[Closed] Alfa Romeo 147

To get round a lot of the problem with reliability they have more items replaced at services than some other manufacturers so servicing costs can be high (esp at main steelers), but make sure it's all been done on the car you're looking at.
The biggest gripe with Alfa in recent history is with the garages not the cars themselves, so investigate to see if there's a good Alfa specialist in your area before buying as it will be the real difference between loving and hating the whole Alfa experience.

A lot of people will be along to tell you how bad they are but they're really not - Mrs has had both a 156 & a 147 as company cars (so 3 years each) and loved them both. If you're into driving you won't be disappointed.

As your mate says they are as reliable as anything else but can be costly for parts and labour.

Make sure the belts have been done after around 40k. Somoe will tell you it is only required at much higher mileages as they ignore the communique that was sent out from Alfa recommending around 47k (IIRC)
Make sure it has a good service history and other than belts keep your eye on the oil. I had a 156 that never drank a drop between changes (circa every 6-8k) and sold a 147 last week that needed toppong up fortnighlty. Splash out on good oil as well. Using a bit of oil isnt a sign of problems either just make sure you never let it run low.
They often wear the inside of fron tyres as well so keep an eye on that as the outer will look fine.

Other than that they are great fun to drive and still some of the best looking cars on the road. Enjoy.

Edit: if you are in the north west Mangolletsi (sp?) are good. I heard nothing but bad about them on the interweb and had to use them on one occasion, they were good and I used them on several occasions after that and my experience was very positive. For serviing/repairs not purchasing.

Had a 156 Sportwagon as a company car 10 years ago. Fairly hammered it and the only thing that packed up was the battery, so no complaints.

Have hankered after an Alfa ever since, but my car requirements (family biking / camping, dogs) are very different.

I think long term reliability is very dependent on engine - the twin spark petrols seem to have a question mark over them regarding extended life. The Fiat 16v diesels are supposed to be very good.

As above, keep servicing up, find a local specialist etc...

and, if you find a good one, enjoy...

great little motors.
Weak spots are the waterpump on diesels prone to failing and killing the cam belt. Make sure it was changed if/when the cam belt was done.
All models front wish bone bushes get clunky parts arent to expensive and easy diy repair.
Everything else is just like any other car.
Oh and give selespeed models a wide birth the gearboxes go tits up and theyre not cheap to sort out.

I've just got a 159 TI Sportwagon.

I used Meridian Milano in Portsmouth and they seem very good. Mind you, as yet I've had no cause to do anything other than actually purchasing it.

I cant really add to the reliabilty comments as mine has only done a thousand miles. . . . in fact, I cant add very much to this whole thread, I'm just proud of my new car!!

Just avoid the Selespeed on 147 - known to be quite unreliable boxes.

The twinspark petrols have a 36k cambelt life - but it was originally an optimistic 72k and Alfa dealers didn't always do a good job of communicating the change. That makes long-term ownership a bit pricier (cambelt service is about £400), worth finding one that's had it's belt replaced recently. If it's due, then a good bargaining point and you'll be reassured it's been done properly.

They can use a little oil - they don't exactly drink the stuff but it's worth checking occasionally. I'm convinced a lot of "reliability" issues are just people never lifting the bonnet between services.

Buyers guide here: http://www.alfaworkshop.co.uk/alfa_romeo_147.shtml

IME most italian cars from the last couple of decades are absolutely fine. Build quality is good, bodies are well galvanised so they don't rust like they used to, electronics are mostly bought in from Bosch and the like. Or you could believe the car bore in the pub who's never owned one.

used to have a 145 and currently got a 147 both 2.0 twinsparks, loved 'em both
had a 100,000 on both, and as said above ignore the nah sayers who've never driven one let alone owned one 🙄
only time I've been let down by one was when a Bosch crank sensor failed at about 80,00 miles on the 147
use an independent garage that's familiar with them and you'll have no bother
great cars

Just avoid the Selespeed on 147 - known to be quite unreliable boxes.

Really? Sold mine last week, 2.0 Selespeed, drove it for 40k not a squeak.

Quite amusing really - work colleague wants one. Has made 3 separate appointments to test drive one at a main dealer and it's broken down every time...

As owner of a car that likes to throw up its little expensive issues I'm sick of using my holiday entitlement to sort out the next thing that needs doing- I say focus on a car that has a specialist on every corner and parts are cheap and plentiful.

Last Monday I had to drive down to Walsall to avoid paying a 1k bill as all the local dealers wanted this.

Sold mine last week, 2.0 Selespeed, drove it for 40k not a squeak

You do realise that 'unreliable' means 'high chance of breaking down' not 'it definitely will break down' don't you?

I wouldn't believe what people say about unreliability

I have had a 1967 Alfa 105 coupe that ran faultlessly

people also say french cars are crap, I had a peugeot 205 diesel that I paid about £100 for and it never let me down

then I got a toyota avensis and it was a nightmare

so I got a mercedes and its been the worst car I have ever owned

Four cars? That's a great statistical base. Much better than the tens of thousands of cars that the surveys cover.

🙄

Really? Sold mine last week, 2.0 Selespeed, drove it for 40k not a squeak.

Fair play to you surfer yours was OK. However according surveys / Alfa specialists they are a 147 weakspot and expensive to repair whilst the rest of cars are reliable. Some cars have little difference in relaibilty manual vs auto but not the 147.

Everyone I know that's had one (four people) have had endless reliability issues.

We hired one in Italy - I thought it would be quite sporty - it wasn't.

Get a Mazda 3/Focus/Astra/Golf instead.

Four cars? That's a great statistical base. Much better than the tens of thousands of cars that the surveys cover.

looking at the mercedes forum, they all seem to be a nightmare if they were made after the 80's

A family member has a 147, it [i]always[/i] has random warning lights on. It has broken down at inconvenient times for a variety of issues. He loves it when it's working though.

Sample of one 147, but 100% unreliability! 😀

Some friends had one of the bigger saloons about 10 years ago, sold it because................oh, sorry, they needed something more reliable.

And a friend in uni had an Alfa back in the early 90s, can't remember which one but it looked horrible. I have many photos of him in overalls trying to get the car to work.

I don't know anyone else who has had an Alfa, so I'd say 3 cars, 100% unreliability!

I don't know anyone else who has had an Alfa, so I'd say 3 cars, 100% unreliability!

You mean they never ran at all?

You do realise that 'unreliable' means 'high chance of breaking down' not 'it definitely will break down' don't you?

I can differentiate. What is your point caller?

You do realise that somebody assuming something will break down or is inherently unreliable in their opinion is not the same thing as something actually breaking down dont you?

"small" ...... "far away"

surfer - Member

I don't know anyone else who has had an Alfa, so I'd say 3 cars, 100% unreliability!

You mean they never ran at all?

???????????

You do realise that 'unreliable' means 'high chance of breaking down' not 'it definitely will break down' don't you?

I can differentiate. What is your point caller?

You do realise that 'unreliable 'means 'high chance of breaking down' not 'it's always broken down' don't you?

You said 100% unreliability, what does that mean?

By your definition any car that breaks down is 100% unreliable is it not?

If thats the case I have had several cars by different manufacturers of different ages that have been 100% unreliable at some point 🙄

Yeah, you are right surfer of course. 🙄

I was going to add to that, but really what is the point?

Actually I will add that the 100% unreliability bit was meant as a tongue in cheek dig at the person who was asking about sample rates........ shall I add another pointless smiley?

Thanks cheers guys, bit mixed but I'll take the advice on board if I do buy one.

I had a quick look when choosing my last car, but according to the reviews they were merely average in many areas including driving, boot space, etc etc.

Went for a much more boring Ford Fusion 1.6 which is good fun to throw around 🙂

common things that go wrong on a 147,

Diesels:
EGR valve,
turbo's die

all models:
thermostat,
front wishbone bushes,
brake pipes corrode in a place that MOT testers dont look at,
wiper linkage goes,
Mass air flow sensor packs up (MAF),
cambelts let go on twinspark models,
variators fail(a loud ticking at start up(avoid buying a car with this problem as it will need a cambelt & roller change which can cost up to £800))

selespeed,
need calibrating, keep on top of this and they dont tend to fail,
people who say that the gearboxes fail, its normally the pump not priming this is down to a relay 9/10
the selepump does need replacing about every 100,000 miles, as the bushes wear out, new ones are £900 fitted, recon are cheaper obv.

btw these faults are shared by 156, 147, GT & spider

but you dont buy an alfa for any of this 🙂

Im getting one of these soon, first Alfa, love cars, so it would be rude not too. Same colour and wheels, far better than a eurobox IMO.

[img] [/img]

Now that to me is awful. Alfas are bodies, engines and interiors. They don't much bother with anything else, hence the enormous bills down the line for owners. Example - the suspension bush had gone on a colleagues GTV. Result? Complete suspension rebuild, as they hadn't designed in the ability to change them on their own.

Whoever thought that using the design principles from the 8C (a good looking car, but not much cop to drive by all accounts) on smaller cars was sorely mistaken - the Mito is dreadful, but at least this has one good angle (the back, where you can't see the front).

People buy Alfas as they are different and buy in to the spin that you are more of a petrolhead if you have one, as Clarkson has made people believe on many occasions. The reality is that within a couple of years they'll be owned by VW and SEAT will be closed. Alfa is the new SEAT!

variators fail(a loud ticking at start up(avoid buying a car with this problem as it will need a cambelt & roller change which can cost up to £800))

If the variator is noisy then it is only a cheap part to replace but to get at it you may as well change the belts at the same time.

people who say that the gearboxes fail, its normally the pump not priming this is down to a relay 9/10
the selepump does need replacing about every 100,000 miles, as the bushes wear out, new ones are £900 fitted, recon are cheaper obv.

The Selespeed itself is a gear changing mechanism and the gearbox is the same as the one used in the manual version fo the car, so although I dont have experience of one failing it shouldnt affect the gearbox as such. Although as we all agree they are more costly to fix when broken!

I agree ref the front bushes I replaced them on my 156 and 146. You get a distinctive knock when they need replacing.

I was completely in love with the Brera. Until I drove one 🙁

Barely - nicely put!

The reality is that within a couple of years they'll be owned by VW and SEAT will be closed. Alfa is the new SEAT!

Alfa are owned by Fiat. Modern Alfas are just re-worked Fiats.

I think the likes of Clarkson and his chums are referring to the older "proper" Alfa's, The Sud, original GTV, Alfetta, 33, Sprint etc. These were genuine Alfa's, they were badly built, badly designed, and the dealer service was dreadful, but when working they drove so much better than any comparable car of the time.
Back in the 80's/early 90's I had three Sud's and rebuilt two of them from the stripped body-shell up. It was worth it for the sound of the boxer engine near the rev limit, especially the Ti.
My brother runs a 156 Tourer, with the JTD diesel engine, its a lovely car but he's had a few problems, mostly with the brakes.
As with any second hand car, the service history is important but no guarantee of reliability.

I think the GTV was the last "proper" Alfa - since then, they've been mostly cr4p.

As a kid, an old guy near us had a collection of 60's Alfa's - Guila Ti, GT Junior, etc. Wanted one since.

However, string of other stuff been and gone over the years. Fav Mk2 Honda CRX or the Mk2 Golf GTI

Wife has a decent enough car so picked up a 7 year old 147 1.6 TS with 30k miles for a song for myself about 18mths ago. However, first job I did was take it to the nearest Alfa specialist - CP Garage in Dundee - for timing belt, tensioner and water pump change. Insurance for the future.

Get one with a decent specialist history, be prepared to service when it should and you'll probably be fine.

What has mine needed? Front tyres, new front pipe (the bit with the 2 cats...) and just the usual service stuff.

Do I trust it? Probably not....

Does it drive well? Not really...drives just like any other family hatch of it's size but probably squeaks a bit more....

Why? Simple, I cannot afford one of these:

http://www.dep-o.co.uk/page403.asp

Plus the offset front number plate....

Didn't think they had a bad rep these days - way back in the 70's/80's when the UK had some sort of argument with Italy the stock of Alfa's sat in a field doing nothing for almost 2 years...then when they all got sold off they had rusted and all sorts going on...the stuff these days is pretty good - but the image is still tarnished so they depreciated rather quickly...same with Fiats (they are very much the same car just a different body - much like the A3/Golf/Octavia...)

I miss mine. It wasn't perfect (what is?) but I liked it a lot.

Reliabilty wise, I think it's just a carry over from the old stuff, in my experience it was no worse than anything else. I only got rid of it as I started doing a lot more miles and wanted something newer.

I'd get another Alfa, think that says it all.

3rd alfa in a row here - two 156s 2.0 TS and now a GT 2.0 TS, all 2nd hand (156s were 8 month old demos, GT 6 year old).

1st 156 had some problems but was super comfy to drive, 2nd had only a couple of problems (clutch went just after I gave it away) but drove fantastically and was like a limpet on the road. GT doesn't hold the road quite as well but gets my whole mountain bike in without touching the sides once I have taken the front wheel off.

Learnt to drive on my dads 1750 GTV which was lovely, but my alfas have been lovely as well, hence the third...

I've had a 145 and now have a 156. Love them both to bits. Great fun when driven quickly on winding roads. Great interiors, nice looking, good engine sounds.

The biggest problem with the 145 was that my 30 mile journey home often turned into 60 miles accross the moors, just for fun. The fun also meant tyres and brake pads wore quicker than you'd expect.

They had some mechanical problems from time to time, but definitely no worse that other cars I've had (Saab, VW, Peugeot, Ford). Front suspension is a little fragile and the dashboard warning lights are a little erratic. That's about it.

I've got an excellent local specialist (Turin Motors, Leeds) and repairs and servicing have been pretty cheap.

However, I think the independents can vary a lot. One specialist (my only deviation from Turin) quoted almost £3000 to fix some front wheel vibration on my 156. Turin fixed it with a driveshaft for £250.