159 wagon rear seats 2009+

[alf]

Hi Folks,

I'm new here and a prospective alfa owner after having had a 33 Quattro wagon some years back.  The 33 was a beast, it was a freebie when I was broke and I figured it might get me through a year till I was over the hump of first home ownership (having sold my MX5 to use as a deposit).  I grew to love it and hate it in equal measure, and although I had to push start it from time to time it NEVER let me down and I sold it after 5 years still going strong.  Ahhh...

Anyhow, I'm considering reigniting the passion so to speak with a 159 wagon.  I looked at one and was amazed at how only the Italians could make a theoretically practical car so useless!  With seats folded there is a 2-3" lip at the front of the rear cargo area and then the seats go up at maybe a 5-10 degree angle (presumably to minimise usefulness).  Coming from a car whose rear seats folded to form a DEAD FLAT rear cargo bay up to the front seats it's a disappointment (though somewhat endearing in an alfa sort of way).

I've read the 2009 update has an improved rear seat which "folds flat", but this is not terribly well documented.  Given I don't have any 09 models nearby I can check out, does anyone here have an update model and can describe or better yet post an image of the rear seats folded?  I'm trying to work out whether it's worth trying to find a later model one.  Also, when did the update model come out, ie is any MY09 car the updated model?  It's hard to tell with basically no external signs.

Cheers
Alf

[[MotoPete]]

Boot shot from 04/09 plated 159 wagon

[shiny_car]

^^^ That is our 159SW. For sale I might add! 

As pictured, the seat doesn't fold flat. In comparison, the seats in my GT fold flat, but the design is quite different, where you first fold the seat base forwards, which obviously lowers the area where the seat backs can 'fold into' (or you can still fold the GT seats forward with the seat base in normal position, and the seat backs thus don't fold flat). Anyway, the 159 seat bases are 'fixed'.

Our car is a Series 2, and this is meant to be the 'updated' seat design AFAIK. Go figure.
I haven't seen a Series 3 car to compare.

[[MotoPete]]

^^^ That is our 159SW. For sale I might add! 

That's GOLD! 

[[MotoPete]]

Our car is a Series 2, and this is meant to be the 'updated' seat design AFAIK. Go figure.
I haven't seen a Series 3 car to compare.

There's a 2011 (61 reg) on Auto Trader (UK) for sale and the boot looks no different to yours...

[alf]

Thanks very much, great info and I think that answers the thread!  Obviously some journalist took the PR fluff a bit too literally.  It's good in a way since it means that at least in that respect there's no point me looking for anything newer/more expensive to gain some practicality.  In fact maybe I should get a GT instead?

Aside from the rear tailgate you can actually sort of open from the outside (Alfa gold) is there much difference between say an 07 and an 09?  Noticeable on road stuff, equipment or fixes for known faults?  It seems these things are actually pretty well designed/built and that the mid-cycle-update "non-facelift" was very mild.

That's a nice looking Ti shiny_car, very tempting but I need to retain some sense to the purchase.  I'm looking for an oil burner I'm afraid, and an auto at that since it's primarily for a highway commute each weekday and I'd like the economy and relaxing nature of a modern diesel. 

[shiny_car]

Cheers.

The differences that I recall between series of 159 include:

Series 2 (compared with Series 1): resculptured rear seat, with base sittings lower (whether it impacts on fold-down, I don't know); lighter suspension components (more pieces are alloy) that reduces unsprung weight; tailgate-release push button badge

Series 3 (compared with Series 2): loses Hillholder brake function; loses full size spare wheel; anthracite Ti wheel option

In Australia, I think all S1 Sportwagons are non-Ti versions, and included petrol 2.2 + 3.2, diesel 1.9 + 2.4.

For S2 cars, the diesel 2.4 was available in normal (incl manual) and Ti versions (?all auto), and petrol now only in 3.2 V6 Ti spec (all auto, except handful of special imports).

For S3, pretty sure all were Ti spec, and in 2.4 and 3.2 guise.

Basically, you probably want a S2 2.4 Ti, being the best value all-round package for most people. For us, my wife insisted on AWD at the time, so the 3.2 petrol was the only choice, but my personal pick anyway!

[[MotoPete]]

Series 3 (compared with Series 2): loses Hillholder brake function...

Sorry to briefly go off-topic, but do you know Alfa's rationale behind this?! It's just one of the things I love about my car!

[Craig_m67]

Bloody hell, I didn't know that about the 159 rear seats.
How ridiculous of Alfa, is something under them (tank)?

I've been hunting for a blue 3.2 or 2.4 159 Ti Sport wagon as a replacement for our 156 but if the seats don't fold properly it will annoy me no end.  Anybody know if the seats in the Brera fold properly (OT sorry)?

[shiny_car]

Series 3 (compared with Series 2): loses Hillholder brake function...

Sorry to briefly go off-topic, but do you know Alfa's rationale behind this?! It's just one of the things I love about my car!

It's what I've been told, but can't actually confirm 100% it's true. Still, no idea behind the rationale.

Bloody hell, I didn't know that about the 159 rear seats.
How ridiculous of Alfa, is something under them (tank)?

I think the transmission tunnel for the AWD cars does have an impact, say compared with the FWD GT (though the 156 Crosswagon overseas was of course AWD and the same platform as the GT).

For us, not a big deal, because we don't ever fold the seats down.

[[MotoPete]]

Anybody know if the seats in the Brera fold properly (OT sorry)?

They're the same as the 159 unfortunately...

[alf]

Drove the 159 (1.9JTDm auto) again and it was a sobering experience.  Leaving aside all the practicality issues (which it can be argued are somewhat offset by the divine looks) it was a bit of a slug.  What felt like a muscular delivery in tight city streets at low speed and light throttle simply didn't get any faster when opened up on a highway.  An hour later I drove an 07 Passat TDI (with twice the mileage) which claims 103kw and 320nm vs the Alfa on 110/320 and it was like night and day, the Passat felt like a rocket (and has none of the practicality issues of the alfa).

The 159 had been almost exclusively city driven for the last 18 months and although there was no warnings on the dash I'm wondering if the DPF or inlet manifold etc was clogged with junk.  Very underwhelming performance and was showing an average of 9.8l/100km on the computer - slow AND thirsty.  Is the 2.4 even more thirsty again?

I still liked the solidity of the body, doors closed with a pleasing thump and there were no rattles I recall but the road noise was very intrusive at freeway speeds.  The poor car had horrid tyres on so perhaps it was just down to that.  Despite the general lack of space anywhere, the interior was a nice place to be, and the front seats (poverty pack) were great.  Although it felt a lot slower it didn't have the frenetic nothing-to-everything surge of the Passat which highlighted the fwd torque steer, the Alfa always felt very composed.

I'll keep looking and an open mind though, maybe try again with a 2.4 but if fuel consumption is at the level of a good turbo petrol then why bother?

Sorry for hijacking my own thread...

[[MotoPete]]

I wouldn't take too much notice of what the on board computer says... mine (3.2 JTS Q4) often sits around the 14 mark, yet (fuel) log book records actually put me around the 11 mark. Log books don't lie.

The 1.9 should be using around 6, with the 2.4 only slightly worse off at 7.

[[MotoPete]]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q-Uwqg9w94

This one seems to go alright...

[Brad M]

The 159 had been almost exclusively city driven for the last 18 months and although there was no warnings on the dash I'm wondering if the DPF or inlet manifold etc was clogged with junk.

Still OT, but the 1.9 diesel doesn't have a filter to clog like the 2.4 diesel. Our 1.9 is pretty brisk with the turbo spinning, granted the 147 is 268kg lighter (1310 vs 1578). My pick would be a 1.9 manual, only shame is there was no TI version of the 159 wagon.