Servicing 156

Zathras > wrote:

> On Sun, 1 Aug 2004 22:20:40 +0100, (SteveH)
> wrote:
>
> <Snip>
> >Bushes are a once-only fix. Replace with poly bushes and they'll last a
> >lifetime. And it's not only Alfa that suffer with this. Mondeos do, too.
>
> If it's that straightforward, why don't Alfa fit poly bushes?

Because most people wouldn't like the firmer ride.

>
> >> The biggest service bill for servicing my Vauxhalls (eek!)
> >
> >Which part of 'prestiege' didn't you understand?
>
> The 'e' before the 'g'!

Hmmmm. I need a spill chucker for this!

> I think 'prestige' is hyping the 156 a bit
> too far. How can a 156 that is bought new for the same money as a 2
> litre Vectra be prestige?

Can they? - maybe an Alfa discount price is the same as a Vectra list
price, but you're still comparing chalk with cheese.

> I don't consider low to medium spec BMWs as
> prestige motors either BTW. In my books prestige starts at about
> 35000UKP! YMMV.
>
> >> in 12 years
> >> (double eek!) of driving their top of the range models came to less
> >> than my smallest Alfa bill. Alfa have not made the 156 a low labour
> >> quick fix car. IME, cheapest VX service = 70UKP. Cheapest Alfa service
> >> 315UKP both from full dealerships within miles of each other.
> >
> >Vauxhall make cheap **** cars for numpties. They're mechanically very
> >crude, hence the cheap servicing.
>
> I disagree.
>
> They're not that cheap when you factor in the depreciation from new.

No, but they're cheap to buy, and designed to be cheap to service, but
they're utterly dull, lifeless horrible things. Especially the engines,
totally characterless.

> As for 'numpties', IME, there are vastly more people that think *I* am
> a numpty for buying an Alfa. I feel like a total numpty when I see the
> cost of the work done on a low mileage car. I always felt cleverer
> handing over 70UKP for a service than 800UKP.

I'd like to know what cars you've been driving when a 36k mile service
will only cost £70! Something with a camchain, I'd assume.

If you want a fancy engine with multiple valves, variable timing and the
refinement of a cambelt, then you pay for it come service time.

I'll stick with the 'classic' Alfa Twincam and it's camchain.

> They're not all crude..the VX 220 and the development 1.9TT engine are
> quite interesting. The idea of a 1.9 diesel Vectra repmobile tagging
> along with a GTA on the motorway doesn't immediately suggest
> 'crudeness'.They also had a V6 with a higher output (similar power,
> much better torque) than the Alfa 2.5 about 3 years ago. IMO,
> crudeness has its place.

The 1.9TT is only there in concept at the moment, very unlikely it will
actually happen, and if / when it does, no-one will spend that much cash
on a Vectra anyway.

The GM V6 isn't a great engine - similar power / torque, but lifeless.

> >Try looking at the cost of servicing an equivalent 3-series BMW. Let me
> >tell you it's not cheap servicing a VANOS BMW 6-cylinder lump.
>
> Is that comparable to a 10V (manually adjusted tappets) JTD?

No idea, the JTD is diesel.

> In any case, I don't care for most over-rated German cars and am
> unimpressed when Alfas are compared to them either because it's
> avoiding the real issue. The REAL competition for quality,
> reliability, and sophistication comes out of Japan. My folks have had
> pretty fancy Hondas for years and they're not simple or crude. Strange
> how their wallet has never been emptied at service time..since 1990!
> Why didn't I get one then? I don't like the way they drive!

You either pay the price of a brand like Alfa because you like them, or
buy a Honda Accord for cheap running costs. There's no happy medium, I'm
afraid.

> >> Even the simplest Alfa maintenance tasks are miserable (e.g. change a
> >> headlamp bulb with big hands?!). I need to jack up my car to change
> >> the oil..etc..etc. I asked one of the dealer mechanics (who was on a
> >> home visit recently to replace a leaky fuel filter) if anything was
> >> easy to fix on these. "NO" he replied. "Great engine though.." :-)
> >
> >Headlamp bulbs are increasingly difficult to change on lots of cars -
> >it's not unknown for bumpers to have to be dropped to change stuff like
> >that.
>
> ..that doesn't make it a good thing though!
>
> >What's so unusual about jacking up a car to change the oil? - that's
> >standard procedure, is it not?
>
> I've never had to do it before. I've always managed (with scraped
> knuckles admittedly).


--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:59:26 +0100, (SteveH)
wrote:

<Snip>
>I'd like to know what cars you've been driving when a 36k mile service
>will only cost £70! Something with a camchain, I'd assume.

I think you've got the wrong and of the stick here..my 800UKP service
included NONE of the 36K mile stuff. That comes next time! My
comparisons are 24K and under.

>If you want a fancy engine with multiple valves, variable timing and the
>refinement of a cambelt, then you pay for it come service time.

The only thing my last shopping trolley VX didn't have from that list
was the variable valve timing (unless you include the routine cambelt
roller collapse followed by valves hitting pistons ploy!!!). Then
again my JTD does not have a 'fancy' head..2 valves/cyl.

>I'll stick with the 'classic' Alfa Twincam and it's camchain.

I have no problem with your logic there!

>> They're not all crude..the VX 220 and the development 1.9TT engine are
>> quite interesting. The idea of a 1.9 diesel Vectra repmobile tagging
>> along with a GTA on the motorway doesn't immediately suggest
>> 'crudeness'.They also had a V6 with a higher output (similar power,
>> much better torque) than the Alfa 2.5 about 3 years ago. IMO,
>> crudeness has its place.
>
>The 1.9TT is only there in concept at the moment, very unlikely it will
>actually happen, and if / when it does, no-one will spend that much cash
>on a Vectra anyway.

...that all depends on what VX actually deliver. The way diesel is
going though, that engine (or similar) is only a matter of time. I
wonder if the GM links to Fiat could result in twin sequential turbos
going on the JTDs any time soon. It looks like a major performance
step nonetheless.

>The GM V6 isn't a great engine - similar power / torque, but lifeless.

...nope..that's not the engine I was thinking of. GM did a hotter
version with a lot more torque (than the Alfa V6), not lifeless and
with a good sound too. Trouble was..they put it in a Mk1 Vectra and
nobody bought it so nobody noticed it. If you're really bored, look up
posts from about 3 years back where (IIRC) I posted figures (I don't
want to reopen that thread now though).

<Snip>
>You either pay the price of a brand like Alfa because you like them, or
>buy a Honda Accord for cheap running costs. There's no happy medium, I'm
>afraid.

Ok but why are Alfas not as cheap as comparable Hondas to run? I would
doubt Alfas are more sophisticated than Hondas. This is the question I
can never get answered properly.

<snip>

--
Z
Scotland
Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather
'Oil' be seeing you..
(Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)

Zathras > wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:59:26 +0100, (SteveH)
> wrote:
>
> <Snip>
> >I'd like to know what cars you've been driving when a 36k mile service
> >will only cost £70! Something with a camchain, I'd assume.
>
> I think you've got the wrong and of the stick here..my 800UKP service
> included NONE of the 36K mile stuff. That comes next time! My
> comparisons are 24K and under.

In which case you need to change dealer.

That's a stupid price for anything under 36k miles.

> >If you want a fancy engine with multiple valves, variable timing and the
> >refinement of a cambelt, then you pay for it come service time.
>
> The only thing my last shopping trolley VX didn't have from that list
> was the variable valve timing (unless you include the routine cambelt
> roller collapse followed by valves hitting pistons ploy!!!). Then
> again my JTD does not have a 'fancy' head..2 valves/cyl.

See above.

> >I'll stick with the 'classic' Alfa Twincam and it's camchain.
>
> I have no problem with your logic there!
>
> >> They're not all crude..the VX 220 and the development 1.9TT engine are
> >> quite interesting. The idea of a 1.9 diesel Vectra repmobile tagging
> >> along with a GTA on the motorway doesn't immediately suggest
> >> 'crudeness'.They also had a V6 with a higher output (similar power,
> >> much better torque) than the Alfa 2.5 about 3 years ago. IMO,
> >> crudeness has its place.
> >
> >The 1.9TT is only there in concept at the moment, very unlikely it will
> >actually happen, and if / when it does, no-one will spend that much cash
> >on a Vectra anyway.
>
> ..that all depends on what VX actually deliver. The way diesel is
> going though, that engine (or similar) is only a matter of time. I
> wonder if the GM links to Fiat could result in twin sequential turbos
> going on the JTDs any time soon. It looks like a major performance
> step nonetheless.
>
> >The GM V6 isn't a great engine - similar power / torque, but lifeless.
>
> ..nope..that's not the engine I was thinking of. GM did a hotter
> version with a lot more torque (than the Alfa V6), not lifeless and
> with a good sound too. Trouble was..they put it in a Mk1 Vectra and
> nobody bought it so nobody noticed it. If you're really bored, look up
> posts from about 3 years back where (IIRC) I posted figures (I don't
> want to reopen that thread now though).

That'll be the MV6, then.

Like I said, it's not a great engine.

On paper it looks good, in reality it feels ****. In comparison with the
Alfa V6, of course.

> <Snip>
> >You either pay the price of a brand like Alfa because you like them, or
> >buy a Honda Accord for cheap running costs. There's no happy medium, I'm
> >afraid.
>
> Ok but why are Alfas not as cheap as comparable Hondas to run? I would
> doubt Alfas are more sophisticated than Hondas. This is the question I
> can never get answered properly.

I think you'll find that an Alfa is considerably more 'engineered' than
a Honda.

The VTEC system is very basic compared with an Alfa variable timing
system, I'd say it's even more basic than the system fitted on my
ancient 75's engine.

But it does seem that most of your woes are down to a dealer ripping you
off! - I've never seen that kind of bill for any of my Alfas, even a
full gearbox recondition was less than £500.
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 23:40:14 +0100, (SteveH)
wrote:

>Zathras > wrote:
<snip>

>> I think you've got the wrong and of the stick here..my 800UKP service
>> included NONE of the 36K mile stuff. That comes next time! My
>> comparisons are 24K and under.
>
>In which case you need to change dealer.

What's wrong with my dealer?

300UKP is not unusual for a basic Alfa main dealer service. There was
an extra 500UKP of work which was, largely, taken up by bushes and
handbrake work identified by the MOT test. Previously, there was twice
as much bush work done under warranty by Alfa before the car had done
10000 miles. I'm pretty sure Alfa wouldn't let a main dealer write
blank cheques like that if the work was unnecessary would they?

The main issue is the (widely noted) poor quality of the suspension on
Alfa 156s from both a mechanical robustness POV and effectiveness POV
(there's far too much vertical movement allowed for the ride height).

>That's a stupid price for anything under 36k miles.

That's my original point! It's happened 2 out of 3 times now so no
flash-in-the-pan either!

<Snip>
>> ..nope..that's not the engine I was thinking of. GM did a hotter
>> version with a lot more torque (than the Alfa V6), not lifeless and
>> with a good sound too. Trouble was..they put it in a Mk1 Vectra and
>> nobody bought it so nobody noticed it. If you're really bored, look up
>> posts from about 3 years back where (IIRC) I posted figures (I don't
>> want to reopen that thread now though).
>
>That'll be the MV6, then.

Can't remember - possibly!

<snip>

>But it does seem that most of your woes are down to a dealer ripping you
>off! - I've never seen that kind of bill for any of my Alfas, even a
>full gearbox recondition was less than £500.

Are we talking main dealership prices or backstreet specialist here?

My dealer is a main dealer. The parts prices seem quite reasonable and
they work to Alfa's 'Menu Pricing'. The problem is the labour rate
which is not unusual for a main dealership. I'm unaware of any
convenient specialist Alfa service in my area (Glasgow South West) and
had a warranty to keep up.

The choices now appear to be DIY (I've got other things to do) or
expensive main dealer. I could sell and move on but I really like the
car (except at service times!).

--
Z
Scotland
Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather
'Oil' be seeing you..
(Email without 'Alfa' in subject are auto-deleted..sorry!)

Graeme,
Its a gamble. You either pay the main dealer and hope that if you get a
problem after the warranty expires, they will treat you sympathetically or
you save some money upfront and use a local specialist.

For a local Alfa specialist, try Ferdi in Lytham St Annes. He's technically
absolutely brilliant and changed my 156 1.8 cambelt, pulleys, etc, all for
just £280 incl parts.
A 2.0 would cost a bit more, as they have an extra balancer shaft.
He could actually hear that the pully was just starting to wear but he told
me that my variator was absolutely OK and not to waste a further £80
replacing that.....

There didn't used to be a formal service "check" on the belts and pulleys at
all, until they were due for replacement at 72,000 miles, but some have
started failing after 40-odd thousand miles, so this extra check at the
36,000 mile service was introduced.

If the main dealer says its OK at 36,000 miles and then it fails before
72,000 miles, I suppose that you may have some comeback, but the car would
be out of warranty anyway, so you're not on firm ground from a legal
perspective....

I've heard hearsay that you pay for the labour for the "check" under the
36,000 mile service and then if the parts are failing, they get swapped
under warranty at the time, but I don't know where you stand if you pay for
the check at the service and they then fail afterwards.




"Graeme Cosgrove" > wrote in message
...
> The 36K service is due on my 2.0 156, and I have noted that there is some
> variance over the timing belt issue.
>
> The dealer (Caledonia in Preston), has given me a price of £360 for the
> service, but told me that they only "check" the belt, as it is replaced at
> the 76K service. If I "wanted" to have the belt job done, that would be
> £440 on top of the service.
>
> Question 1, therefore, is "should they be checking or changing the timing
> belt at the 36K service?"
>
> The car is still under warranty, so I would (naively?) thought that if
there
> was a problem with the tensioners/belt/etc it would at least be partly
> covered?
>
> Question 2 is "if they need to replace the parts, should some or all of
the
> cost be covered by the warranty?"
>
> Question 3 is "isn't (potentially) £800 a lot of money to spend to service
a
> two and a half year old car?"
>
> Question 4. This is the tough one. "How do I get "executive approval"
> (e.g. the wife) to swap it for a GT?"
>
> G
>
>