Even Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear absolutely loved the Alfa 166, his only problem with it was the steep depreciation (when bought new).
Interesting and unusual opinion. What was wrong with it?
Sorry the embedded youtube video doesn't seem to work, here is the link:
Reliability and customer satisfaction are not the same thing. If you expect your Alfa to not work from time to time will you be easier satisfied as a Toyota buyer with a tiny issue once after five years.
Carrying out a study based on interviews with Alfa owners is like asking Apple users if they like their computers...
Having just spent the weekend with a classic Italian car mechanic in Italy, his advice is buy the newest model you can and keep it for as long as the warranty. The older models had poor electrics.
My own experience was terrible with reliability (2 gearboxes) but all the work was under warranty and I have never had a car that was as much fun to drive, so would happily buy Alfa again.
Yes, I do like it. Especially in Red.
Yup, definitely rubbish, a car with the highest depreciation rate (faster than you can say al-fa ro-me-o) has same reliability as other EU brands. Yeah right. So why does it depreciate so much than?
I mentioned the constant grin on your face, and no, it's no priceless, it definitely has a price. A big one for that kind of a car.
Because there is a big difference between actual reliability and having a reputation of reliability.
Depreciation has nothing to do with reliability but with demand vs. supply.
So how many Alfas have you owned and which ones (specify if from new or second-hand)? I mean surely you have first hand experience to comment on it's reliability?
Co-owner of a 156 anno 2000. Only repairs so far have been a replacement of an exhaust and change of battery.
I've driven a lot of other (European) cars and so far I haven't met a car with a driving experience to match. Fun, great sound, precise steering, great acceleration considering size of engine/car, etc.
Go for it.
Edit: the 156 was once elected car of the year, leaving behind the Golf and A6: http://www.caroftheyear.org/previous...rs/1998_1/coty
So are you saying that Alfa has great reliability and the reputation of poor reliability is just wrong?
I see. So according to you, there is no demand for Alfas, that's why the price goes down. I wonder why there is no demand? Poor reliability maybe? Expensive repairs maybe?
None, I am not that crazy to own a new or second hand Alfas. But I drove many and I confirm they are great experience but they are also costing way too much for what they are. Reliability wise I have many friends who own Alfa and are stubborn enough to drive them every day because of the "priceless" grin on their faces and I see them how they have lost contact with reality when it comes to maintaining a car. Example:
"Yeah, my last service on the 166 was like 1800 CHF for changing some rubber pipe and water pump, not that bad actually"
-Dude, I payed 450 CHF at Emil Frey for water pump swap for a SUV.
"Yeah, but this is Alfa".
It's not wrong, it's outdated, it's mostly based on past experience with Alfas from the 70's and 80's that indeed were quite unreliable. I had a late 90's Alfa (bought second hand and kept for 8 years) that was just fine, with very few problems.
You seem to tend towards hyperboles. It's not that there is no demand, demand is simply less than the amount of second hand cars available for sale mostly due to the nowadays undeserved reputation which harks back to the 70's/80's.
Well obviously he got ripped off, there are plenty of cheating mechanics here in CH, too. OTOH you need to consider that the 166 is a luxury car of the same category as a 5 series BMW or a E-class Mercedes so pats for the 166 tend to be more expensive.
Actually the Alfas of the 70 were one of the most reliable ones, you can see them on the road even today! A true classic cars that even I would buy without hesitation.
THe 90s were probably the worst era of Alfa regarding reliability, I can agree that things have changed but not so significantly so that you can compare an Alfa 166 with a Merc or BMW for its class, reliability etc.
What I said was 100% correct and corresponds to most of the user reports on the internet and real life:
1. It's a great, fun car (or as Top Gear would say passionate, full of emotion)
2. It costs a lot to buy, depreciates like crazy and it is expensive to maintain.
You can not compare a 166 to a BMW 5 or Merc E. No way that you are able to that. And that is why the cost to maintain an alfa is unjustifiable by most people and hence low demand, big depreciation. Alfa owners are very emotional about their cars and they consider them the best cars in the world and they have accepted crazy maintenance prices where as in the real world this is seriously overprices and a prospective owner should be aware before jumping in.
You also get fanatical following amongst BMW, Audi, VW, Maserati, Ferrari, Porsche etc.. drivers. There is bias everywhere, but I don't think people are so brainwashed that they will put up with a heap of junk and underplay that in a survey.
The ones these days you see are the few who survived (with a lot of care from the owners)!!
Not true at all. The 90's Alfas were among the first cars to have fully zinc-treated bodies (so no rust even if you scratch off the paint) and at least since the introduction of the Twin Spark engines and the use of third party electrics (mostly Bosch) the reliability was comparable to any other European car (not as good as Japanese cars but certainly no worse than VW).
I wasn't comparing brand image, I was simply stating the fact that a 166 was in the same market category ('Executive class' or 'Obere Mittelklasse' as the Germans call it) as a E-class Merc or a BMW 5 series. This is not an opinion but a simple fact determined by the size of the vehicle and the engines and equipment it comes with.
True, the worst Alfas were from the 80's
They probably stopped producing interesting cars in the 60's though.
The 8C is an exception and I hope the brand revives starting from there.
Changing subject a little bit:
What do you think of people driving recent Lancias?
IMO: Its like driving a Fiat while been stupidly presumptuous.
Did you ever hear about corrosion?
I find them all extremely ugly and pointless, Lancia died a long time ago.
RIP
Corrosion was the enemy of every car until the 90s, so you can't factor that as "reliability" issue on a 60/70s car.
Go find a decent Spider 2000 veloce for less than 12/13k...It's a bulletproof engine that will run another 100 years with almost no maintaince and only trouble is the body, you need to take care of rust...
How many 2 year old Alfas can you buy today with 12/13k....3 or perhaps 4? (jk)
Trouble with the Alfas from the 90 and 00s too is that they will make you go mad with electric and often serious engine trouble before they even show a tiny bit of rust on the scratched body...
Sorry, but you really don't know what you are talking about and repeating the same false opinion over and over again doesn't make it any less false.
Hmmmm...You really think that my opinion is false?
Let's see detective:
Take a look of the whatcar.com revies for the 159:
http://www.whatcar.com/car-reviews/u...-2#tabsection4
Holy crap batman, not only I found reputable source to prove my "false" opinion but I also managed to find bits and pieces to negate your "facts" on the Alfa!