Thinking of changing my MG for an Alfa Romeo 147

Third Opinion · 30 Oct 2007 at 10:34

ajgoodfellow said:
I've spent £3.5k on my MG in 18 months - surely the Alfa cannot be worse?

That is totally ridiculous but I hear not uncommon with MG's. My sister has finally cut her losses with her 2004 MG ZR after it costing her a mint in maintenance. Plus she was finding increasingly that parts were taking longer and longer to arrive.

The HG went twice in 24k, the second time it was a new engine. Not great.

I reckon with a 147 you should expect to see maintenance bills of around £600 a year max. You do need to be really careful however that you don't buy one that has had a cambelt failure. Many people just get the head fixed then out them as the main bearings usuallygive up within 6 months. That is going to cost at least £1500 to put right as I have found out from experience.

ajgoodfellow · 30 Oct 2007 at 10:41

£600/year sounds fine - thanks for the warning about the cambelt failure though

Two HGF in 24k? Ouch! Mine went about 8k ago at 49k. I always thought that the later 2004 onwards cars were better too

HEADRAT · 30 Oct 2007 at 11:03

I've always fancied a white 147 GTA

http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/278438.htm

HEADRAT

ajgoodfellow · 30 Oct 2007 at 11:07

Me too but they're just a little out of my price range!

One of the few cars that looks good in white IMO

Gilly · 30 Oct 2007 at 11:13

A Rover with a bodykit thats costing a lot to keep on the road to an Alfa.

Nice move!

Freefaller · 30 Oct 2007 at 11:23

Go for it! New Alfas are a lot more reliable, just keep away from the Selespeed models. The 2.0 is good fun to drive and is well equipped (if you get the Lusso). I was actually tempted by a couple of 03 plate 147s, they look gorgeous and are fantastic fun charismatic cars - plus they're great lookers. Yes older Alfa's had a lot of build and electric problems, but they really have sorted themselves out, as long as they are well serviced then you don;'t really have much to worry about. Cam belt is about the only dodgy thing to make sure is changed. We've owned several Alfas and despite their reputation which I feel is no longer the case, they're fun great cars to own. Besides as they say you can't be a true petrolhead until you own an Alfa

Don't be put off, but get one from an 02-03 plate onwards.

[TW]Fox · 30 Oct 2007 at 11:28

The problem with Alfa 147's is you pay good car running costs but get a small family hatchback. It's not a bad small family hatchback, but not one which matches the increased running costs and hassle.

ajgoodfellow · 30 Oct 2007 at 11:30

Yeah - that's a good point. It looks like it costs similar to a Merc/BMW to keep on the road

Still can't be more than mine though!

Freefaller · 30 Oct 2007 at 11:32

I can tell you it's a LOT cheaper than mine!

ajgoodfellow · 30 Oct 2007 at 11:41

..at least you've got the car to show for it!

Freefaller · 30 Oct 2007 at 11:58

Yeah but I'm outgrowing it and need more space!

How about going for something like a 156?

ajgoodfellow · 30 Oct 2007 at 12:03

Thought about it but I don't need the extra space and I prefer the looks of the 147

Is the 156 more reliable?

Freefaller · 30 Oct 2007 at 12:10

Just as reliable from what I've read - but they are a little quicker if that matters, but if the extra space isn't important, I think the 147 is a winner. It's more charismatic than a Golf/Focus IMO (though they are good cars), it's more quirky and generally a bit more exciting for me.

ajgoodfellow · 30 Oct 2007 at 12:21

Just what I feel

Gilly · 30 Oct 2007 at 12:26

Much uglier though.

Freefaller · 30 Oct 2007 at 12:32

Yeah but we know you have not taste so it doesn't matter

/OT: When you going to come and buy me a pint and pick up your bottle Gilly?

MarkDavis · 30 Oct 2007 at 13:25

You what the best 'Golf class' hatchback is in the world?

Something with the flair and design of an Alfa, with a BMW drivetrain/gearbox/6cyl engine and Audi engineers screwing it all together, with OEM parts being engineered and manufactured by Honda.

:cool:

MarkDavis · 30 Oct 2007 at 13:27

ajgoodfellow said:
Is the 156 more reliable?

156 is definitely less reliable. Basically, whatever bits went wrong on the 156, they tried to sort it out with the 147. Whatever bits went wrong on the 147, they tried to sort it out with the GT. You have to give Alfa some credit because which each new model they tried to improve on the reliability (though that's not saying much).

I reckon that the 147 replacement (called Junior/149?) will be pretty reliable, since they've now got that German ex-Audi/BMW bloke overseeing things.

Matmulder · 30 Oct 2007 at 13:34

Another problem with Alfa's is that parts availability is crap. Can take a while to get hold of bits that aren't commonly replaced. I've been waiting on a new engine for 5months, in the end I went to Autodelta to get one.

But there are other cases - like the bloke who's after a gearbox casing, been waiting 3 months and still not resolved. They have given him a new Alfa Spider as a courtesy, but still doesn't solve the problem.

At least the dealers and reliability are on the up though.

Freefaller · 30 Oct 2007 at 13:34

I really think the Alfa stereotype of them going wrong all the time is not so valid anymore - certainly not for cars built in the last 5 years. Admittedly they did have huge reliability issues, but if they're well looked after (like any car) they can be very reliable. There's a lot of scare stories about now which are in general just too generalised.

However I like that design idea of MarkDavis! :cool:

I love Alfa's myself so will be quite quick to defend them - but if you are scared off with all the stories, what do you feel would be a good alternative? Golf? Focus? Something else?