on the other hand, rust from 1993 on.

Anan1

Cyrus wrote:

eh?

eob has posted 15 times in 4 years. If he does know anything about cars, he's keeping it very close to his chest.;)