FS: Alfa 156 TSpark

But it's very true.

Compare 'first drive' reports, which are invariably done on smooth Spanish tarmac in the sun, with full UK road tests - they're often very, very different. They're so known to be different that many road testers include a disclaimer in their reviews 'handling and ride were exceptional, but it remains to be seen how the results on smooth Spanish tarmac stand up when we get a car back to the UK'

Setups are a compromise, you make something that mostly works everywhere

- but we have very poor roads compared with where the largest volume of cars will be sold, so get a setup that mostly works OK, but isn't tuned for our driving conditions.

When Rover were working with Honda, the Rover badged cars were often significantly improved in terms of ride and handling as they *were* tuned specifically for UK roads.

Not really. More a take on the fashion of shoehorning big engines into smaller and smaller cars, that it could be argued, started with the Golf VR6, a great example of too much engine driving the front two wheels.

Personally I would take the 1.6 or 1.9 diesel 147 over the GTA *but* I'm tight; see below.

I struggle to believe that you're using miles per gallon as a reason why not to get the V6 on a B-road blat. I also don't believe that the difference in balance and handling will make jack all real world difference unless you go straight from the 2.0 to the 2.5.

You will, however, listen to the 2.5's wonderful engine note and laugh at the guy trying to look smug because his 2.0 is returning 33 mpg compared to the 2.5's 25. But only briefly because you'll be leaving him far behind.

If the difference is just between different variants of the same model, one may feel nose-heavy in comparison to the other, but against its peers, both will feel the same. The '96 Mondeo V6 I would toy about in did feel a bit more understeery than the 1.8, but sounded *much* nicer when trying hard and was a stack quicker.

Amongst other issues.

The Italian market buys very few big engined cars due to tax regulations, so their large engined cars are tuned for the wider European market.

But they're by no means the only manufacturer who does that.

As I remember, it used to be based on engine size, but this has now changed for power output... But anyway, most Italian drivers bought a

Maybe, maybe not. I can tell the V6 is much heavier on the front end, but then I drive a 156 every day.

Everything is a balance - the 2.0TS is a better car to drive when you're 'in the groove', the 2.5 is quicker in a straight line. The 2.0TS struggles to drop much below about 28mpg even when caning it - the 2.5 may as well be dumping neat fuel into the exhaust, given that it'll drop into low teens if you even think about using all the performance available.

Overall, certainly in the UK, the 2.0TS is the best model in the range - especially as they drive and ride nicely on standard / lusso suspension and wheels. To stop the 2.5s grounding out, you need to have Veloce / Sportpack suspension, which can make them a little harsh when you're not in the right mood. (There's a massive difference in ride quality between Katie's lusso and my veloce)

Or a 2.0 litre twin-turbo Maserati / 2.0 Ferrari / Alfa with a 2lt V6 Turbo etc.

There were many 2lt oddities out there due to the Italian taxation rules up until quite recently.

Italian Volvo T5s were 2.0s as well.

'Wrong type of snow' 'Dead leaves on the line'

;-)

But EVO test many, many very flash cars such as Ferraris and the like on UK roads, and their preferred test route, 'The EVO Triangle', is just some crappy roads in the middle of no where near Wales, with the main part of the route having loads of bumpy bits, differing surfaces from patching, pot holes etc etc and I've never read one of their reviews saying "Unfortunately the 997 GT2 and new Lambo Gallardo LP560 both smashed their sumps and front valances on the bumps". One review, well, comparison they did a year or so back had the new Gallardo Superleggera and a new Scooby (old style, not nows new model) of some flavour and they were doing chase runs which each trying to catch / keep up with the other on the traditional British countryside twisties. The road itself didn't look very smooth and was complete with dry stone walls, trees, sheep etc. So in summary, which I've heard of Alfa GTAs, and actually last gen Leon Cupra Rs, smacking their sumps on the floor - I don't think it's down to the roads themselves, and certainly in the Cupra's case is down to the speed bump the council has added to the road... I've only ever read of it happening over speedbumps, rather than crap roads.

The ones that are in demand now are the 2.5s with the LSD as they're a fabulous thing to drive apparently. Although, I'd rather a saloon/hatch (could you get a hatch?) than an estate like PeteMs current steed.

This is the point I beleive he was making - that a FWD one can never be right, so it's just a case of making it as good as you can and hiding the flaws as much as possible. Whereas we've all seen BMWs 50/50 weight distribution adverts, although they never mention the small boots and big transmission tunnel heh.

Interesting/pointless fact, the Volvo 340 has near 50/50 weight distribution. My mate had one at college, brown, 'b' reg 1.4 DL - it was slow and a bit/lot shit, but it did actually handle really well hehe!

No one can accuse the 5 or 7 of small boot or lack of passenger space.

My merc is 51/49 (front heavy). ISTR all MB and BMW saloons are within 5% of

50/50 with the driver and fuel.

Alfa got it right with the 75 - inboard discs to reduce unsprung weight, gearbox at the back to move the distribution, rear drive. Since then they've been re-engineering inferior platforms (not to their competitors but to the

75) and have failed to make anything quite as pure, in fact nothing in the current range is as exciting as they look.

They should have teamed up with someone to make a nice light rear drive chassis and stuck a light aluminium 159 style body on it. Then no-one would have had an excuse not to buy one. Instead they made it heavier than a 5 series but smaller than a C class.

You mean 3rd gear at 60 as the boost comes on strong. Yes I had that. Kinda scary, especially as you are still accellerating as well a spinning.

Yeah, it was ace :-) The first time I drove the car after fitting it, I was coming off the M65 (J5/accrington) and heading up to the M66 up a steep dual carriageway at 2am. I gave it some, found myself doing well into 3 figures and had to brake for an uphill bend that was never sharp before :-). Fantastic..

Mike P

I've never seen the Autodelta 147 on Top Gear.

Mine was a in the '84. The £300 one that just happened to have the Garrett/Bosch/Scary cam combo that did nowt then went mental, and it was the first time I'd floored it properly, to pass a TT that was dawdling along at 40 on a national dual carriageway, so signal, pull out, boot, scrabble, pass pull in. Most I ever took it to was 90 in 3rd but it still hadn't hit the limiter or boost cut. But the 911 that had been gaining on me stopped gaining on me, so a shifted to 5th and sat there.

HTH

My E30 is allegedly 51/49, the E30 saloons are closer to 53/47.

The modern ones have driving positions to suit actual humans, which is a bonus. I love 3.0 75s, but that driving position is atrocious, probably the only reason I've not bought one over the years. Shame as the 75 3.0 would be a fun thing to drive more often.

That would have cost too much. Don't forget FIAT were rapidly going broke when they designed the 159 - hence getting GM involved. They did the right thing by getting GM to pay for loads of development, but if they'd made an alloy body 159 Alfa be history now, and that would be a shame. Hopefully the 159 replacement will be RWD, lighter, and exclusively V6 - or even better have the Maserati V8.

I'd buy one, maybe even new.

Can't see the 159 replacement getting RWD.

The 166 replacement (when it finally arrives) will be RWD.

The good news is that the GM based JTS and V6 are likely to be ditched with the next generation of cars and replaced by Fiat based lumps with Alfa heads.