Old 156 - madness?

fonecrusher1

Well soon im going to change from one oldie (my 2000 corolla) to another oldie, possibly a mazda 323 or a 1.6 avensis. The usual reliable boring choice. Thing is im seriously tempted to get an old 1.6 Alfa romeo 156. Something for about 1200 euro.
Well the question is, is it just a bad idea? I mean we all know how much bad press they get for being faulty. Is it grossly exaggerated pub talk or are they a dodgey car? Im tired of my fisherprice corolla I just want an Alfa. Always have. I used to enjoy taking a spin out in the countryside. Not anymore with my yoke.

Im not unfamiliar with car maintenance, I'd be willing to change the oil as many times as its recommmended. I'l be extra nice to the thing, as long as it doesn't leave me stranded on the side of the road every few months. How much life do you get out of a 1.6 156? Say i buy something 2000/2001 with 100,000 miles on it, is it good for another 20 or 30k till they give up? I know its a bit of a how long is a piece of string question.

Im apprehensive about actually handing over cash for an Alfa, ive only ever bought jap cars. Yeah i know that probably sounds a bit insulting to you alfa fans but hey im only being honest.:o

Alfa Romeo 156 1.6 t-spark. Whats the motors verdict on them? Opinions appreciated.

-Corkie-

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/3482/crimascaronfire35.jpg

Stheno

This thread has a fair bit of information OP

Timmaay

Ugh, its a hard one to call. If you are looking for and expecting cheap motoring like the corolla, simple as is the alfa isn't a good choice. The timing belt needs to be changed every 36kmiles, suspension bushings need changing often, and the t-spark engine has a fair few problems. Having said all that they are a great car to drive, and once you get one with a good service history, there is no reason it should give any more problems then other cars once the mileage isn't too high.

Engine and handling wise, they are fantastic, 120bhp from the 1.6 t-spark is great. I was seriously considering one before, but ended up going with a Honda instead, I've had two honda now, 1st one was a 99 accord 2l vtec, great handling car, nice power and sound and will run forever and cheap as chips. Its a good alternative I think.

Suspension bits and the short frequency of timing belts are the only thing that would put me off. Suspension are not drive and 2 ton jack friendly jobs and the I wouldn't chance driving an Alfa that was overdue a cambelt change, lots of other cars I would without too much worry. The costs of the cambelt change relative to the purchase price of the car is not insignificant in my view. So buying one for €1200 that's due a belt is not really savage value for a 2001 ish car with 100K miles on it

There doesn't seem to be that many old 156s about now though so a good one would be nice to have, I hate driving around in something that loads of folks have.

Edit: I'd agree with above point, a decent spec Accord would be money better spent.

shamwari

Those twin-sparkers can be a "loose" engine. Some (but not all) can consume as much as a litre of oil every thousand miles. And on top of the timing belt, the good old variator can give up the ghost and make the sweet twin-sparker sound like she's a diesel.

Despite all their weaknesses, they are still an impressive machine to drive when on song, even by todays standards.

mondeo

From experience I can tell you what to expect from a 156. I had two of them and both had a reasonable service history with them. They are in no doubt a beautiful looking car if you get it in the right colour.. But thats about it really.

The problems I had were very annoying and left me stranded several times. Crank position sensors go on them all the time resulting in your car not starting from hot or at all. Stranded me in Tesco's, Superquinns etc with this problem. It made me furious! I replaced them and months later they were popping again and I had no idea why as did a few mechanics. The engine management system was not logging the codes for some reason on both my cars...:rolleyes:

AFM's are really common to go, temp sensors, thermostats, front upper wishbones are rediculous and if you live around speed ramps you will know what I am on about. They are very embarressing when they wear out and sound unreal when driving off on a cold morning. Sounds like somthing smashing and breaking behind the dash. All of the above became issues with my cars.

Variators go in them pretty often which is a timing belt off job to replace them. A new variator is about 160 but you can fix them by replacing a spring and a washer in them making it cheaper. You are replacing these variators as often as the timing belt 30k or thereabouts. I think they are made of putty or somthing.. I had variator issues to some degree on both my cars.

The electrical switches inside the car are really cheap and break off in no time. Somtimes one of the rear lights can stay on which is an issue related to the rev counter.

An enthusiast will probably tell you they are a great handling car which they are 100% right! They may also tell you the reason why so many things go wrong with these cars is due to improper maintenace but to be perfectly honest I dont agree. I think they are just a badly built car. Not the cars fault just the materials they are made off. Shame really.

Good Luck with a 156 but I think there are better choices out there.

fonecrusher1

Right thanks for the responses lads. Ok so im a bit dissappointed with the general vibe im getting with the idea but i was kind of expecting it. And because im already reluctant about switching to an alfa i don't think i'll bother. Took a look at what people are saying about their 156's on carsurvey.org...wow not good.

Timaaay a 2 ltr honda accord sounds nice, the brother owns one. Lovely car but they ain't too light on petrol & that 2ltr tax is a fair bit more than 1.6 & lot more than a 1.4. Maybe the 1.8 accord is an option although the increase in tax & decrease im mpg still could be just a bit too much for me. Ideally i'd not want to go above a 1.6 engine.

What about a mazda 323 GT? Its a 1.8 & they're meant to be lively enough. Are they heavy on the juice?

fonecrusher1

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

What about a mazda 323 GT?

Are they not very very rare though?

fonecrusher1

RoverJames wrote: »

Are they not very very rare though?

They are indeed but theres a few for sale alright on donedeal atm.

mondeo

A 323 GT would be an interesting car.

Timmaay

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Timaaay a 2 ltr honda accord sounds nice, the brother owns one. Lovely car but they ain't too light on petrol & that 2ltr tax is a fair bit more than 1.6 & lot more than a 1.4. Maybe the 1.8 accord is an option although the increase in tax & decrease im mpg still could be just a bit too much for me. Ideally i'd not want to go above a 1.6 engine.

My 2l wasn't too bad at all, I'd always get an easy 32mpg out of it, that was with quite a lot of motorway driving though, like all bigger petrol engines expect the mpg to drop off with urban driving. The 1.8 is actually 1850cc or so, so taxed as a 1.9 :rolleyes:, and there is very little difference between 1.9 and 2L tax. (both ~600euros).

Likes of this isnt a bad car either if you don't want the boring run of the mill avensis 1.6. You'd want yourman to put it through the nct for you though. http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/cars/1848574

Dilbert75

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Right thanks for the responses lads. Ok so im a bit dissappointed with the general vibe im getting with the idea but i was kind of expecting it. And because im already reluctant about switching to an alfa i don't think i'll bother. Took a look at what people are saying about their 156's on carsurvey.org...wow not good.

Just remember that when people have something to complain about, boy do they complain. They'll rarely tell you the good stuff unsolicited.

FWIW, I bought a 03 a few weeks ago to replace a Skoda Octavia (beloved of Boards) and there's no comparison in the driving experience. Its not all perfect of course, a few of the critiscisms apply to mine as well, but its a lovely drive.

+1, carsurvey.org isn't a great place to look for constructive criticism. Along with HonestJohn it's a no no in my eyes.

mondeo

RoverJames wrote: »

+1, carsurvey.org isn't a great place to look for constructive criticism. Along with HonestJohn it's a no no in my eyes.

I think honest john is more of a guideline then actual real term motoring experience with said car. I still read his reviews though:D

Carsurvey is a load of boll!x there is no doubt about that one.

I agree, I just reckon Honest John is fairly poor, not at all along the same line as carsurvey by design but just as sh1te.

johnos1984

I find the best they do is highlight a few things that you should keep an eye out for.

Owners clubs and your local mechanic who actually work on the cars are far more reliable in giving a guide of what to check, what will go wrong and ultimately how much it will cost to sort.

If you want to know what they are like to drive go and bloody drive one. Its rare you read a review where the journalist says how epically sh!t a car actually is when you drive it.

fonecrusher1

Timmaay wrote: »

My 2l wasn't too bad at all, I'd always get an easy 32mpg out of it, that was with quite a lot of motorway driving though, like all bigger petrol engines expect the mpg to drop off with urban driving. The 1.8 is actually 1850cc or so, so taxed as a 1.9 :rolleyes:, and there is very little difference between 1.9 and 2L tax. (both ~600euros).

Likes of this isnt a bad car either if you don't want the boring run of the mill avensis 1.6. You'd want yourman to put it through the nct for you though. http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/cars/1848574

I know all about mpg dropping off, i owned a subaru legacy B4 a few years ago.

That audi does look interesting although its a 20 valve engine, would that mean poor enough fuel economy?

alias no.9

Had a 1.8 t-spark for nearly 3 years. Suspension wise, I did both top wishbones at the front and the rear transverse arms at both sides which were very straightforward, but the little stubby bush between the strut and hub carrier at the back really puts the n in cut to replace at home. None of it was particularly costly as I did the work myself.

As mentioned, thermostats are a problem, fortunately they fail open rather than closed, so overheating isn't an issue. Again, not expensive.

The timing belt is costly, labour accounts for about half of that. I did my own, it was a slow process but not actually that difficult if you're handy with a spanner.

Despite the stories, I never had any electrical problems.

In summary, if you have to have one, look for a recently NCT'd example (suspension), with the timing belt done.

Zubeneschamali

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Alfa Romeo 156 1.6 t-spark. Whats the motors verdict on them?

I like Alfas a lot, but I don't think a 1.6 is worth it in a 156. For the 2.0 twin spark, I'd put up with the extra TLC needed, but the 1.6 isn't even quick.

king_of_inismac

I had a 1.6ts model. Again beautiful car inside and out and a pleasure to drive!

My advice with alfas is: If every time a warning light comes on or the suspension begins to creek you have to go to a mechanic, stay well away from an alfa.

I spent hours and hours fixing various problems with my alfa. It was fine for me because my job was flexible, I don't have a family and I'm fairly handy with a spanner. Otherwise, I'd definitely recommend an alternative.

P.s. I drive a diesel golf now because after the experience with my alfa, I just wanted boring reliable motoring for a while.