What constitute a True Alfa?

[Ascari32]

This may not apply to everyone, but is relevant to me and my time as an Alfa owner cum enthusiast.

The glory that was Alfa's history was never a major factor for me. At the time their cars were successful, I would never have been able to afford one. And it was by pure chance that I came to own my first Alfa. A life long friend had bought a Berlina 2000 in Cyprus and subsequently sold it to me. Perversely he bought an Austin Princess - the wedge shaped abomination from BLMC - I teased him about that forever.

That car took us as a family everywhere, clocking up huge distances on holiday on the continent. It never failed in all the time we owned it, perhaps because I did my own maintenance - not that I was in anyway a knowledgeable mechanic. Non the less I tore the engine apart and rebuilt it, when in truth I could have got away with just replacing the head gasket - the "O" rings for the oil feed to the cylinder head had perished and it was weeping a little oil. Otherwise, she was fine.

I suspect there was much cars of that era had in common, but as easy as it was to maintain, nothing was very easy to get to - grazed knuckle, cuts and bruises were were the order of the day, every time one tried to do anything by way of maintenance. They were testing times!

Just to change an exhaust was a nightmare. Things seemed to take forever for what were really simple tasks. So much so, in exasperation I would declare "That's it, I'm selling the bloody thing.

But jumping in and taking it for a test drive, within a quarter of a mile a smile crept across the face and I would sell the wife and kids for medical experiment before I would part with it - such was the power of persuasion that intoxicating twin cam had upon the senses.

I skip from the Berlina to the Alfetta GTV6. In between, there was a 2.0 Giulietta which did not have the same magnetic effect, although the engine again stood out. But the GTV6 Alfetta - Magnificent. The same criticism is levelled when it came to self maintenance. I got to know that Busso intimately and did so much to make it sparkle. Balanced, Autodelta/Colombo Bariani cams and absolutely stunning - Dropped a 2.5 BMW between Orleans and Paris simply because it could not live with the GTV, despite me having driven from Bordeaux, fully loaded with four cases of wine, my daughter, niece - both teenagers - and my wife on board.

Then we come to the modern era - Fiat. The 156 I loved but was the most expensive to maintain. The 1.9 GTD - GT the cheapest, but an oil burner, so strictly speaking not an Alfa. 155, 2.5 wide track superb, but little by way of history came with it and parts were difficult to source.

The 3.0 GTV, 1998, with still only 30k miles on her from new, a fabulous continental cruiser - a few times to Italy and back without so much as a groan, doing 143/5mph on the Autobahn from Basle to Freiburg on one occasion, whilst my wife was fast asleep in the front - just magical.

However, with my modern Alfas, I have had to rely upon garages and that has not been a pleasant experience. They charge a lot for doing virtually nothing - swapping out parts and with little understanding about them or how they are supposed to perform. Even to the point where they hazard a guess as to what the problem may be. If there was any reason to give up on Alfa's, it would be because of their agents/dealerships. It would be unkind to rubbish to call them that. The bulk that is, although there are exceptions - but too few.

And so it brings me to the 3.2 JTS 159 Q4, which on so many occasions, dealers/independents have declined to work on. So much so, virtually all the work undertaken has been via non Alfa Garages. However, detailing the work I wanted done, they have been brilliant with everything I have asked of them.

But, given my Q4 is heavily modified, there is much that one cannot leave to them, not least because of the cost. So that is where I come in. Knowing what I want to achieve is one thing, but how to achieve it is another. So much trial and error ensued and much frustration. To the extent that it took me back on several occasions to my Berlina 2000. But with the Q4, so little interference could throw thing out of kilter - dramatically - and that really sets the old grey matter's cogs whirring. Having been there before, does not make it any less frustrating and the "That's It, I've had enough" feeling comes out with a vengeance.

However, drive it down the road for a quarter of a mile and all is forgiven. Cosseted in that secure place, that the Q4 cockpit is, the silkiness of the engine and the surefooted way in which she takes any changes in the road is just sublime.

I'm in my teens again, and still in love with Twiggy, Marianne Faithful and Jenifer Eccles.

The 3.2 JTS Q4 is the real deal - every bit a True Alfa.             
 

[poohbah]

You must have been unlucky with your 156 Ascari - I'm on my third and they have been progressively cheaper to look after. Ironically, my current GTA has to date been the cheapest of all of them (and notably cheaper - at least per scheduled service - than my wife's 2019 Subaru Forester). But I have an excellent independent Alfa workshop to rely on - been taking my cars there for over a decade, and they've been in business for 40 odd years.

That aside, I'm kind of with you - I consider all three 156s (all Busso V6s) to be as quintessentially Alfa as my '81 Alfetta GTV, though they are all both "Fiat era" and FWD. Certainly the most driver-focused FWD cars I've ever driven.

The "modern" Fiat-era cars also have the benefit of being more rust resistant for starters than earlier cars! (At least in Australian conditions...)

I squibbed on buying a 2015 Giulietta QV a couple of years ago on the grounds it didn't feel "Alfa enough", but that was more to do with my general disaffection for all modern hatchbacks. I couldn't fault the way it drove, it just didn't give me the same "zing"  as my other Alfas. And yet I keep finding myself drawn to sales ads for them...

Have never owned or even driven a 159, and obviously am aware of the general criticism around weight and performance. But I still consider the 159 Sportwagon to be the pinnacle of wagon design, and would have no hesitancy buying one should I need the extra space and the right spec model was available.

[bazzbazz]

And yet I keep finding myself drawn to sales ads for them...

And probably hear the soft subliminal chanting in the back of your head, "One of us . . . one of us. . . one of us. . ."
 

[MattK]

I don't like the size of the 159, or the sewing machine noise of the 1750 TBi, but gee it's a nice car to drive. It just goes where you put it and doesn't argue back. All other cars I've driven felt vague compared to Alfas.

[Ascari32]

You must have been unlucky with your 156 Ascari - I'm on my third and they have been progressively cheaper to look after. Ironically, my current GTA has to date been the cheapest of all of them (and notably cheaper - at least per scheduled service - than my wife's 2019 Subaru Forester). But I have an excellent independent Alfa workshop to rely on - been taking my cars there for over a decade, and they've been in business for 40 odd years.

That aside, I'm kind of with you - I consider all three 156s (all Busso V6s) to be as quintessentially Alfa as my '81 Alfetta GTV, though they are all both "Fiat era" and FWD. Certainly the most driver-focused FWD cars I've ever driven.

The "modern" Fiat-era cars also have the benefit of being more rust resistant for starters than earlier cars! (At least in Australian conditions...)

I squibbed on buying a 2015 Giulietta QV a couple of years ago on the grounds it didn't feel "Alfa enough", but that was more to do with my general disaffection for all modern hatchbacks. I couldn't fault the way it drove, it just didn't give me the same "zing"  as my other Alfas. And yet I keep finding myself drawn to sales ads for them...

Have never owned or even driven a 159, and obviously am aware of the general criticism around weight and performance. But I still consider the 159 Sportwagon to be the pinnacle of wagon design, and would have no hesitancy buying one should I need the extra space and the right spec model was available.

My 156 was a base model, 1998, 1.8TS. No body kit and Alfa red with cloth trim. The way the waist tucked in was as graceful as any sculpture could be.

The car had 170,000 miles on her when she died from tin worm. It took me 40 miles each way to work and later when on secondment, from Suffolk to Bristol for two years. The company decided everyone commuting on secondment should do a A.A. driving course. Unfortunately I had 9 points on my license and but for a "Speed Awareness" course, would have been banned.

As a consequence of my points, I would not be allowed to use a company car for the A.A. training, so I used the 156. My instructor was an ex - police highways driver. His first comment on my taking off towards the M5 was, "This is front - wheel drive"? His second was, "I can understand why you keep getting done - I can't hear the engine".

After a while, we stopped and pointed out various areas of my driving technique, then took over from me. He did twice the distance/time behind the wheel than I had, in my own car!!! I don't think he wanted to give me it back.

When I final got back behind the wheel we set off, to put into practice the pointers he had given me. There was a heavy aggregate lorry in front of me as we turned onto a slip road, for the M5 near Cheltenham. Given my drives from Suffolk to Bristol were cross country and over two hundred miles each way, it would take three hours more if I adopted his approach.

I glanced towards him in the passenger seat and said, "This is how I do it". and promptly gunned past the lorry and by the time I hit the carriageway, this time he could hear the engine.

"I fancy one of these", he said.

However, I had to rely upon dealers for maintenance and but for the dreadful service I got, she could have gone on for longer - the engine, gearbox and clutch were still absolutely fine. The floor pan was shot and she suffered continually with wheel geometry; tyre wear, rear arms and steering rack, for which I was charged a fortune.

The 159 may well be heavy, but the panels are substantial - the 156 was as thin as tissue paper - metaphorically speaking. 

[Ascari32]

And yet I keep finding myself drawn to sales ads for them...

And probably hear the soft subliminal chanting in the back of your head, "One of us . . . one of us. . . one of us. . ."
 

That magnetic attraction, which to this day, no one has adequately explained. Even if there was no way of knowing a car was an Alfa, getting behind the wheel of one, subtle differences in the way they perform would set it apart from all others.

[poohbah]

Great yarn about your 156 Ascari.

I got pulled over in the GTA by the rozzers a couple of months back, purely because the copper heard me exercise my right foot as I turned off at a set of lights. By the time he had crossed lanes to get behind me I'd already eased back and was doing the speed limit. He pulled me over anyway, warned me about watching my speed  and added words to the effect of "I get you giving it a boot, you're in a GTA". To which I asked "so you know what it is?". "Of course" he said, "drive carefully and have a good night...".

Sad to hear yours eroded. Bloody UK weather and salt. Never had any rust issues with mine, being in dry sunny WA.

[Ascari32]

I don't like the size of the 159, or the sewing machine noise of the 1750 TBi, but gee it's a nice car to drive. It just goes where you put it and doesn't argue back. All other cars I've driven felt vague compared to Alfas.

The 159 looks big. And its performance isn't sparkling. However, a 1.3l Ford Capri appeared big/gutless, simply because of its "power to weight ratio". The same car with the 2.8 injection engine, or the 3.0 litre, got an awful lot smaller with those power plants under the bonnet. And a lot more interesting!

The Q4 diesel has an awful lot of grunt. "Chuckability" is the key. But the 2.4 diesel isn't geared for that and the engine is an ungainly lump, despite its brilliance. 

The 1750, a brilliant engine, but compromised by weight and front wheel drive.

But the Q4 159 is "Rock - Solid - Planted" and tracks bends like no other that I have driven. The quality of the platform is unrivalled, other than by the Giulia QF. However, with such mass, it needs to "Drive" the Torsen 4 wheel drive system, with sufficient torque at the low end, to enable the Torsen double "C" system to function properly. All four wheels need to be sharing the work and the lean burn philosophy Alfa adopted for the 3.2 JTS compromises it badly, at low revs.

However, my 159 Q4 Saloon with 291PS is most definitely a Sports Saloon, and conventionally, Sports Saloons appear to be smaller. Importantly however, my new camshafts are designed to produce more torque ~300nm at 6900rpm. It will also pull sixth gear at just over 1000rpm. 

Overcoming the lack of torque at low revs transforms the Q4. It becomes "Supremely Chuck-able". I can understand the fascination for supercharging the 3.2 JTS - Autodelta's must be brilliant. 

[poohbah]

[/quote]

And probably hear the soft subliminal chanting in the back of your head, "One of us . . . one of us. . . one of us. . ."
 
[/quote]

Bazz, I put the attraction down to one of the local club members who has one that has been "slightly" breathed on and puts out (if I recall correctly) over 280bhp.

[Ascari32]

And probably hear the soft subliminal chanting in the back of your head, "One of us . . . one of us. . . one of us. . ."

[/quote]

Bazz, I put the attraction down to one of the local club members who has one that has been "slightly" breathed on and puts out (if I recall correctly) over 280bhp.
[/quote]

Niceeeeeee! It's a great engine. Not sure how long it will last making that power however. But really - that's not important. 1750cc., imho, it the best size for a four potter. The old Berties and Berlina's sang like no other. 

[Duk]

I'll chime in and hopefully stir the pot.

What Constitutes a True Alfa?

I would say that it starts with Alfa designing the chassis.
And to a very large degree, the engine.

As an example, the 8C, in my opinion, IS NOT an Alfa.
It has a Maserati chassis, with a cross plane crank version of a Ferrari V8 engine.
Yes, they are gorgeous!

Without knowing otherwise, we'll give Alfa credit for the 4C's chassis.
But isn't the 1750 turbo engine a member of the FIAT multi-air family?

The modern Giulia.
Is it an Alfa chassis, or a variant of a Maserati chassis?
The twin turbo V6 is the twin turbo Ferrari V8 with 2 cylinders 'chopped off'. Obviously it's not like that, they are their own engine, but the internal dimensions and principal design are there.
But it was first and maybe only, used in the Giulia Quadrifoglio, so we'll give it a pass and call it an Alfa donk.

The 159 Q4.........
It is a GM chassis and it is a GM engine.
And the claims that have been around for ages that "Alfa Romeo designed the heads" on the 3.2 JTS engine...... Well, I've never seen any proof of that claim and I find it very unlikely.
I'm not trying to take anything away from the car, though maybe some weight............ 
Owning 1 is tempting.
But a 'TRUE' Alfa?
Nope.

[bazzbazz]

But isn't the 1750 turbo engine a member of the FIAT multi-air family?

No, it's not a MultiAir, it's is derived from the earlier 4 cylinder engines in the 156/147.

The modern Giulia.
Is it an Alfa chassis, or a variant of a Maserati chassis?

As far as I am aware it's an Alfa designed chassis. And as for the engine, every review of the engine has swooned over its performance, power and note . . . . is it really a bad thing to have a stunning Ferrari engine in an Alfa? 

[poohbah]

Reckon there is one more criterion to consider - does it have the power to make you forgive/forget all the trouble it's given you because of the way it looks/feels/sounds when everything is on song? I think that is an essential Alfa quality.

[Anth73]

From memory the 159 chassis was originally designed to meet internal GM torsional stiffness benchmarks for the US market. Those plans fizzled but it was too late to reengineer the overweight chassis. Is it a concidence that the VE Commodore, especially in wagon form, had a pretty strong resemblance to the 159 and was also bloated? On the plus side, the 159 Ti Sportwagon I briefly owned was a much more robust car than the 156 I owned earlier. But the 156 was much more fun to drive and that's what made it more of a true Alfa to me.

My current Giulietta QV has some Alfa DNA on show through the twisties and in general styling, but I much rather take my GTV6 out for a Sunday drive even if the QV is faster point to point. The primeval driving experience is what differentiates it and draws us back for more.

[Ascari32]

I'll chime in and hopefully stir the pot.

What Constitutes a True Alfa?

I would say that it starts with Alfa designing the chassis.
And to a very large degree, the engine.

As an example, the 8C, in my opinion, IS NOT an Alfa.
It has a Maserati chassis, with a cross plane crank version of a Ferrari V8 engine.
Yes, they are gorgeous!

Without knowing otherwise, we'll give Alfa credit for the 4C's chassis.
But isn't the 1750 turbo engine a member of the FIAT multi-air family?

The modern Giulia.
Is it an Alfa chassis, or a variant of a Maserati chassis?
The twin turbo V6 is the twin turbo Ferrari V8 with 2 cylinders 'chopped off'. Obviously it's not like that, they are their own engine, but the internal dimensions and principal design are there.
But it was first and maybe only, used in the Giulia Quadrifoglio, so we'll give it a pass and call it an Alfa donk.

The 159 Q4.........
It is a GM chassis and it is a GM engine.
And the claims that have been around for ages that "Alfa Romeo designed the heads" on the 3.2 JTS engine...... Well, I've never seen any proof of that claim and I find it very unlikely.
I'm not trying to take anything away from the car, though maybe some weight............ 
Owning 1 is tempting.
But a 'TRUE' Alfa?
Nope.

You would have to go back the the "Horseless Carriage" to find any wholly designed transport. No company makes all the systems used on their vehicles. but they own the intellectual rights to the design. Both Rolls Royce and Aston Martin used American V8 designs as the blue-print for their cars. As for the Ferrari engined QF, Sergio pulled a team together from Ferrari engineers to design the V6, which does have a lot in common with the Ferrari California. But it was not simply a matter of chopping two cylinders off, there is much more to redesigning it as a V6. So there are common aspects to it, but so too is there common aspects to BMW V12 and their straight sixes.

The heads for the Alfa 3.2 JTS are not a completely new design. One can see the glaring omissions in the design after they fitted the four cam VVT system - the front cover is from the SAAB & Insignia 2.8 Turbo, The oil feeds to rear head is misaligned and the disparity between the oil feeds to both the inlet and exhaust VVT's doesn't help, let alone the position sensor for the rear bank exhaust camshaft, which is out of kilter - simply because the boss for fixing it is, as it was when the front cover was fitted to the SAAB's & Vauxhall's, as they only had VVT on their inlets. The heads are a botched rework by Holden to Alfa's spec.

None of these problems are massive to overcome. However Alfa didn't and thus what is intrinsically a great engine is loathed by some. The Busso too suffered from bad press too in the early days.

Alfa always leave headroom for improvement - I'm being generous now. The 159 Platform was gifted Alfa as part of the divorce settlement with GM, that and two Billion Quid. So I count them lucky to have got it. But the weight is woeful, with only the 2.4 oil burner capable of sufficient torque to shift it. The petrol versions are awful, except the 1750 which is just hamstrung by the mass of the car. Otherwise it is a great engine. It was a waste of a great engine.

But there is little difference in the bore and stroke of the 3.2 JTS and the 3.2 GTA Busso. But the Busso doesn't produce 300Nm. or greater, from 3600rpm to 6900rpm,with a peak of 320Nm. at 4500rpm. You wont get that torque spread from fixed valve timing. This is why I argue the platform's weight is irrelevant when there is sufficient torque - look at the weight of some of the Ferraris and other exotica.

And you won't get my 159 Q4 hanging its backside out on bends the way the GTA's or GTV's do!

Rid the 3.2 JTS of the lean burn aspect at low revs and their is more than enough grunt to cope with the car's weight. For that reason, it is as good as any of the production models since Fiat took over. I do of course discount their QF and the 8C. The 4C is a different kettle of fish altogether.