Alfa Romeo 156 vs MG ZS

TimD · 17 Jun 2003, 21:47 (Ref:634940)

I'm throwing this open to the forum - what experiences have people had with these two cars? I'm seriously considering either as the replacement to my trusty 1994 Rover 216GSi. The key thing is reliability and driving enjoyment. Practicality is not quite so much of an issue - I don't often need to carry loads or people, so it will be the sheer driving pleasure which wins the day, I suspect.

Oh, and price and availability of course.

The floor is open...

Tristan · 17 Jun 2003, 22:25 (Ref:634974)

Both are fine, but I'd have the Alfa on a Monday, Tuesday or indeed "any day of the week".

garcon · 18 Jun 2003, 12:36 (Ref:635463)

The MG ZS has had some decent write-ups, but it's fundamentally a very old car, based on the mid/late 90s Rover 400. Never been near one, let alone driven one, so can't really comment further.

The (new) Alfa 156 is an excellent car. Having been in an early one and driven a new one I'd definitely go new. The improvements all round are significant, and interior trim and switchgear now has a proper quality feel rather then the self destruct flimsy plastic of older Alfas. They're still not the most indestructive and reliable car out there, but hopefully the real horror stories are now history. Besides, having a Rover I guess you'll be used to a few "quirks"...

The 156 I drove was the 2.0 JTS (new model 2 litre twin spark), and I thoroughly enjoyed it on a trip from Manchester down to MK and back (no motorways!!). A very good friend of mine is Sales Manager at an Alfa dealer, and reckons the 2.0 JTS is one of the best of the range - 165bhp and superb handling. The V6s are a bit front heavy, and somewhat thirsty.

If/when you're looking for a new or nearly new Alfa, pm me - my friend isn't local to you but being in the grim north I'm willing to bet he can do a better deal than your nearest dealer...

Just a thought - if practicality isn't an issue, what about a GTV?

rdjones · 18 Jun 2003, 13:13 (Ref:635505)

No question in my book - ZS, why because they are fantastic cars both to look and drive, I have driven one and I really enjoy driving. The other thing to remember that they are british........

Tristan · 18 Jun 2003, 14:42 (Ref:635574)

"Just a thought - if practicality isn't an issue, what about a GTV?"

...or even a top-end 147. Whislt there's no chance of finding I second hand one (thus making the following comment irrelevent), I'd give my right shoe for a 147 GTA.

garcon · 18 Jun 2003, 15:00 (Ref:635601)

A 147 GTA. Hmm.....

1. It's a (small) hatchback.
2. 250bhp to the front wheels.
3. BIG lump making it soooooooooo front heavy.

Just three reasons I wouldn't want one. I know someone who's got a 147 2.0 sillyspeed (or selespeed or whatever) and loves it. I reckon it'd be a better all round package than the barking GTA. Even the 156 GTA is a bit daft. And it's got horrible uncomfy seats and the suspension's too hard.

My Scooby was a good few grand cheaper than either, and would paste 'em both on the road and might even match 'em on the track.

429CJ · 18 Jun 2003, 15:24 (Ref:635621)

Italian cars, heh, repair 'em every day, and don't leave them on the rain, it'll rust away. P.S: the best Italian car is a Lada 2101 Zhiguli.

krt917 · 18 Jun 2003, 18:45 (Ref:635819)

I think that even the Italians have probably got that problem sorted out by now!

Quite like the MG, but the Alfa is probably better.

Tristan · 18 Jun 2003, 18:48 (Ref:635822)

"1. It's a (small) hatchback.
2. 250bhp to the front wheels.
3. BIG lump making it soooooooooo front heavy."

LOGICALLY I would agree on all those points (you know me and unecessarily big engines) but apparently it ain't half bad. Plus which it looks fabulous inside and out and possesses arguably one of the greatest small engines in the world. That also looks great. Rah. Italians... so... irrational!!

garcon · 18 Jun 2003, 19:08 (Ref:635855)

Possesses one of the greatest small engines in the world.

That'd be a 3.2 V6, then.

Small??

**Craig** · 18 Jun 2003, 19:11 (Ref:635858)

Everyone owns an MG... do you really want to be just another lemming? You might as well buy a Bimmer if that's the case! I'd go with an Alfa everytime me.

TimD · 18 Jun 2003, 21:51 (Ref:636038)

Craig, you really know how to get a man rattled! A BMW???? Never, I tell you!!

The 147 is out for a start as I don't care for smaller hatchbacks, and I prefer the engine to be a pleasant accompaniment to my cross-country driving, rather than the dominant acoustic. This also probably rules out the Subaru too - I just don't think I could enjoy the boxer motor over long periods of time.

Garcon, when did the 156 switchgear start to get uprated? I'm going to have to look at used cars, and I seem to notice a big price differential around the "V" plate '99 models. Is this where the big improvements kicked in? Also, before I make a twit of myself at the main dealership, what principle does the Selespeed work on? Is it a sort of semi-auto, or a clutchless change, or merely a silly name for an autobox? Seems silly to use a slushbox on an Alfa Romeo, but if the rest of the spec falls into place, I wouldn't necessarily rule one out.

Interesting thought on the GTV - thing is, I'm just not a small/medium coupe person either. I tend to the idea that if you're going for a coupe, you go for a Grand Tourer and step up the budget accordingly. Finnicky, I know, but that's me.

One final thing, I like to have a chassis closely matched to the power output it has to handle. One of the scariest cars I ever drove was a Fiesta RS Turbo, which was so overpowered for the chassis that it was lunacy to consider it as an everyday road car. An embarrassment of power is no fun when you're trying to control it on the way back from the grocers. That's another black mark against the 147 rocketship, now that I think about it.

Of course, I could still go for the mad option of the 1973 Jensen Interceptor III, which fits the big coupe bill, but I don't particularly relish the 15mpg fuel consumption on my present wage. Have to admit to being tempted though....

garcon · 19 Jun 2003, 07:58 (Ref:636324)

Tell you what - buy a cheap 5 grand box to get around in AND the Jensen!

The most recent (and extensive) 156 facelift was 2001, possibly 2002 model year. Might have had another in '99 - that would explain the increase in prices. I think the selespeed is effectively a clutchless manual - like a tiptronic style semi-auto but possibly without the auto option.

I guess we're opposites in terms of acoustics - I've got the Prodrive back box on my Scooby to accentuate the engine note. But don't rule it out on those grounds - with the standard twin-pipe it's no louder than any other performance saloon, in fact the feint boxer burble is really quite pleasant - much more so than a standard 4 pot.

Where we obviously agree is on car sizes - I hate small hatches and coupes - it's either a medium/large saloon/estate (I've got the Sport Wagon 5dr Scooby) or a "proper" GT - I can't see myself in another coupe until I can afford a 996. Even then, I'll be equally/more tempted by a BMW M5 (the only BMW I would consider btw!)...

Also a good point on chassis/power - that's exactly why many believe the 2.0 TS is a better 156 than the quicker V6s. The exception is the Scooby - having driven a 2002 STi, it seems the more power you give it the better it gets!

Here's one to throw in - if you also like bigger executive cars with a performance edge and reasonable economy, how about a Saab 9-5 Aero? Depends on budget, but the 2002 model is the one to go for - extensive chassis tweaks (so it actually handles well - for a big fwd), more power and huuuuge standard equipment list...

Izzy · 19 Jun 2003, 09:12 (Ref:636372)

I work for an MG/Rover dealership..... get the Alfa

Truckosaurus · 19 Jun 2003, 10:01 (Ref:636399)

Quote:

Saab 9-5 Aero? ...the 2002 model is the one to go for - extensive chassis tweaks

I've just had an Eibach suspension kit put on my '98 9-5, this is said to be the same as the '02 Aero suspension, cost £500-odd from http://www.elkparts.com (who are also the UK dealers for Speedparts, a Swedish tuning concern)

Tristan · 19 Jun 2003, 10:27 (Ref:636433)

"I work for an MG/Rover dealership"

In New Zealand??!! We EXPORT these things??!! Oh dear lord.

Alfa Alfa Alfa. Do it.

davemorganfan · 19 Jun 2003, 11:24 (Ref:636482)

Heart says Alfa, head says MG. Both are a great drive. The fact that the MG is based on an old Honda doesn't really matter - it is thoroughly competent, and anyway the Alfa isn't much newer. My problem with the MG is its styling - a cack handed affair with all the current "sporty" cliches. It would have been much better if they had followed the more original approach taken with the Rover 200 BRM. The Alfa looks gorgeous, but I suspect its running costs will be higher than the MG. I'd be happy with either of them.

Izzy · 20 Jun 2003, 09:01 (Ref:637355)

Quote:

"In New Zealand??!! We EXPORT these things??!! Oh dear lord."

Oh dear lord is right. Me thinks you guys only export the really bad ones. I’m doing the head + liners on one at the moment.... just the usual

Dani Filth · 22 Jun 2003, 15:37 (Ref:639212)

The chassis in the 147 i think is the same as in the 156 ... the Selespeed i think it has auto option .. and for the 156 2.5 you can get an automatic one ..

429CJ · 22 Jun 2003, 18:19 (Ref:639295)

MG, don't ruin your life with a guinea car.

Bluebottle · 22 Jun 2003, 20:40 (Ref:639400)

Alfa's arn't very strog

The 156 that hit my Granada at 25 mph didn't drive home

Having said that with toungue firmly in cheek....

I would go for the Alfa, although I have to ask about the build quality, anyone know how well they're built?

Tristan · 22 Jun 2003, 22:24 (Ref:639579)

"and for the 156 2.5 you can get an automatic one"

But it's an Alfa. An Alfa with an auto is like a BMW with a towbar.

BB: I don't think Alfa will ever get over their Alfasud etc. reputation.

Alpina · 22 Jun 2003, 23:12 (Ref:639607)

driven them both and I have to say that whereas the MG was OK the 156 (V6) wa one of the best road cars I have ever driven. The steering was so positive and the engine so responsive. I kept hitting the rev limiter in 2nd but my friend who owned the car said he used to that all the time as well! The handling was the best FWD I have ever experienced. No competition!
The comments about the turbocharged fiesta are true by the way! I have got one.

Dani Filth · 23 Jun 2003, 08:37 (Ref:639841)

Quote:

Originally posted by Tristan
"and for the 156 2.5 you can get an automatic one"

But it's an Alfa. An Alfa with an auto is like a BMW with a towbar.

BB: I don't think Alfa will ever get over their Alfasud etc. reputation.

hey i'm not for an auto myself .. but if the market wants one .. alfa wil build them one ...
and for the alfasud ... they will ....
BTW .. i've heard that the next generation Alfa 157 will have RWD

**bella** · 23 Jun 2003, 12:01 (Ref:640047)

i'd go for the alfa, and a high end engine one too. that way, when you come to sell it, the resale value should be reasonable. plus, having a little car with a silly engine, i barely ever use the full power of the engine, but it's good to know it is there when you need to do stuff like burn little boys off at traffic lights etc.

i expect if you do go for a big engine it'll eat tyres like mine does, but that's a small crisis really.

personally i wouldn't touch an mg unless it's one of the 'proper' mgs because
a) girls car (sorry rdjones)
b) based on an old car (as pointed out previously)
c) comes in very silly attention seeking colours.

alfa. get an alfa.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Alfa romeo t33	nobster	Sportscar & GT Racing	7	18 Aug 2005 21:25
DTM and Alfa Romeo?	Thommy	Touring Car Racing	1	4 Apr 2005 08:03
Alfa Romeo GT	TerryC	Sportscar & GT Racing	7	26 Nov 2004 14:13
Alfa Romeo	Richwesthorpe	Motorsport History	5	26 Jan 2004 09:08
alfa romeo	knowlesy59	Touring Car Racing	12	19 Jul 2001 19:46