28.1mpg.....

Having driven a few mass-market cars, I can certainly say they're very rubbery and isolated compared with the Alfa. There's no life, no soul. Technically they may 'handle better', but if the car doesn't feel alive then, IMHO, it's not handling well.

The shell, the interior, the cylinder heads, the gearbox.

Parts are shared with Fiat, but then they would be, given that Fiat own Alfa.

Besides, I rate Fiats too.

But I've not always bought Fords...

Nor have I always picked Fords for the various fleets...

The lack of Ford products? The fact that you don't have a car that's sensible for a rainy climate?

All just a bunch of overpriced Fiats.

Alfa is to Fiat as Seat is to Volkswagen.

Too reliable, needs to buy a rover 75: 80,000 miles, two years, 6 mths in garage, new engine (cambelt) , two clutches (both failed, not burned out), and the odd sensor failure.

hmmm. Fiat chassis, Fiat electronics, GM engines and shoddy workmanship.

because they're cheap.

Not even close.

Alfa actually do a hell of a lot of their own engineering work. Whilst the floorpans are similar, they're vastly modified, and the cylinder heads are all Alfas own work.

But the wierd thing is that I bet you actually did like that car, didn't you?

Fiat *based* chassis, but on vastly modified suspension, electronics are a mixture of Bosch and Fiat, engine blocks are designed by Fiat with an Alfa head - the only GM involvement is that they own some shares and are nicking Fiat engine technology as they can't sort their own.

Handling is subjective. So one mans good handling is not the same as another.

The best front drive medium size chassis in no particular order are:

Focus, Alfa 156, Rover 75 / MG TF, Honda Accord (current one),

Indeed, the Alfa feels the most alive of all of them, but mostly due to the oh so quick steering rack that can make them a bit fidgety on damp slippy twisty roads.

Yes. I don't expect him to check the oil in his Mondeo, and I don't expect him to have any problems.

Funny how those people I know who have run an Alfa say, "never again" when they change it.

All modern Alfa Romeos feel rubbery and isolated.

Seat do a hell of a lot of their own engineering work. Whilst the floorpans are similar, the interiors, styling, design, suspension and engine management are Seat's own work.

Your point was???

Yep, and I nearly bought another (Kev - unohoo - did!)

Fords, I agree, are characterless and soulless, but better for it. My Volvo has been driven harder than the Rover ever was, and is utterly reliable and much better built, I wanted to change it due to car boredom, but really can't bring myself to doing it.

I nearly owned an Alfa too, once. Proper one though - 166....

IIRC the new GM 4 cyl diseasels are Fiats, but the new (or next) Alfa V6s will be reworked Ecotecs. And the JTS engine is remarkably similar to that in the Vectra....

No no no, Steve was talking about the handling, not the interior quality....

So it's okay for Alfa to modify Fiat's suspensions and it be considered a different car, but when Ford vastly modify the suspension settings between generations, you consider it to be the same car?

And injecting proper build quality.