Originally Posted by
LeonOfTheDead
I think this whole review is failed in its main argument. Who buy cars.
First of all, the 164 from 23 years ago was just rock solid. Second, the 156 was magnificent to drive and a good reliable car too. Third, the 159 is built up to German standards (requested by those who were buying the 156 a few years before), and yet it handles marvelously. It's more comfortable than the Croma, goes faster and feels alive too.
Having unfortunately experienced both, the Croma is much like a Passat. A large comfortable boat (by European standards, sort of), and a few more. Not interesting to drive, not funny, and fast enough with mid level engines. The 159 on the other hand is asking for a late braking while approaching a turn so that the tail will slide just to make you smile a bit more. And then you are asking yourself why you chose the 1.9 diesel engine instead of the 2.4 while exiting the turn flooring the accelerator.
People don't buy them, not as much as I'd like but that doesn't mean something is wrong with the car except that it isn't German or continuously and blindly praised by some short minded and bored journalist. And I don't even want to talk about the premium thing, just plain pointless.
Extremely often it doesn't matter how good a car is, all that does matter is what people think to know about it.
I know a few guys which were sort of insulting a friend's Opel Tigra, because it was supposedly too light (yeah, wtf) and dangerous, while their 206s were just plain awesome, because of two WRC titles. Yeah, wtf at its finest.
Regardless of the fact that both cars weighted just a bit less than 1.000 kg, or that the Tigra won many races if not championships in ice rallying events, or even that the 206 CC one of them owned at the time was about the worst car to handle in extreme/dangerous situations in that period and class, do we think for a second their opinions were reliable? Of course not, as they didn't know what they were talking about, let alone know at least a couple of things about cars.
On the other hand they were and presumingly still are owners and buyers of cars, and they more than likely stand for the most buyers out there. We, as enthusiasts, are a minority report.
As with almost all modern objects and possessions, there are people truly in love with them, people who know or try to know as much as they can about that specific object. Some of these products though are bought and used also by people who just need them, or think they do, and they don't go trough the hassle of knowing everything that is good to know before of buying and using them. They are in many cases, and specifically in this case, the largest market.
So the Alfa Romeo problem is probably a simple one: us.
Because of us, they can't just go out there and built a Passat, a Golf or a Touareg, because we'd just kill'em. It takes them much more time and middle steps to reach that sort of targets, which they sort of need to reach, because of the rest of the market which is what feed them.
The 156 was just awesome, really. Cheap, fast, reliable, good looking. It sold well, but not enough. It wasn't a mainstream car, so only enthusiasts bought them or thereabouts. At the same time they kept asking for more equipments, luxury, stuff and so on. Here you go, this is the 159.
FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUU, they said, it's too German, it's too heavy, too comfortable, no matter if it's exactly what I asked you yesterday.
Saying that buyers shouldn't be considered when designing a car won't solve anything.
But, as Pieter once told me waiting under the Italian sun and talking about a completely different car, "you have to feed customers slowly".
True words, which means, you have to educate customers and don't let them pretend things they don't even know about.
As far as I see things, Alfa (and Maserati) are heading in the right direction, except the two SUV things, which I'm afraid can't be avoided.
Regardless of which wheels are pushing, or pulling, the car.