Alfa Romeo Owners Club of Australia Forum

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: grumpydude on March 28, 2013, 09:51:29 AM

Title: 156 or 166
Post by: grumpydude on March 28, 2013, 09:51:29 AM
I'm wanting to buy buy first Alfa—either a 156 or 166.
I've seen a few 156's and really like them but am concerned about the room in the back for my teenage kids (although they won't be in this car very often or for long trips.
Do the 166 Alfas have more room in them? I haven't seen any in person but am keen to track one down.
I've been trying to research these models on this forum (which I've found incredibly useful), and was after info on what to look out for when I check some of them out.
I've found a 156 I like, but it's the 2002 Selespeed 4cyl model with 170,000 k's
I've found a 166 (on the internet that I want to take a look at this week) which is the 2002  3.0 V6 model (which I think is WAY over the market price) with 155,000 k's
Does the 166 have much more room in the back row of seats than the 156? More headroom even (I have tall kids).

Any thoughts on comparisons for reliability, parts problems etc.

I don't know anyone who has had any Alfas, so I'm trying not to get too caught up in the Selespeed is bad thing unless there are obvious reasons—as I'm sure there are some great examples of these cars where nothing has gone wrong (...isn't there?).

Thanks for any input.
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: alanm on March 28, 2013, 05:56:07 PM
Hi,

I don't know anything about the 166 but I am guessing that they all share the same motor and auto gearbox found in the 156.
The 156 has a 2.5 litre 24 valve V6, the 166 has the same motor slightly enlarged.
The 156 "Q System" auto (as apposed to the selespeed) will most likely be the same in the 166.

I have owned a 156 V6 auto for years now and it is an EXCELLENT car. No problems at all. None.

The same unfortunately cannot be said of quite of number of selespeed 4 cylinder cars.

Cheers
Alan
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: colcol on March 28, 2013, 08:59:25 PM
The 166 was Alfa Romeo's replacement for the excellent 164, the 166 is bigger than the 156 and has more room inside, they didn't sell very well in Australia and had a very poor resale value, it had a proper V-6 engine made by Alfa, they need the cam belts to be changed on time or engine damage will follow, also the heater cores used to leak...directly onto the computer, causing computer replacement to cost more than the car, Marranello Pursang Motors in Brunswick have a fix for this problem, 166's that have this happen end up in wreckers, so parts are available, but not as plentifull as 156, due to more being sold here, no more reliable or unreliable as any modern Alfa.... although, they were not purchased by boy racers who flogged them as they were more a limo, not a sports sedan, should have been sold as a luxury Lancia, not an Alfa, Colin.
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: SlyvianJereau on March 29, 2013, 09:07:12 PM
I will say that you go for 166. I have it from 5 months and till now I have not experienced any problem with it. The space is ample and I am happy with it. The auto gearbox are all just fine. If you are doubt, go for 166.
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: lombardi on March 30, 2013, 02:01:11 PM
If u get a good one, the 166 is the value of the century,get a lot of car for peanuts,quite amazing,did own one in the past,interior is so beautifully made and designed and such a nice car to drive and the engine,wow, but try and get one that has had timing belt and water pump changed as this can be quite costly, i was quoted $ 2500, good luck.
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: colcol on March 30, 2013, 04:30:57 PM
Clarkson from Top Gear tested a 166, because it had one of the highest depreciation rates of any car in England, and he liked it, go figure!, Colin.
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: Davidm1600 on March 30, 2013, 05:21:51 PM
I think I have in a perverse sense always liked the 166, especially its interior which looks gorgeous.  No idea what they are like to drive or maintain, but, if they are anything like a 164 except newer and given the known heater core leak problem onto the computer, I suspect I probably will never own one.  I really don't need a car of its size, so that alone would predicate against it. 

To date I have only ever owned one Italian limo, and that was a somewhat rusty and leaky Fiat 130 sedan.  I loved it but was always scared stiff it was going to cost me a leg and an arm.

Hence owning a 156 from my perspective has been always a little easier to cope with.  I totally agree with the sentiments though you sure do get a lot of luxury Alfa for so little purchase price cost.
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: AGM155 on March 30, 2013, 07:00:54 PM
I have owned a 166 for over 5 years and a 156 JTS Manual for nearly 2 years.

The 166s back seats are ridiculously comfortable, plenty of leg room behind me (I'm not tall though) and probably a lot better for older kids.

My opinion is that the 166 is in another league in comparison to the 156, its been a really rewarding car to own. Negatives are the 4 speed auto (not the same as the 156 V6 - not the Q system built by Aisin just a garden variety sequential tiptronic built by ZF) which is smooth but not very sporty and the running costs which have been appreciably higher than the 156 - everything costs more.

The 156 is my daily drive. My 166 is special occasions only because of its rarity, fuel consumption, unwieldiness (with giant turning circle, and lowered with body kit) and my reluctance to expose it to the perils of daily driving.
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: poohbah on April 03, 2013, 02:20:16 PM
Grumpy,

For what its worth, I bought a 2.5L V6 156 with 115k on the clock last year (my first Alfa too) and couldn't be happier.

What's more my 15yo teenage son absolutely loves it (though he generally sits in front). I have no doubt the 166 would be fine and have more leg room in back, but it's definitely more of a "gents" cruiser than the sportier 156 (esp with 6sp manual box like mine). Comes down to what sort of drive you prefer. I'd also have to say I reckon the 156 is much better looking.

Only real advice would be to steel clear of the selespeed, and go for the V6.

Poohbah
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: grumpydude on April 07, 2013, 10:15:41 AM
Thanks for your input guys.

I'm going for the 166 purely due to room inside. I'll get it checked out to make sure it's in AOK condition.

It's very hard to find a fair market price for the 166 considering there's hardly any around to compare with. Done the usual search, and the one I like seems to be about 3K over priced. I'll get it checked and go from there. Any thoughts on market pricing?

Any ideas on how much the heater leak fix at Marranello Pursang Motors costs as a preventative measure?

For what it's worth, I like the 166 look better but need the room of the 166. I like the 159JTD but can't justify the extra $$$ with my current job security (or lack thereof).
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: colcol on April 07, 2013, 10:43:18 AM
Have the car checked out by an Alfa Romeo service provider in Melbourne, depends on where you live, there is Marranello Pursang Motors in Brunswick, Monza Motors in Bayswater and Mauceri Motors in Clayton, all are long time supporters of the club and know Alfa Romeo's backwards, don't know what a 166 heater shield costs, but well worth it to save an expensive computer, [why would you put a computer under something that WILL leak?], Colin.
Title: Re: 156 or 166
Post by: Fast Eddie on April 10, 2013, 02:04:16 PM
there will be a 2007 166 3.0 Ti on the lot at Lance Dixon Doncaster shortly.