This beautiful Alfa-Romeo was murdered by the Quattroporte

"Ted Olsthoorn" (SecretCars)
09/04/2013 at 16:26 • Filed to: None

What you're looking at here is the test mule of a V8 version of the Alfa Romeo 166. This car has been around in 2007 and 2008 as a development car. From the outside you can see it's lowered and it has larger wheels. What's more important though, is the powertrain. It was powered by the engine that powered the 8C supercar, a 4.7-litre V8. The engine was slightly detuned to give around 390hp and 420nm. 0-100km/h would be reached in around 5.5 seconds and the top speed would be around 260km/h. The reason why this car was cancelled is because Fiat Auto took over Maserati and built the Quattroporte. Fiat didn't want to have 2 competitors in the same segment from their own Auto Group, so they cancelled the 166 V8. What do you think? Would you rather buy this luxury V8 supersaloon, or the earlier mentioned Quattroporte?

DISCUSSION (13)

duurtlang > Ted Olsthoorn
09/04/2013 at 16:28

I'd rather have the Alfa, but do believe Fiat made the right choice. Fiat is a business and needs to make money first.

Party-vi > Ted Olsthoorn
09/04/2013 at 16:28

Churning out a V8-powered Alfa saloon would have it compete against the V8 offerings from BMW, Mercedes and Audi, something German marques have done well for the past few decades. The Quattroporte makes better sense to me as an upscale vehicle.

BugEyedBimmer - back in the Saddle Dakota Leather > Ted Olsthoorn
09/04/2013 at 16:29

I would love the Alfa. As badass as the QP is, I feel like some parts bin love woulda made it a little more liveable and affordable car.

Z_Stig > Ted Olsthoorn
09/04/2013 at 16:34

It made sense because Maserati is an upscale brand, while most Alfa's are not upscale.

It would be like BMW releasing a front wheel drive car when they already own Mini with an entirely front wheel drive line-up. Oh, cock; they are gonna do that >:{ Damnit!

Klaus Schmoll > Ted Olsthoorn
09/04/2013 at 16:35

http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/new-alfa-romeo…

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Looks like Maserati is going to share it's goodies with Alfa. So it wasn't completely pointless for them.

CKeffer > Ted Olsthoorn
09/04/2013 at 16:42

It may be a rather un-jalop thing for me to say, but I just don't get the love affair with all things Alfa. I mean the car isn't ugly, but I also wouldn't say it's beautiful....it's just kinda 'meh' to me. I'm not saying that Alfa hasn't made some beautiful cars, they absolutely have, the 8C is one of the most beautiful cars I've seen in a long time, and the 4c (spider eyes aside) is a damn good looking vehicle as well, but this, and cars like this and the Brera just aren't vehicles that I would consider extraordinarily attractive.

. . > CKeffer
09/04/2013 at 17:38

The 166 was the most controversial looking Alfa in recent years, especially the early model. I've kinda grown to like it but many people still regard it as the ugliest of the lot. They made it much more conventional looking druing the facelift, but I think I actually prefer the older one. Had much more character.

I don't know what you have against the Brera, becauce that's just gorgeous. On the other hand, the Giulietta I find to be rather meh.

Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney > CKeffer
09/05/2013 at 00:37

Well there's your problem: you're talking about modern Alfas.

BannedAndFurious > Ted Olsthoorn
09/05/2013 at 02:56

Was this car FWD or AWD?

A-J-I > . .
09/05/2013 at 03:24

The 166's problem was that it was developed before, but released after the 156, which Alfa decided was more important. They were right of course, but because the 156 was the later-developed car the designers had had a few more years to throw in some neat styling cues and get the proportions worked out.

Take a look at both cars where the A-pillar meets the hood. In the 156, it's a nice sweeping curve. In the 166, it's more or less a straight, very 1990s angle. The less imaginative side surfacing and smaller grille are other clues. And obviously, the 156 has the more imaginative interior too, where the 166's looks suspiciously like a new take on an old layout.

Both are lovely cars though.

Ted Olsthoorn > BannedAndFurious
09/05/2013 at 08:52

I have no idea actually. But with 390 horses under the hoond i'm guessing it's AWD to not ruin the fun too much by constant understeer.

CKeffer > . .
09/05/2013 at 09:12

The Brera looks great to me from the back, but I'm just not a fan of that face. The tall skinny triangular grill paired with the long skinny headlights give it a very pinched appearance to me, like it just ate something very sour and is not happy about it. That said style is extremely subjective and a design that does nothing for me may be a masterpiece to someone else. As for the Giulietta, I love it...provided we're talking about the classic one from the 50's & 60's.

CKeffer > Bob Loblaw Made Me Make a Phoney Phone Call to Edward Rooney
09/05/2013 at 09:17

But that's the thing, yes Alfa has made some beautiful cars through over the course of history, but they have also had some major flops in styling, yet their name at times seems almost hallowed and like general consensus is that they shit Sistine Chapels, fart David's, and piss Starry Nights. But when I look at most modern Alfas, I'm just left feeling....nothing.