|
Off to look at a very tidy 2000 (w) Alfa 166 up for grabs at £2150. It looks good but I've yet to drive it. Anything I should watch out for? Thanks
|
|
Having owned two in the past they are a joy to drive, guzzle fuel,high insurance,heavy on brake discs.Make sure all the electrics work and get one with a cd player no after market add ons except from alfa.Oh and the cam belt needs changing at half the recommended times [alfa service update].X and before struggle to fetch £1500 at auction in Leeds most are withdrawn so do not buy one with any thoughts of a resale value.A very cheap throwaway limo.
|
|
Forgot to mention a plug change is a bank loan job unless you do it yourself and still costs £35 for the 8 plugs ,4 being a common type and 4 pretty unique to alfa.
|
|
Thanks. Lovely car - no cd player but leather etc. Ice blue, 70,000 miles full Alfa history but no mention of cam belt change. Worth a punt at £1500?
|
You'll be wanting to get the belts (and probably variator while you're at it) changed the instant you buy, so factor that cost in.
Where's it for sale? If it's a dealer you could even do some 'cambelt-service included' based haggling.
|
|
Private sale. New X type on the drive way. Divorce pending - wife no idea what husband has done. Waiting on dealer who serviced the car to ring me back. And waiting ...
|
J Clarkson raved over the Alfa 166 in his last year's book "I know you got soul."
|
|
|
|
Having owned two in the past they are a joy to drive, guzzle fuel,high insurance,heavy on brake discs.
It is a Twin Spark version, it won't be so ruinous on fuel as a V6. Having had a 164, it should be good for about 30 mpg overall.
|
|
2001Y TS on Autotrader (with 95000 miles), for which they are asking almost £5K. That is almost the cheapest on Autotrader, within 40 miles of S Derbyshire, so no bargains on there.
|
|
You will never get 30 out of a 166 in general use more like 22 ,there is one on ebay now 02 looks like it will struggle to make 2K and its fully loaded including sat nav.
|
You will never get 30 out of a 166 in general use more like 22 ,there is one on ebay now 02 looks like it will struggle to make 2K and its fully loaded including sat nav.
I beg to differ. Have you personal experience of a 166 TS? Having run a 164 2.0 TS, which is similar in size to a 166, that did a lot of short journeys, achieving 30 mpg should be no problem at all.
|
I think his first post saying he has had 2 answers that.
|
|
The fuel guzzler is the V6 engined version.
|
|
|
|
A 164 2.0 was much more economical than the 166 2.0 due to its much lower power output.The mpg I quoted was for town use as this normally 90%of peoples driving.Both superb cars though.
|
|
The first time I saw one of these a few years ago I thought, wow what an astoundingly beautiful piece of metal, I only wish I could afford to own one. As it turns out, we all can. Brits who aren?t buying these gorgeous cars at those ridiculously low prices are mental. Myself included. The rest of Europe would kill to buy them at that price.
|
|
Big bad Dave is right! Went back with the readies and met two East Europeans heading out the gate gate in it having paid the full price!
|
|
Plenty more fish in the sea Dodo. Shouldn´t be too hard finding another one.
|
|
A 164 2.0 was much more economical than the 166 2.0 due to its much lower power output.The mpg I quoted was for town use as this normally 90%of peoples driving.Both superb cars though.
I believe it is basically the same engine, with very little difference in power output. I think the engine in the 164 was 148 bhp and the one in the 166 150 bhp, unless someone knows better. It is not the JTS engine that is fitted to the 156.
|
|
I have just checked out the power output of the 166 2.0 TS and it is 155 bhp. This is not the turbo engine, which didn't make it over to the UK, as far as I know. I am assuming it is the same engine that has been used in the 166 since its launch, so not a great increase in power over the engine in the 164.
|
According to www.carfolio.com, the 164 had a kerb weight of 1200kg, while the 166 has a kerb weight of 1420kg, so this could account for a difference in fuel consumption.
A colleague at work used to have a 166 twin spark and IIRC it used to average low 30's mpg, doing mixed town + a bit of motorway driving. It also used to run out of fuel when the computer display still said 10 miles range! It happened 4 or 5 times before he decided to only trust the standard fuel guage...
Nice car overall but had some electrical faults like central locking and electric windows failing at very inconvenient times!
|
|
That is the kind of mpg that we used to manage out of the 164, although my wife did a lot of short journeys in it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
