Volvo vs. Alfa Romeo

ionapaul

Folks,

Just a quick one. Am test driving two cars tomorrow afternoon, a '00 Alfa Romeo 156 1.6l and a '00 Volvo S40 1.6l. Assuming they are in good condition (will get a 6 month warranty anyway) and with similar mileage, what are the pros and cons of each? The Volvo is exactly €1,000 more expensive. Being offered €2,200 for my Seat Arosa (see my sig) as a trade-in, which is a good bit less than it is worth but maybe will save me the hassle of the private sale.

I've heard a lot of warnings about the Alfa's dodgy reputation when it comes to electrical faults, and am quite a fan of the Volvo's looks, but would love some objective advice from those in the know! Thanks

shakenbake

Check out my "about to buy an alfa 156" thread, it sould be on the 2nd page somewhere.

ShockBlast RX8

Dont Go near the Alfa you will have problems there not a good car thats comeing from the motor trade Alfa's are Junk just Posh Fiats Sorry to Piss any one off but chack out reviews all over the web on alfa's

drdre

what a question

defo volvo everyone knows its expensive cause of quality. i have driven my dads volvos for over 3 years and they are amzing. he has had s70 and 3 s80 t6.and i have to say volvo are amzing. i drove the new s40 t5 and they are savage.
anyway back to the question about which car.

DEFO VOLVO:D

ds20prefecture

drdre wrote:

defo volvo everyone knows its expensive cause of quality. i have driven my dads volvos for over 3 years and they are amzing. he has had s70 and 3 s80 t6

The 00 S40 is a very very different car from the S70 and S80. It is also a different car from the current S40, which is well made by Ford.

The old S40 was a bag of sh1te, with very poor build quality and weak engines. They are cramped, heavy, thirsty and bland. The V40 estate is a handsome car, but suffers from the same quality issues as the S40. A friend ran a 2.0 S40 for 3 years and loathed the car. After 2 years the seat trim was unstitching and the whole car squeaked and rattled. I wouldn't touch an S40.

The Alfa is an exceptional car, with an exceptionally poor dealer network. Ask most people who have run a 156 for a couple of years and you will hear nothing but praise for the car. @120bhp, the 1.6 engine is a bit underpowered for the car, but it is thrifty and sounds great. The car is spacious, well equipped and one of the better handling FWD cars out there. Because of inconsitent and ill-informed biases of some (particularly in the motor trade) the second hand value is very poor, so you'll get a lot more car for your money, and probably lose more value over time. Make sure of a full and regular service history and check that the wishbone bushes and timing belt have been done before buying if the car is above 50000 miles. I'm not sure, but I think the 1.6 TS has the same variator weakness of the 1.8 - listen for a diesely sound on startup.

Make sure you have somewhere decent to service it and might want to check the difference in insurance costs - the Alfas carry a loading because of their desirability and peppy engines.

Buy the Alfa.

landser

i agree with ds20. I own an alfa 156 1.8. it's the best car and the most fun to drive of any car i have ever owned (and i've had bm's mercs, hondas, renaults and fords). the problem with alfa, is not so much that their cars are unreliable, more that the chances of you getting a dodgy one seems to be higher than with other makes, imho. i have never had a day's bother with mine in the 3 1/2 yrs that i've owned it... it's 6 yrs old with 82k on the clock.

i don't know enough about the Volvo to comment on it, but know enough about the alfa to tell you to stop thinking and go italian!

alias no.9

The old S40 is not a real volvo. It was built in holland in a plant joint owned by mitsubishi and the dutch government. It's very closely related to the much maligned mitsubishi carisma and most of the engines were sourced from renault.

Eoin

ds20prefecture wrote:

@120bhp, the 1.6 engine is a bit underpowered for the car, but it is thrifty and sounds great.

I actually found it quite nippy for a 1.6, but then again not really used to much bigger engine cars though... I do get that diesel sound on startup actually that you mentioned.

ShockBlast RX8 wrote:

Dont Go near the Alfa you will have problems there not a good car thats comeing from the motor trade Alfa's are Junk just Posh Fiats Sorry to Piss any one off but chack out reviews all over the web on alfa's

:rolleyes: I can sort of make out the gist of what you are saying, and it sounds suspiciously like bollocks.

ds20prefecture

ShockBlast RX8 wrote:

Dont Go near the Alfa you will have problems there not a good car thats comeing from the motor trade Alfa's are Junk just Posh Fiats Sorry to Piss any one off but chack out reviews all over the web on alfa's

"Chack" out reviews all over boards.ie from people who have owned Alfas instead. You never know, if you're lucky they might have punctuation too.

To try to be objective about it, there's no smoke without fire. i.e. Alfas do give problems, but in my experience no more than average. The problems are avoidable with good servicing, and I think this is where those who have had bad experiences have been let down. Alfa dealers in Ireland (and the UK) are in general a fairly shoddy lot. I had my 2.0 serviced in Grandons in Cork for most of it's life and I never had a problem of any sort. Alasta had 1 service too, and they replaced the "wishbone mounting bushes". Expensive, and I could have ignored it, but I'd rather it was right.

Compared to the Škoda I have, the servicing costs on the Alfa were less, and the Alfa technically gave less problems. I had a clutch cable disconnect on the Škoda, caused again by poor servicing.

Compared to the 2 Mercedes C-classes we ran as company cars at the same time as the Alfas, the Mercs gave more trouble over a shorter space of time - primarily electrical.

A friend bought a 4 y.o. BMW 318i (i think that's the 2.0 4 cylinder). A lot of issues "with the engine" (his words), and the car felt very tired for its mileage. But it was probably thrashed for its life and poorly serviced too.

Overall, any car that is poorly serviced will give issues. Alfas have 1 or 2 unusual features, and therefore might need more experienced servicing than a toyota.

Any Dutch volvos I have driven (340GL, 440i, 460 diesel, old S40) have been uniformly dreadful designs, with poor build quality and weak engines. I drove a new V50 diesel and thought it was a fine car. But then again it has a Focus chassis with a good Peugeot diesel engine, so that's hardly surprising.

The Clown Man

I have a 156 and I love it.

Simply put, everyone who owns an Alfa loves it. Head and shoulders above the rest of the cars you will get for it's price.

You may have small issues with variators etc. and checking the oil regularly is a must, but you will see this type of thing as more like caring for a baby than fixing a car.

If you want to get more car for your buck, buy the Alfa.

Pataman

I had a 00 volvo s40 and loved it. It has me converted to volvo's now. currently driving the s60. Never had any probs with the s40. Would heartily recommend it.

MercMad

I concur with the above. Those S40's were not a good car, they were built down to a price and feel that way. The Carisma, same platform, was brutally boring too !

I would stay away from these Volvos unless you like falling asleep at the wheel !

Having owned an Alfra 155 then driven a 156 a lot I lobve these Alfas. apart from the Variator problem ( I cant believe they still have this fault, my 155 was done first in 1998 !). The 156 is an undervalued car, and it doesn't really give any more trouble than any other car. The dealers ARE a problem with one or two minor exceptions, I had great difficulty with one of the longer established dealers, then moved to a new dealer and had great service !

Go for a highly specced 156 and enjoy it !

Cyrus

drdre wrote:

what a question

defo volvo everyone knows its expensive cause of quality. i have driven my dads volvos for over 3 years and they are amzing. he has had s70 and 3 s80 t6.and i have to say volvo are amzing. i drove the new s40 t5 and they are savage.
anyway back to the question about which car.

DEFO VOLVO:D

Dont Go near the Alfa you will have problems there not a good car thats comeing from the motor trade Alfa's are Junk just Posh Fiats Sorry to Piss any one off but chack out reviews all over the web on alfa's
Yesterday 22:27

One point, look at the replies from those espousing the alfa and then those telling you that the volvo is a better bet

which people seem better informed to you, if you take care of the alfa it will take care of you, make sure it has a full s/h, that the timing belt has been done and make sure the oil level is okay

a great resource here www.alfa156.net

Dilbert75

I don't own or have any allegiance to either, but I've travelled in both and have friends who own both. I'd buy the Alfa, subject to the bushing / timing belt / variator advice already given. FSH would be high on my list.

kyote00

Firstly I'm a 156 owner since 1999 and have done 77k on my car.

No issues at all except a new clutch. I have the v6 version and its an issue with the large engined Alfas.

Most of the original problems with the 156 have been resolved long ago and the 1.8 TS is the pick of the bunch. A few other annoyances are
- small boot opening
- rear seats don't fold down
- front bulbs (dims) are always blowing

Make sure that the timing belt has been changed and also check that the variator has been changed and it has been regularly serviced.

At the time I got the 156 and I also test drove a S40 T4 and it didnt compare very well with the 156.

The dealer network is a real problem you should consider --- I have tried out most of the them over the years and had poor service in most cases. If you can find an independant mechanic then you are onto a winner.

My vote goes with 156

ShockBlast RX8

Ok if you are Lucky to get a Good Alfa there ok & I agree the old Volvo's were not good in the past but Volvo Have come a long way & there Cares are Great True Alfa's can be more Fun then a Volvo & they do look better but is it reloyablitly or Fun your looking for Alfa = Fun. Volvo = Reloyable.

bmoferrall

ShockBlast RX8 wrote:

Ok if you are Lucky to get a Good Alfa there ok & I agree the old Volvo's were not good in the past but Volvo Have come a long way & there Cares are Great True Alfa's can be more Fun then a Volvo & they do look better but is it reloyablitly or Fun your looking for Alfa = Fun. Volvo = Reloyable.

There have been a few 'newbie' posters of late whose grammar/spelling/lack of punctuation is too bad to be true. Is this someone like 528i taking the Michael?
No offence ShockBlast but, if you're genuine, I'm sure you can do better than this. Your opinions will carry less weight with this standard of writing.
(Forgive me if you're non-English speaking but you can at least make an effort with punctuation.)

Eoin

ShockBlast RX8 wrote:

Ok if you are Lucky to get a Good Alfa there ok & I agree the old Volvo's were not good in the past but Volvo Have come a long way & there Cares are Great True Alfa's can be more Fun then a Volvo & they do look better but is it reloyablitly or Fun your looking for Alfa = Fun. Volvo = Reloyable.

This is the point I am trying to make though - by and large the 156 is not the unreliable car that the uninformed seem to think, as is evident by the amount of owners who are replying to this thread. The car really is not the gamble that an alfa may have been in the past.

ds20prefecture

ShockBlast RX8 wrote:

Ok if you are Lucky to get a Good Alfa there ok & I agree the old Volvo's were not good in the past but Volvo Have come a long way & there Cares are Great True Alfa's can be more Fun then a Volvo & they do look better but is it reloyablitly or Fun your looking for Alfa = Fun. Volvo = Reloyable.

I'm afraid it's not that simple. The Dutch Volvo is not that reliable - sure the engines are robust enough, but the interiors are flimsy at best and the suspension seems to feel prematurely old. This is in stark contrast to Swedish-built Volvos, and has been the case going back to the 240/340. Swedish Volvos are excellent (if a little bit dull).

I have not met a 156 owner who has had serious left-on-the-side-of-the-road issues with their car. I'm sure they are out there, but I haven't met them. I put 45k on a '00 2.0, my brother drove a 1.8 to 100,000 miles, our company ran 5 of them with no issues and I know of many many others who have owned the cars or had them as company cars with nothing but absolute reliability. My brother's 1.8 had it's engine replaced at 45,000 miles - but only because he submerged it running in a flood!

So if it's reliability or fun Alfa=both, Volvo=neither.Not to mention value.

No word from the original poster in this debate. I wonder how he(?) found the cars.

ds20prefecture

bmoferrall wrote:

Is this someone like 528i taking the Michael?

If so it's a fair extreme to go for a troll! Clever too.

ionapaul

Well, I only had time to drive the 156, which was in poor condition for a '00 car. Didn't like the feel of it at all, but there was something wrong with the battery and I knew I had to avoid stalling it at all costs, which made me apprehensive and shortened my test drive! The engine seemed extremely sluggish and make a worrying clunking sound from time to time. I do like the look of the Alfas, but I don't know much about car maintenance, nor plan to learn, so really want something I can buy ready to run, service it once a year or so, and forget about it otherwise (like my trouble-free Seat Arosa). Seems the Alfas need a good deal of babying and self-education on the part of the owner.
I probably won't bother even driving the Volvo, I like the look of it but I am sure the 1.6l is just too small an engine for such a large chassis, I want something a little nippier. Back to the drawing board...will be viewing an A3 next weekend, so maybe that will be the one for me.

ds20prefecture

Why not have a look at a Seat Leon - they are a fine car and much less expensive 2nd hand than the A3. The only thing the A3 has going for it is the 4 rings on the grille.

alias no.9

ionapaul wrote:

... so really want something I can buy ready to run, service it once a year or so, and forget about it otherwise (like my trouble-free Seat Arosa). Seems the Alfas need a good deal of babying and self-education on the part of the owner.

In that case you need a toyota.