13th Nov 2007, 06:47

Even if you stick a filter in a 1.6 vti it sounds awesome, its very hard to describe the sound, but once you here it you will love it, who would actually buy an alfa, they have never made a decent reliable motor.

13th Nov 2007, 08:16

You've clearly never heard an Alfa V6... there's no comparison between a 1.6vti with filter to a V6.

13th Nov 2007, 11:31

Yes, but its faster than a type R no matter what you say.

14th Nov 2007, 02:32

Faster by how much though, and it's not always about straight line speed.

14th Nov 2007, 06:36

And I'm one of them. But given the choice of owning any of them, I'd still choose the Alfa. I haven't driven the 147, but have driven a 156GTA, and was an experience never to forget (in a good way).

As Clarkson says, for that 5 minutes when it is actually running well, it makes all the problems seem worthwhile.

14th Nov 2007, 11:58

You haven't answered my question why is it that the type r out sold the 147 by about 50-1? I'm going to say the reason why the Type R sold so many more is because it's better.

14th Nov 2007, 16:15

The type R might appeal to a wider group of people, it might handle better, it might be more reliable, cheaper, and outsell the alfa 147 GTA. But is it more sexy, powerful, better looking or faster than the GTA? that is a big fat NO!

15th Nov 2007, 03:30

It's only powerful and fast for 5 minutes.

15th Nov 2007, 06:38

'You haven't answered my question why is it that the type r out sold the 147 by about 50-1. I'm going to say the reason why the type r sold so many more is because it better.'

The type-r outsold the GTA because it was in production for longer, more reliable, slower depreciation, the average car buyer has actually heard of it, reasonable insurance and running costs etc... But none of this actually means it is a better car.

How good a car is, is down to the owner. And if you've ever owned a 147GTA, you'll know why most would say it is the 'better' car of the 2.

15th Nov 2007, 10:53

You just said more things in favour of the Type R than you did the 147.

As for the 147 being better looking, I think that's open to interpretation; I think it's ugly, it's just a wierd shape.

Secondly you said it's sexy. Please explain this further because I don't know what you mean as I certainly don't think it's sexy.

Thirdly you said its more powerful than the Type R, which it is, but it's being to powerful that makes it a bad car, so you can't really say that in its favour.

Have I mentioned before that Alfas are the most unreliable cars ever and lose all their value, something a Honda will never be.

15th Nov 2007, 10:58

Yes the Type R was in production longer. I was talking about 2003 alone. Take in to account all the years the Type R was in production and it probably outsold it by about 3000-1.

There is a reason why it wasn't in production long and it's because it was a complete flop and nobody bought one, and there's nothing that you can say that can change that. Why don't Alfa just go away? They must be one of the least profitable businesses in the world.

15th Nov 2007, 11:22

I'd rather have the things in favor of the 147, and having more power will always be a good thing, and I know you don't like to say it, but its faster, which counts.

16th Nov 2007, 03:47

You are wasting your breath (or keyboard life) trying to convince the kind of person who prefers a Honda to an Alfa that the Alfa is the better car.

What we Alfa owners enjoy is something that a Honda owner just wouldn't understand. The exchanges above prove it. Honda owners will resort to quoting technical measurements and scientific tests, measured by which all Hondas excel. That's the Japanese way.

The Italians do it differently, and an Alfa GTA has something no Honda Type R will ever have because it cannot be designed or engineered in. It has soul, and its flaws are a part of that. Of course, soul is intangible, and a Honda owner will scoff and snort in a derisory manner. Let them. Each to their own. Does the fact that a Type R owner thinks their car is better than your GTA ruin your enjoyment in any way?

I see Type R's every day (one part of the problem). Of course it's a capable car, but would I consider swapping places with any of their drivers? Not on your life.

Incidentally, the view that Alfas regularly break down is a decade out of date.

16th Nov 2007, 13:01

Having more power WILL always be a good thing, it's a simple concept. If these two cars both had the same power would the 147 be faster? no it wouldn't, but it does and it is. Learning how to use that power when launching is what makes you a good driver. Once going you can plant your foot down anyway. Apart from the fact that the 147 does have a better 0-60 than the type R (so traction can't be that bad) it would murder it once moving. The type R handles better round bends but you are not always on a bend, and a lot of races are just off the lights anyway, Racing in a straight line is a lot more common than going mad round bends.

17th Nov 2007, 11:22

Well that all depends how you drive it, if power in a front drive car is an issue round bends then you ease off it so you don't understeer, you can't use full throttle 197 bhp in a type R either, or it too will understeer. Same with tires, you are not going to be using 247 bhp all the time are you? Its easy to be gentle with a car. But its there if you need it on the straights.

18th Nov 2007, 10:26

Nope you can floor the throttle any time you want in a type r wheel spin and understeer aren't an issue.

19th Nov 2007, 05:37

Can you explain how a car has soul, when it was created by man.

19th Nov 2007, 06:29

Just means it has a lot more character than the type R. And have you seen the new type R on top gear? Oh dear, slower, major understeer. "not a very fast car" said jeremy.

19th Nov 2007, 11:10

Nobody here is saying that the new Type R is good or bad, we're talking about the first one and it's actually a complement to the old Type R being better than the new one. And when Jeremy was driving the old one, he showed what good handling it had, which just reiterates what I've been saying all along.

P.S I don't believe that last comment, someone saying they had an Integra, but getting orgasmic over an alfa, I don't believe that comment.

19th Nov 2007, 11:46

I'm just saying the new type R isn't very good, I already said I agree the old type R out handles a few hot hatches, including the 147. But what you can't grasp is the 147 is better in other ways, looks for one a lot of people will agree. Power, it may lose grip with 247 bhp FWD, but it will get to 60 quicker than a Civic Type R, and then after in 3rd 4th 5th (straight line speed) that power will be very useful.

Sound, yes very nice. Comfort, yes. These are the main areas where the 147 is special.

The Type R excels in other ways, already mentioned handling, price, depreciation, reliability (although you tend to over exaggerate the lack of reliability on 147). But don't try to say the type R is better in every way (including performance) because it's far from it.