Alfa Brera Prodrive 3.2 S Coupe

Sneaky Peaky · 17 Feb 2010 at 14:58

What do people think of these ?

They say you're not a real Petrol Head until you've owned an Alfa !

http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/1447240.htm

ajstan · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:00

Love the look of those, wish it wasn't an alfa tbh.

Witor · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:03

iirc it's a Brera Q4 with 100kg removed, little bit lower and blistein dampers/brembos.

It's still around 1550kg with the weight reduction.

Cyanide · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:03

Don't know about that one but the standard one looks like an orgasm on wheels yet is far too slow and the handlings just not up to scratch

Hatter The Mad · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:04

Cyanide said:
Don't know about that one but the standard one looks like an orgasm on wheels yet is far too slow and the handlings just not up to scratch

That is what the Prodrive model is supposed to correct.

OP: Look at the 2.2 S

peterattheboro · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:08

Supercar looks without the go.

SHOULD be a lot faster than it actually is imo.

Ok not supercar but you know what I mean.

Cyanide · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:13

Hatter The Mad said:
That is what the Prodrive model is supposed to correct.

It's still not as fast as it looks though, 0-60 in 7s is what the standard one should be doing so a more powerful version should be running low 6's

And from what I gather than better handling comes at the cost of a lot of the ride comfort.

So it's still not hugely fast and now it's uncomfortable, I'd rather a slow GT Cruiser than a moderately pokey slipped disc.

MikeHiow · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:15

I've never understood the fuss over these, I mean, they are a fairly pretty car, as most Alfas are, but there seemed/seems to be too much fuss made over them.

Freefaller · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:15

Although it's not as quick as it should, the handling of the prodrive pack should be pretty good. Sure it is a bit heavy, and IIRC it has a AWD system so loses some clout. However, I'd take one of them without even thinking twice. :cool:

Firestar_3x · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:18

Are any of these so called "Petrol Head" Alfas actually RWD?

Freefaller · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:23

This one is AWD, though some of the better Alfas were RWD. One of my favourites was the 75 3.0 V6, the other was the Montreal 2.6L V8 :cool:

Peerzy · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:23

Firestar_3x said:
Are any of these so called "Petrol Head" Alfas actually RWD?

No, Alfa doesn't currently have a RWD platform to use. Some older Alfa's are RWD but no current model has it (expect maybe the 8C).

The Brera is available in FWD or 4WD. The FWD version of the 3.2 I drove handled the power fine. 4WD is .2 seconds quicker to 60 according to Alfa.

Firestar_3x · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:41

Freefaller said:
This one is AWD, though some of the better Alfas were RWD. One of my favourites was the 75 3.0 V6, the other was the Montreal 2.6L V8

This was my point in disguise, the amount of truly great drivers cars based on a FWD platform can be counted on one hand, Lotus Elan & the Integra come to mind, i can't think of a single Alfa that would make the list.

All the proper petrol head Alfas are in the past (8C excluded).

Freefaller · 17 Feb 2010 at 15:58

Probably. However people don't always own an alfa purely for it's performance or handling. But for it's prestige, engine and just pant wetting looks!

However I think most Alfas tick most of the boxes that one would hope for in general.

Django x2 · 17 Feb 2010 at 16:05

I'd rather blow my own ballsack off and drive a clio than risk an Alfas reliability

Witor · 17 Feb 2010 at 16:09

(Seeing as there's no OcUK "unconfortable smiley" option

)

Sneaky Peaky · 17 Feb 2010 at 16:17

Lol - just found Clarksons review..

This car, then, is a bit like having a very beautiful but bonkers girlfriend. You’ll know exactly why you got involved, but equally you’ll know that the relationship can never last.

Clarkson’s Verdict: Lovely to look at, shocking to drive

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/article5055312.ece

Shame

leon4112 · 17 Feb 2010 at 16:34

Oh and the one above is now fwd for the weight loss

Peerzy · 17 Feb 2010 at 16:54

Lucero said:
I'd rather blow my own ballsack off and drive a clio than risk an Alfas reliability

To completely rule out ever Alfa because of a reputation is silly. Alfa's are generally well build now, mechanical and engine problems are few and far between. You're more likely to come across a few electrical gremlins but nothing major or, for example; a new 159.

They are not perfect, but something that always strikes me is people moan that a 10 year old 3.2 itre hot Alfa costs money to run, but equally Fox's 3.0litre E39 which is potentially one of the best looked after example has cost him thousands to run.

Also:
Don't buy an Audi because they're boring.
Don't buy a BMW because they're driven by cocks.
Don't buy a french car because the electrics blow up and go mental.
Don't buy a Fiat because it'll fall apart.
Don't buy a Ford because it'll rust.
Don't buy a Honda because they're boring.
etc...

Dogbreath · 17 Feb 2010 at 17:02

Firestar_3x said:
This was my point in disguise, the amount of truly great drivers cars based on a FWD platform can be counted on one hand, Lotus Elan & the Integra come to mind, i can't think of a single Alfa that would make the list.

There are many excellent FWD cars, I simply don't understand this blind assumption that RWD=great cars. There are hundreds, possibly thousands of RWD cars that utterly sucked. I guess you are too young to remember the Alfa Sud and Sprint, but they were probably the closest thing to an Integra at the time.

The you have classics like the mini (the proper one), and numerous hot hatches starting with e.g. Fiat Strada, and moving on to the Pug 205 GTi, and latterly the Focus RS etc. Do you think none of these are 'drivers' cars because they have FWD?