1991 Alfa Romeo 75 Reviews

1991 Alfa Romeo 75 3.0 v6 Qv 3.0 V6 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 3.0 V6 Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired54000 miles
Most recent distance67000 miles
Previous carAlfa Romeo 146

Summary:

Really Fast 4 Seater

Faults:

Changed radiator at 58,000 miles.

2nd gear sincromesh went on the gear-box at about 59,000 miles.

Changed front and rear gear-box mountings.

Head gasket blew at 62,000 miles.

Slight wear on drivers seat causing the crumbled sponge effect.

All in all a great car.

General Comments:

This is one of if not the best V6 engine in the world, talk about sound, this car has an orchestra under the bonnet. Having fitted some stainless steel racing manifolds and getting rid of the Cat and fitting a 3.5 inch stainless steel Tig Welded exhaust this baby really sings over 3000rpm. And the throttle response is phenomenal compared to standard, well worth the £1000 price tag.

To date there has not been any other car that puts that sort of huge smile on your face when you give it some.

The torque on this car in any gear is fantastic.

The cars best acceleration kick in at about 70 mph then it really starts hammer right up-to 140 mph. (had the car on a track)

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 22nd November, 2003

24th Nov 2003, 01:54

I've had one too and I have to agree it really is a great car.

Well worth the odd problem you get.

On a track there`s not a lot of cars in its class that will keep up.

2nd Jul 2004, 12:39

Steven.

When you want to sell the car on, give me a shout on

07817 977769. I've been looking for a decent one with a decent pipe on it for a while.

Darren.

15th Apr 2005, 12:05

I completely agree - it's a cracker of a car, although a little lightweight; helps the speed/power, but probably not good in an accident (think sardine tin).

I have one too (not a QV though) and it has been one of the best handling (it's lowered so even better than normal), quickest (complete recon mildly tuned engine from an independent Alfa specialist) and most exhilarating, fun cars to drive that I've ever come across.

Minus points - build, boot size, errr... that's about it.

Problems - needed new prop doughnuts when I tried to race a Cozzie (silly) ; needed a steering/susp alignment when new engine was fitted, just to make sure handling was spot on; needed new half-shaft and HT set. Service items really, not problems. Absolute cracker of a car and highly highly recommended.

1991 Alfa Romeo 75 Cloverleaf (QV) 3.0 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 3.0 Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.2 / 10
Distance when acquired92000 miles
Most recent distance113900 miles
Previous carAlfa Romeo 75

Summary:

Outstanding saloon, easily capable of embarrassing many other cars. So cheap, but buy a good one

Faults:

The car has not left me stranded since I bought it 2 years ago.

There are some niggling problems. The most annoying is that the interior lights do not come on when the doors are opened (only when boot or bonnet are opened) and the headlamp warning pinger is not coming on - part of the same problem. I think I will need to replace the electronic brain to fix this.

The ventilation does not work very well, I can never get enough cold air into the car unless I open a window, and this is too noisy on the motorway. This should only be an issue on cars without air conditioning.

There is one minor squeak from the dash sometimes, and the central air vents do not stay properly in the dash; one side sticks out slightly.

The headlights are not very good. I need to replace one of the H4 connectors (slightly melted - previous owner must have used bulbs too strong).

The brakes are appalling on 75s. I hope to fit braided hoses and up-rated front discs/pads.

One of the rear petrol lines rusted through about a year ago. It was repaired cheaply by my mechanic.

The doors need to be slammed hard or the car thinks they have not been closed properly.

Previous owner had not wired the Momo steering wheel horn buttons properly. This took me 2 minutes to fix.

One door lock solenoid failed. Again, it cost about £5 to replace, and took no more than 30 minutes to do myself.

I had replaced the driver's mirror because it was seized. This cost very little, and took about 1 hour to do.

The plastic clips, which hold the outer end of the rubber gaiters on the steering rack, both broke. They are very easily replaced. I used zip ties.

Some of the bushes in the rear suspension have been replaced, and some of the front ones will need replacing.

Replaced exhaust from the cat back to the tail; the old one was holed. The exhausts on 75 3.0 cars sit very low and take a lot of bangs. Apparently stainless steel ones don't last, because the are too inflexible. I don't know if this is true.

The radiator has lost about 10 percent of the metal leaves, but still works. This is going to need changing soon.

The hydraulic cam belt tensioner on these cars always goes wrong and leaks oil down the front of the car. Apparently, there are some better, newer replacements available, but I just had my mechanic fit a new hydraulic one.

The interior is very lightly-made, and though the fabric seems to wear well, some of the seams on mine have split and the foam is crumbling. This makes a mess under the seat.

General Comments:

This is my second 75 QV (see: http://www.carsurvey.org/review_4310.html)

I drive this one much more smoothly (though not more sensibly) than my first one, and the brakes, clutch and gearbox are much happier as a result.

The biggest complaint is that you really need cruise control on these cars for long trips on the motorway. The extreme angle of your ankle at part throttle means that long trips on the motorway cause some pain in the ankle and leg. This is annoying as the car rides very well on the motorway and is a pretty good motorway car, even though it is quite noisy (well, compared to my friends' luxury MB and BMWs).

The chassis on these cars is awesome. Anybody who can't drift the tail under power shouldn't have a driving licence.

The brakes really need to be better, and I need to fit cruise control. The rear parcel shelf and door cards are too flimsy for good stereo speakers, but then you only have to turn the radio off and listen to the noise from the engine.

The petrol tank is too small and intrudes into the boot, so the boot is pitifully small and the distance you can travel on a tank is very poor. That's OK, though, because you will want a break to rest your foot/leg.

If you have decent shock absorbers, springs and tyres, you can drive around the outside of Imprezas unless they are well driven.

I love this car and never want to sell it. I would like, however, to build a much more tasty 75. Modify a 24v engine and fit it into a fully-restored shell with up-rated brakes etc.

You must change the cam-belt every 60k miles to avoid very expensive problems. Also, don't use modern very thin synthetic oils, get a good Millers or similar, which is better for the engine.

Avoid the typical electrical gremlins by regularly cleaning and treating (copper grease or similar) every electrical connection you can find.

I drove a very recent BMW 330, and expected to come away wishing I had one. In fact, the Alfa is much better to drive except for the brakes.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 11th October, 2001

18th Oct 2001, 07:42

The information about the cam belt is, I think, incorrect. They need changing every 36K or three years, whichever comes first.

Totally agree with the comments about the brakes and the pedal angle.

A former 75 3.0 owner.

2nd Jul 2002, 20:32

I'm on my second Alfa 75 (fourth Alfa altogether) and agree with most of the other comments posted. Both of my 75s have been Australian-spec 2.5litre three-speed automatics and have generally been a pleasure to own and drive. The Alfa V6 is such a smooth, sweet engine with lots of usable torque.

Leaks from the cam-belt tensioner and leaking seals between the torque converter and transaxle seem to be the only major recurring mechanical issues. Replace cam belts religiously at recommended intervals. Use good quality lubricants and coolants and you will be rewarded with good reliability.

Suspension bushes and power-steering overhauls seem common for cars with reasonable mileage on the clock. (my current 1989 model just turned over 250,000klm) The autos were originally fitted with a hydraulic self-levelling rear suspension - usually these have bee retrofitted with conventional springs. There is a lot of low-hanging equipment on the 75s and heavy scars are typical on floor-pan rails and the exhaust system.

There are the usual niggling electrical problems, but much less than on previous Alfas. The ARC (Alfa Romeo Control) can be a bit temperamental, especially as electrical connections age and sensors seize. The air-conditioning just copes with Australian summers, but needs to be in peak condition. The summer heat also contributes to failure of the hood-lining adhesive, but re-lining is not a big problem. The velour seat material wears well, although 10 years seems about it for the seat foam.

All in all, the last rear-wheel drive touring saloon produced by Alfa Romeo lives up to its pedigree and increasingly deserves to be considered a classic.

9th Jan 2004, 02:04

Having owned an Impreza and an Alfa 75 3.0, I definitely cannot confirm that a 75 is anywhere as fast as a Scooby... Sorry.

An Impreza Turbo is in an altogether different performance league.

Having said that, performance isn't everything and the 75 is becoming something of a cult car.

9th Jun 2008, 06:55

The 3L 75 is phenomenal drivers car. The car is willing to keep going on and on. My other alfa is a 33 16V Boxer. Alfa knew what they were doing when they did not put in turbo like the other marques. My only complaint is the handling; V6 is nose heavy. The twinspark handles better. But what the heck, the grunt from the V6 is enough to make you forget about the car's perceived flaws. Sure to be a modern day classic.

1991 Alfa Romeo 75 2.0 twin spark from Belgium

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership1991
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 2.0 twin spark Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired70 kilometres
Most recent distance165000 kilometres
Previous carAlfa Romeo 75

Faults:

Replaced one camshaft at 70000km.

Replaced front and rear brake pads.

Drivers seat foam decomposed!

Electrically operated side mirror (R) failed.

Replaced front and rear shocks.

Replaced flex-joints in the prop shaft at 155000km. The prop shaft couldn't be disassembled so it had to be broken, and was replaced by a used part. (EURO 50!!!)

Oil change every 5000km.

Cloth attached to the sun roof has loosened.

General Comments:

After 10 years, I still enjoy driving this car every day.

Two years ago I became aware of "engine" vibrations and thought that the end was near. I thought I could just drive carefully so as to preserve the engine. When I changed garage the mechanic discovered that the flex-joints in the prop shaft needed replacing. Now it feels like the car is brand new again.

I want to get a 156 but am afraid I won't like the front wheel drive. Then again, I enjoy this car (75) so much I don't want to ditch it!

The car sounds great too. Not like Japanese cars.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 6th July, 2001

1991 Alfa Romeo 75 Twin Spark 2.0 twin spark from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2000
Engine and transmission 2.0 twin spark Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.4 / 10
Distance when acquired73000 miles
Most recent distance76500 miles
Previous carAlfa Romeo 33

Summary:

Wolf in sheeps clothing

Faults:

Only minor niggles like a faulty door lock, and a dodgy headlight.

General Comments:

An amazingly good value high performance saloon car. What else can be bought for a couple of thousand pounds and beats many supposed sports cars. Good fuel consumption 28-42mpg, excellent handling, and very smooth power delivery.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 29th June, 2000

1991 Alfa Romeo 75 Twin Spark 2.0 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
Engine and transmission 2.0 petrol
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10

Faults:

Nothing.

General Comments:

I run 30,254 miles with this car and it satisfied me a lot; its driving style is very exciting. I drive this car every time on oversteering, the engine horse power is like the power of a big tiger. My car is a Limited Edition with Recaro seats and special wheel design.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 3rd December, 1998

Average review marks: 7.9 / 10, based on 5 reviews