IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Which Handles The Best?, 145/146 or 156 which is best on a twisty
Which car handles the best?
Which car handles the best?
145/146 [ 26 ] ** [70.27%]
156 [ 11 ] ** [29.73%]
Total Votes: 37
Guests cannot vote 
Spennie
post 15th June 2005 17:19
Post #21 | Print


1.3 8v
*

Group: New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: 8th June 2005
Local Time: 18th November 2017 09:37
Member No.: 951
Driving: Alfa 156
From: England



Having driven 145 and 156, have to say, 156 handles far better round the twisty stuff, but the 145 steering is more responsive. I find that going round the same corners in either car, the 156 you just point and squirt without having to make any adjustments and the car is just planted on the road and will just turn in without the back ever coming out. 145 is more work. However, I enjoy both equally!!
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
Cream
post 15th June 2005 21:38
Post #22 | Print


1.3 8v
*

Group: New Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 15th June 2005
Local Time: 18th November 2017 08:37
Member No.: 962
Driving: Alfa 155 3.0 L
From: wrexham



QUOTE(crit71 @ Jun 15 2005, 03:22 PM)
QUOTE(Cream @ Jun 15 2005, 03:12 PM)
Ive driven an early 2.0 156, great handling, very comfortable and a mad engine... streets ahead of the 145/6/5 in terms of refinemnet etc.. but perhaps not so focused for the real driver.
With a V6 up front the wieght will seriously comprimise the handling, having said that my 3.0L 155 is the best car ive ever driven around bends, except perhaps a porsche 968, but the 155 is far more involving to drive..
*

3 ltr 155 cream? I thought they only went up to a 2.5?
My 2.5 155 had mad power through out the rev range so I couldn't imagine what a 3 ltr would be like...are you sure there was a 3ltr?
*



Orginally it was a 2.5 , had raised comp ratio, gas flowed and ported heards, mad high lift cams, tubular manifolds and remapped to 220BHp with an 8k limiter... it was a track day car. I bought it a couple of years ago now and loved it, mental car and so fantasically noisey - but something happend to the cam belt, or the tensioner, never found out what, the engine eat itself, completley distroyed pistons and valves smashed back up it the chambers etc... one of the worst days of my life i tell ya... so rather than just pull it to bits i had a 3.0 L engine built (couldnt get 2.5 pistons), i stuck with the 12V as i wanted torque, just some porting to the heads etc but otherwise standard. In this form the car is quicker than it was as a 2.5, lots of go from 1700 to 6500, but its not mapped so i carnt thrash it hard. having never driven a standard 2.5 i dunno how much quicker it is as a 3.0 but the torque makes going fast so easy, just tickle the throttle and hold on, handling is amazing , turn in is somthing else
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
Veloce
post 17th June 2005 06:53
Post #23 | Print


1.3 8v
*

Group: New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: 19th January 2005
Local Time: 18th November 2017 08:37
Member No.: 721
Driving: Alfa Romeo 145 QV
From: Norway



I have an italian car magazine from 1996 where several gti cars are tested round a circuit (Golf, Astra, 306, Clio, Xsara, Bravo hgt, 145.gif qv ). The french cars were much faster round the circuit than the qv , and it was only one car that was slower: The Bravo naturally blink.gif
The qv gives a lot of fun behind the wheel, but it isn't espesially fast. I believe that a 156 2.0 is faster on a twisty road, but I think the 145 is more fun. And isn't it that it's all about? thumbup.gif
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
Symon
post 17th June 2005 13:11
Post #24 | Print


1.6 16v
****

Group: Veteran
Posts: 1,950
Joined: 22nd May 2005
Local Time: 18th November 2017 09:37
Member No.: 912
Driving: VW Golf V5 170ps
From: Oxfordshire



I suppose you are right Veloce. the 156 had higher limits to it cornering but it doesn't always let you know so clearly where they are. Therefore in a 145 you can use 100% of the cars ability whereas in the 156 you are very wary of using the last bit.. In case it lets go and puts you in a hedge. The 145 would have been screaming at you to back off a long time before then.
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
xxxvekyxxx
post 17th June 2005 14:17
Post #25 | Print


1.6 16v
****

Group: Veteran
Posts: 1,060
Joined: 16th February 2004
Local Time: 18th November 2017 08:37
Member No.: 237
Driving: Traktor TD2.0
From: Pula , Croatia



QUOTE(Veloce @ Jun 17 2005, 06:53 AM)
I believe that a 156 2.0 is faster on a twisty road, but I think the 145 is more fun. And isn't it that it's all about?  thumbup.gif
*


totally wrong , and don't read those influenced mags

The qv is faster around bends and straight than every 156 / 147 2.0 ,2.0 ts and the newer jts are a bag full of s**te.. believe me
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
Dogbreath
post 17th June 2005 15:16
Post #26 | Print


1.6 16v
****

Group: Veteran
Posts: 1,673
Joined: 21st June 2004
Local Time: 18th November 2017 09:37
From: Work - London (City), Home - Hertford
Member No.: 477
Driving: GTV Cup no 25, 916 TS spider
From: Baldock, Herts, England



with a few little tweaks ive always eaten 156's in my ti, only the gta tends to blow me. Blew a 156 2.5l months ago, on his tail but he wouldnt take it past 130 lol. This is obviously on the continent wink.gif

With a few suspension tweaks i out handle most things, was pushing along a new yet rather wallowy looking porka...probably he couldnt drive it. Golf vr6 etc, the list goes on. I guess with the more powerfull stuff you tend not to push 100% on the corner or you'll be spinning around before you know it.


--------------------
Traveling through hyperspace isn't like dusting crops, boy!
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
Veloce
post 17th June 2005 20:25
Post #27 | Print


1.3 8v
*

Group: New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: 19th January 2005
Local Time: 18th November 2017 08:37
Member No.: 721
Driving: Alfa Romeo 145 QV
From: Norway



QUOTE(xxxvekyxxx @ Jun 17 2005, 02:17 PM)
QUOTE(Veloce @ Jun 17 2005, 06:53 AM)
I believe that a 156 2.0 is faster on a twisty road, but I think the 145 is more fun. And isn't it that it's all about?  thumbup.gif
*


totally wrong , and don't read those influenced mags

The qv is faster around bends and straight than every 156 / 147 2.0 ,2.0 ts and the newer jts are a bag full of s**te.. believe me
*


Well, I have tried some of the 156, and I can't say that I agree with you. The qv might feel faster, but it isn't (maybe straight).
And if I didn't have tried any 156, I had to lean to the mags to get an opinion. Why should I believe more on what you say? Aren't you influenced of what you drive?
I have seen one track test of 145QV, which I already have refered to. I have also seen a track test of 156 V6 with sport pack together with 911 Carrera, Boxter, 355 F1, BMW 328i,Nissan 200SX Turbo, Xsara VTS, Lotus Elise, Golf GTI 1.8T, E55 AMG, Jag XKR, GTV3.0, Integra Type R, Camaro Z28, MX-5, C70 Coupe and Almera gti turbo. Okay, the track was wet, but still: The 156 finished with 3rd best time, only beaten by the 911 and the 355. It can't be that bad? But this mag is surely influenced by a Fiat mafioso guns.gif tongue.gif
In my opinion the fastest car is not the funniest. I believe it is bags of more fun to drive a Fiat Abarth 1000TC than a Mercedes AMG w00t2.gif
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
Veloce
post 17th June 2005 21:08
Post #28 | Print


1.3 8v
*

Group: New Member
Posts: 13
Joined: 19th January 2005
Local Time: 18th November 2017 08:37
Member No.: 721
Driving: Alfa Romeo 145 QV
From: Norway



QUOTE(Dogbreath @ Jun 17 2005, 03:16 PM)
with a few little tweaks ive always eaten 156's in my ti, only the gta tends to blow me. Blew a 156 2.5l months ago, on his tail but he wouldnt take it past 130 lol. This is obviously on the continent wink.gif

With a few suspension tweaks i out handle most things, was pushing along a new yet rather wallowy looking porka...probably he couldnt drive it. Golf vr6 etc, the list goes on. I guess with the more powerfull stuff you tend not to push 100% on the corner or you'll be spinning around before you know it.
*

I shall maybe buy FK Silverline X to my own qv . I may eat some big birds for breakfast with that upgrade. I hope it will be even more fun than it is standard too, but I am not sure because it will be more difficult to exploit the limits.
I took my 145 qv on a wet track day a few weeks ago. Lots of understeer (really bad tyres when wet), but bags of oversteer too. That is really fun ohyes.gif

It is difficult to compare which car is the fastest when it is different drivers. 6 years ago I drove past a 145 qv on track day with my Sprint, I am not shure that the car was faster, but my kamikaze driving-style was indeed laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
xxxvekyxxx
post 17th June 2005 22:42
Post #29 | Print


1.6 16v
****

Group: Veteran
Posts: 1,060
Joined: 16th February 2004
Local Time: 18th November 2017 08:37
Member No.: 237
Driving: Traktor TD2.0
From: Pula , Croatia



you're right im a little influenced , just to say that i'm selling my 145 and buying a 156 2.4 jtd ecu mapped with 190hp torque- 390nM
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
Symon
post 18th June 2005 00:03
Post #30 | Print


1.6 16v
****

Group: Veteran
Posts: 1,950
Joined: 22nd May 2005
Local Time: 18th November 2017 09:37
Member No.: 912
Driving: VW Golf V5 170ps
From: Oxfordshire



QUOTE(xxxvekyxxx @ Jun 17 2005, 10:42 PM)
you're right im a little influenced , just to say that i'm selling my 145 and buying a 156 2.4 jtd ecu mapped with 190hp torque- 390nM
*


I just hope it doesn't suffer the same handling problems as the 156 V6 when loaded with a heavy engine, like bottoming out all the time and really bad understeer.. You may not find out about the understeer until you take a bend too fast and end up on the wrong side of the road with oncoming traffic heading your way. You have been warned..
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
xxxvekyxxx
post 18th June 2005 06:27
Post #31 | Print


1.6 16v
****

Group: Veteran
Posts: 1,060
Joined: 16th February 2004
Local Time: 18th November 2017 08:37
Member No.: 237
Driving: Traktor TD2.0
From: Pula , Croatia



you are right and it has the same heavy-nose problems as the v6 (in fact jtd 2.4 is a v5). It has much higher torque than the v6 2.5 but that could be a cons also
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
Symon
post 20th June 2005 17:49
Post #32 | Print


1.6 16v
****

Group: Veteran
Posts: 1,950
Joined: 22nd May 2005
Local Time: 18th November 2017 09:37
Member No.: 912
Driving: VW Golf V5 170ps
From: Oxfordshire



Better save up for some uprated spring and dampers then..
I can't also say I am taken with the idea of a Diesel Alfa. You have a fantastic looking car that sounds like a tractor, and with a very narrow power band too. What people also don't realise is by the time the engine is turbo'ed up to give petrol like performance the fuel consumption isn't much better either. At least you have the torque I suppose so you could drive it like a tractor too..
Yes I have driven a Diesel Alfa, a 2.4 JTD 156 by the way..
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
xxxvekyxxx
post 20th June 2005 17:57
Post #33 | Print


1.6 16v
****

Group: Veteran
Posts: 1,060
Joined: 16th February 2004
Local Time: 18th November 2017 08:37
Member No.: 237
Driving: Traktor TD2.0
From: Pula , Croatia



QUOTE(symonh2000 @ Jun 20 2005, 05:49 PM)
Better save up for some uprated spring and dampers then..
I can't also say I am taken with the idea of a Diesel Alfa. You have a fantastic looking car that sounds like a tractor, and with a very narrow power band too. What people also don't realise is by the time the engine is turbo'ed up to give petrol like performance the fuel consumption isn't much better either. At least you have the torque I suppose so you could drive it like a tractor too..
Yes I have driven a Diesel Alfa, a 2.4 JTD 156 by the way..
*


maybe sounds like a tractor but it drinks almost nothing and goes like your petrol powered car, it can be ecu tuned for good!, it has much higher torque than petrol powered and for the sound , when alfa endend with boxers the sound is nothing better than a good honda.. be real!

oh and i forgot , narrow power band?? haha
give me a 2.4mjet and i'll leave you and your 2.5 v6 24v choking in my black smoke

This post has been edited by xxxvekyxxx: 20th June 2005 18:02
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
Symon
post 20th June 2005 18:13
Post #34 | Print


1.6 16v
****

Group: Veteran
Posts: 1,950
Joined: 22nd May 2005
Local Time: 18th November 2017 09:37
Member No.: 912
Driving: VW Golf V5 170ps
From: Oxfordshire



QUOTE(xxxvekyxxx @ Jun 20 2005, 05:57 PM)
QUOTE(symonh2000 @ Jun 20 2005, 05:49 PM)
Better save up for some uprated spring and dampers then..
I can't also say I am taken with the idea of a Diesel Alfa. You have a fantastic looking car that sounds like a tractor, and with a very narrow power band too. What people also don't realise is by the time the engine is turbo'ed up to give petrol like performance the fuel consumption isn't much better either. At least you have the torque I suppose so you could drive it like a tractor too..
Yes I have driven a Diesel Alfa, a 2.4 JTD 156 by the way..
*


maybe sounds like a tractor but it drinks almost nothing and goes like your petrol powered car, it can be ecu tuned for good!, it has much higher torque than petrol powered and for the sound , when alfa endend with boxers the sound is nothing better than a good honda.. be real!

oh and i forgot , narrow power band?? haha
give me a 2.4mjet and i'll leave you and your 2.5 v6 24v choking in my black smoke
*



Another thing is that Diesels are not as cheap to run in the UK as the fuel costs quite a bit more than petrol. I haven't got a 2.5v6 by the way I have a 145 qv
Also the sound or a good Honda engine is pretty good, even the four cylinder ones like the Civic type R, especially over 8,000 revs.. As for the NSX..
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post
romesolution
post 17th September 2013 18:02
Post #35 | Print


1.6 8v
***

Group: Regular
Posts: 751
Joined: 1st November 2010
Local Time: 18th November 2017 08:37
From: Faringdon
Member No.: 5,656
Driving: Cloverleaf, 1.8 ts, 1.7 Boxer
From: Faringdon



This thread is a million years old but people are still voting..... cool! For the record my blue track car handles like a Go-cart! Only downside is it c*cks a leg round every roundabout!

This post has been edited by romesolution: 17th September 2013 18:03
Go to the top of the page
View Vehicles
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18 Nov 2017 08:37