What car should I go for?

[Phil]

Can someone please help me?

I'm in 2 minds here trying to buy a car.I have around £22,000 to spend. Now this is were the problem starts. Should I go for a Audi A4 1.6 or a Alfa 156 2.0.

Are these the right cars to even be thinking of or have I lost the plot altogether.

Can some please help?

[Ciaran]

Phil,

Here's a good tip for someone in your position. You say you have up to £22,000 to spend. Now I'm sure you'll want metallic paint + alarm, so this could add £700 to the car's price. Also, delivery charges could amount to around £300 (unless you are talking about a Fiat or an Alfa Romeo, whom operate an Open Book policy). So that gives a base price of £21,000. Now, if you use eForecourt's New Car Locator (http://www.eforecourt.com/showroom/) to find new cars within your budget you can narrow down the number of suitable cars. For example I've used the locator for cars between £20,000 and £21,000, and this returned 25 matches, so you are spoilt for choice. One car you may want to consider - the Honda Accord 1.8S Vtec 4dr, which comes in at just under 21,000. For the 156, the 2 litre costs 21,700 all in (excluding metallic paint). On the other hand, you'd get an Audi 1.6E. Don't know which is the best overall, but I'd say the 156 would be a better drivers cars, and it does come with air-con and alloy wheels as standard. HTH.


------------------
Ciaran Moran.
ciaran@eForecourt.com

[Phil]

I have to that the Alfa 156 2.0 is looking more and more like the car to go for.

When I buy the car I'll let you know.

[Eirik]

Don't know about Ireland, but here in Norway the value of Alfas plummet faster than most cars, about on par with Citroen (Sitron = lemon in Norwegian :) )

[Phil]

Eirik, should I go for a second BMW 3/5 series. A 97 to 99 BMW car would be a nice car to drive, plus they seem to hold their price.
Is the Alfa 156 a bad buy in terms of selling in years to come?

[Eirik]

As I said, I don't know how Alfas hold their prices in your country, but they don't hold up well in Norway. If you plan to keep the car long, you should also expect pretty high running cost for service/maintenance.

If they made a larger car, I'd seriously consider Mitsubishi in Norway. They come with 5 year full guarantee and service included in the price (even consumables like coolant, brake pads, exhaust system, and all labour is included for 5 years).

Personally, I'd never buy BMW or Mercedes because I don't think they offer enough for the money they ask. I'd seriously consider a Skoda Octavia if I were you. Peugeout 406 also seems like a nice car to me. Other cars I'd consider are Mazda 626, Toyota Avensis, Honda Accord. But I agree they might be a bit boring, more sense than emotion. You must make up your own mind, and take your time test driving! You'll be amazed how little things like mirror placement, pedal room, interior design, head room, seat comfort etc etc can soothe or annoy. Don't just listen to advice from others, try it yourself.

Also VERY important IMO; check what the car will cost you over the time you plan to keep it (value depreciation, service cost, fuel consumption, insurance). It might just be that a 22K car is cheaper in the long run than a 18K car - and be more fun to own as well.

[Junior]

Oh oh oh I've an Idea .. theres a Scooby Impreza STI available in Rover Waterford for 30 gees ..I know for a fact that the original price was less than that... It's a beautiful white colour with the gold Five spoke alloys, variable differential control, full STI Kit .. g'wan inquire about it anyways and let me know .. if they are stuck on 30 gees let me know and I'll see what he paid for it originally :eek:

[Phil]

Junior, 30 grand is a little out of my reach. I think if I had 30 grand I'd go for a second hand 5 series with all the trimings. :cool:

I'm going to test drive a Alfa 156 tomorrow, so I'll let you's know how I get on. :D

[Justin]

Get A 2nd hand Scooby. The Alfa isn't on the same planet!!!!

[Phil]

Had a look at the Alfa 1.8 sports. Had to say I was very impressed with the sports than compared with the 2.0.

I enquired about all the trimmings, eletric sunfoof, leather seats, Metalic Paint, 16inc alloys,leather steering wheel and gear knob. In fact the works all in for £21500.

I going to take it out for a test drive this week so I'll let you know what's it like to drive after coming from a Honda Prelude 2.2i

[Michael Power]

Yes, but it's a 1.8 dammit...don't you realise that all the 2.0 drivers sneer dismissively at the guy in the 1.8 ? The 1.8 might as well have written on the side "My company car allowance couldn't stretch to the 2.0".

I think a good rule of thumb, IMHO, is to always buy the best basic car your budget allows. If there's room for extras, fine, if not, you still have a better car.

Again, IMHO, the 1.8 will not hold resale anything like the 2.0.

Michael

[Anders]

The Alfa 156 will hold its value in principal. I think the only problem is the fact that there are so many of them around. The car is so cheap to buy new in comparison to other cars of that ilk, that it's not going to drop dramatically. I don't really see much justification for the huge cost differential between a BMW 3-series and an Alfa 156, so it's possible it will even narrow in the used market. But maybe I'm underestimating the great demand for driving a BMW (318i).

I took my wife's Alfa 156 2.0 for a spin over the weekend. Not a bad all-round car and about as involving as a 3-series BMW. I wouldn't call the 156 a fast car and it does need revving. I like the engine sound. About the only bad thing about the Alfa is that it can't cope with really bad roads too well, you can get crashing sounds out of the suspension. That would never happen in a BMW.

An Audi A4 1.6? Don't even bother.

[Justin]

I don't know about the 1.8 or 2.0 Alfa 156, but I drove a V6 one, and I thought it was a bit lame, with a rough sounding engine which you had to flog the cobblers off to get moving. I know that this is heresy, but it sounds just the flat 4 in the Subaru Impreza, which coincidentally costs less and is a much much better car, except perhaps in depreciation terms, but even that is debatable in relation to a 156 V6.

I think the 2.0 156 is meant to be the best version.

[Justin]

I don't know about the 1.8 or 2.0 Alfa 156, but I drove a V6 one, and I thought it was a bit lame, with a rough sounding engine which you had to flog the cobblers off to get moving. I know that this is heresy, but it sounds just the flat 4 in the Subaru Impreza, which coincidentally costs less and is a much much better car, except perhaps in depreciation terms, but even that is debatable in relation to a 156 V6.

I think the 2.0 156 is meant to be the best version.

[Phil]

I'm sorry Justin, but I would'nt be caught dead in a Impreza. It may be a great car to drive ( no arguments there ) but it just looks like a regular run of the mill car with a few things added to tart it up. It's just not worth the money. All I can say is Scooooby Scooooby Don't. :rolleyes:

I have to say that the ALFA sport may not be as fast, but it has a bit of class about it.

For my money the Alfa comes in well ahead of the Impreza.

[WhipLash]

MP: I think the ideas of rep’s in their 2.0 litre 156’s looking down on the 1.8 drivers are now dead and buried. It now appears they are driving the Selespeed version, so the 2.0 litre doesn’t cut it any more :(. Also the ‘Silver’ fad appears to have changed this year – most 00 plate 156’s seem to be Red.

I must admit that in theory, the 2.0 156 sounds the better. But there's not much difference power wise between it and the 1.8 (about 12 BHP and about 8 MPH difference). The 1.8 sport looks far better, having the side skirts, 16" alloys (which look far better then the standard ones on the 2.0 litre), and it has a lowered/stiffened suspension. The only thing you're missing then is the air-con, and sure you can get that added in and you still come in at around the same price as the 2.0, but the car looks better and probably drives better because of the 'sportier' ride. Besides, the 2.0 has one of the worst false wooden dashes I've ever seen (sh1t, where’s the pukey smilie gone?) And then don't forget you'll also have marginally cheaper insurance and car tax, and get better MPG. And to add more to this argument, I'll stick my neck out and admit that I'd still be interested in buying the 1.6 120 BHP sports version (which will be available in May :)). BTW, I think the reason why the Alfa needs more revving is because its engine uses variable valve timing similar to Honda VTECH. I believe chipping the engine smoothens it out to a more acceptable level. As regards the looks of the 156 in general, IMO I think its one of the best sculptured cars around. Next time you see one, take time out to study the lines along front, but especially the beautifully designed bulging sides. Design wise, its an Italian masterpiece :cool:


[This message has been edited by WhipLash (edited 04 April 2000).]

[Anders]

I wouldn't buy an Alfa with the basic spec, much as I wouldn't buy a BMW with the non-existent basic spec. My wife's 156 has sports pack 3 which included the 16" alloys, leather, a/c, s/r, and carbon fibre effect centre console. The lower ride wasn't an option at the time, as far as I know.

The Alfa 2.0 TS engine does not have the characteristics of a VTEC engine. In a VTEC engine you feel a surge over 5000 revs. The Alfa engine never really kicks in and I feel that it is a little reluctant to rev too, particularly in comparison to a VTEC engine.

I wouldn't buy a car that size with anything less than a 2 litre engine and I definitely wouldn't get the 1.6 litre engine. If I were you I would wait for the 147. At least then you wouldn't be at the bottom of the food chain.

[WhipLash]

I don't think the 1.6 with sports pack would be bottom of the barrel, and it would certainly be miles ahead of the BMW 1.6, but I do understand where you're coming from. For some people the bigger engine is a must, but in my case most of my driving nowadays is city bound, so I wouldn’t get any benefit from driving the 2.0 litre version. It'd only do my head in knowing I'd so much power beneath me and not being able to 'plant it' because of being stuck in God awful traffic. :(

As regards the 147, I don't think it looks half as good as the 156, and I don't like the thought if buying a brand new spanking model that's potentially got manufacturing/design flaws that need ironing out (like most new models).

http://www.automedia-online.com/spion/pics/alfa_147_3f2.jpg


[This message has been edited by WhipLash (edited 04 April 2000).]

[SpyCamera]

I have to say from experience that there is hardly any difference between the 2.0 and the 1.8.

I think for the money the alfa 1.8 sports pack 3 is the better deal. :D

I'd be worried that 1.6 will be way to underpowered for the size of the car. :(

So if anyone buys one make sure you don't have any passengers while over taking. :rolleyes:

[Justin]

OK buy the puny one with more goodies then.

You can't be serious about the Scoob not representing better value for money over an Alfa. You may not like the looks (I don't) but it is genuinely on a different planet to the Alfa in driving enjoyment terms and beats the socks off the V6 in terms of value. I think the Alfa is beginning to look like a "regular run of the mill car" now anyway, and surely if you spend extra on the "sport" nonsense as opposed to the engine, it is a regular Alfa with a few things addd on to tart it up. The Scooby NEEDS the bonnet scoop. The Alfa 1.8 :rolleyes: DOESN'T need any spoiler or bigger wheels at all at all. Its chassis can usually keep those 140 titanic horses ploughing via the front wheels in the right direction without those delicious and tasteful spoilers.

[This message has been edited by Justin (edited 04 April 2000).]