Alfa Romeo GT...your thoughts?

GreenMint

GreenMint

GreenMint

Soldato
Joined
11 Dec 2003
Posts
21,634
Location
Sol
Whats people's thoughts/experiences on the Alfa GT then folks? Still looking aroudn for that next car so just trying to gather opinions a bit cheaper than the Focus ST and can seem to be able to pick up a 54 plate Lusso 2.0 for about 7.7k and a 3.2V6 for about 10k.

The main reason I've never looked into these before is the whole Alfa technical nightmare scenario that everyone seems to curse Alfa's with! (Including Alfa themselves :p)

I know a few people on here said they had one? As I do ~8-9k a year, the 1.9JTD is probably not really a very economical choice as it'll end up costing me more than the damn petrol one!

More than likely going to be looking at the 2.0 which, with some ragging would probably see what kinda figure? As I assume the already thirsty V6 would drink down to the mid teens under spirited driving?

The cars themselves look amazing, have really fallen for the lines, and the inside looks a very nice place to be, reminds me partially of the RX8 dash which I loved!

Again, any opinions from the floor that is motors? ;)
 
Improved quality on these cars but not quite there in the early years of production. Your right about the 3.2 V6 will guzzle fuel. 2.0 will give a spirited drive but wont knock the socks of anything, infact it will probably be slower than rivals.

Diesel will be the lesser of the evils but you will pay the price.
 
  • Very pretty car
  • Very practical coupe (hatchback)
  • Bit short of headroom in the back though
  • 1.9JTD is a decent engine (real world 35mpg to 40mpg average, all conditions)
  • 2.0 JTS (real world 27mpg to 30mpg average, all conditions)
  • 2.0 JTS cambelt service every 36k which can be pricey (around £400 at indie, £700+ at dealer)
  • 3.2 V6 (real world 23mpg to 26mpg average, all conditions)
  • 3.2 V6 nice sound but expensive to service / maintain, nose heavy
  • Driver seating position is 'okay' but not the best
  • No major reliability issues if well maintained but car does cost a bit to maintain as particularly suspension parts do wear and need replacing (balljoints, ARB bushes, trailing arms, bushes etc)
  • Never buy without a full history and evidence that cambelt, variator, water pump, tensioners etc were done at last 36k interval, otherwise your engine might go 'bang'....
  • There's a guy on here who owns one so he might pop along in a minute...
  • E46 Coupe is a lot better
 
I drove my neighbours round the block, if your tall you'll probably hate it, I felt like a sardine the driving position is awful, I couldn't wait to get out. Its a great looking car though and "looks" put together well. He's had problems though mainly electrical gremlins and battery issues.
 
It's an Alfa so even if it doesn't go wrong (unlikely) you will have to see Alfa dealers eventually for servicing. That alone is a big -ve.
 
I am far from convinced that modern alfas are really any more prone to serious faults than any other major make.

They depreciate horribly because they are percieved to be unreliable but this makes buying a second hand alfa a decent enough choice and you can get a hell of a lot of car for your money.

On the whole they look very good and have excellant engines and are great to drive, really what more do you want ?

I currently drive a 156 and will move to a 159 when I find the right priced and specced 2.4 diesel.
 
Rilot said:
It's an Alfa so even if it doesn't go wrong (unlikely) you will have to see Alfa dealers eventually for servicing. That alone is a big -ve.
Click to expand...

So many decent Indie's around that'll do a far better job than the stealers. I don't know what the service costs/frequency are like on the GT but on the GTV they are fairly reasonable if you look around.

Domi said:
On the whole they look very good and have excellant engines and are great to drive, really what more do you want ?
Click to expand...

Echo this. What 156 you drive?
 
Some people have said the 3.2 is very front heavy and a nightmare with even simple maouvres and parking etc.. anyone had/got one and can attest to/deny these allegations? :D
 
MarkDavis said:
  • Never buy without a full history and evidence that cambelt, variator, water pump, tensioners etc were done at last 36k interval, otherwise your engine might go 'bang'....
Click to expand...

Are the variators a 36k part on the JTS then? On the TS they're good for about ~60k, its for convenience they're done around the time of the belts and they're not a 'go bang' type of thing, just sounds like a diesel and make it run badly.


Anyway, I don't know too much about the GT specifically, but if it does it for you why not?
 
act smiley said:
Are the variators a 36k part on the JTS then? On the TS they're good for about ~60k, its for convenience they're done around the time of the belts and they're not a 'go bang' type of thing, just sounds like a diesel and make it run badly.


Anyway, I don't know too much about the GT specifically, but if it does it for you why not?
Click to expand...

The variator is not required at 36k.

They begin to rattle while they fill with oil at boot, I mean startup, as they wear, but they will work quite happily until they begin to rattle on the overrun.

Replace every 72k with the spark plugs and you'll never really get into the rally startup phase.




Edit:
Since we're on the topic of rattly hydraulics, if you see one that has been standing for any length of time (even just a couple of weeks), the tappets may rattle (usually just 4). This is not in itself a bad sign. The way to clear this is to hold the engine at idle for 1 min, 2k for 1 min, 3k for 1 min, then 4k for 1 min, this is the correct to fill the tappets, if it clears up, chances are the motor is fine. Once again, check the variator on the overrun.

Bad or old oil can harm these engines too, I've seen a variator on a twin spark completely shot at just 50,000 miles. Should be using good quality semi-synthetic, correct grade. Although in the colder climates some say 5w35 (for a default of 10w40) is better for the tappets.
 
Last edited:
Shame they are the older JTS engines not the GM built unit. They drink oil so 10w60 all the way. Expensive 36k cambelt intervals and early engines had a mistake in the factory with cams and ECU's. Been known that some only produced as little as 120bhp.

Personally I wouldn't bother with the 2 litre.
 
blaze of glory said:
Shame they are the older JTS engines not the GM built unit.
Click to expand...
The 2.2 JTS uses a GM block, the 1.8 uses the old Twinny block. Both use an alfa head. Nothing in an alfa is "built by GM".

The TS engines come in 1598, 1742, and 1995cc verity, and are all Alfa.

They drink oil so 10w60 all the way.
Click to expand...
They are known to take a long time to bed in, but once they do, if you use the correct fuel, and change it often enough, they don't drink.

early engines had a mistake in the factory with cams and ECU's. Been known that some only produced as little as 120bhp.
Click to expand...
Complete BS. If it wasn't there would be a re-call, and ECU's would have been flashed with a new map. But since the cam winds on at x RPM, it's pretty unlikely they got it wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom