Bangernomics car of the week/day

L-M

coffeenuts wrote: »

Seriously thats a really stupid comment. Sure with your logic why bother NCTing in the first place. :rolleyes:

Of course a years test means something.

Yes there could be problems but you'll get that with any car not just Alfa.

Yes but there are also alot more problems that you could get with the Alfa. Those 166's are so high spec and so very very troublesome. I love them though, I'd nearly buy that.

coffeenuts

RoverJames wrote: »

You asked which would folks rather, I answered, you don't like my answer. If I had a nice well maintained 2002 166 with a years test that was't due a timing belt, wasn't knocking like a Jehovah suspension wise and was relatively sound I would be asking and getting a lot more than a grand for it. A years test in most case means it was tested a year ago, fairly meaningless really, I reckon suggesting otherwise is stupid. Anyway, if you reckon it's such a great buy give the chap a ring and buy the thing.

I dont need another car. If I did I'd have a look certainly, get it checked out. Could be a bargain.

Your dismissal of the NCT system and a full years test left is a complete joke though.

I dont like it as much as the next person but it means cars on the roads now are a lot more roadworthy and it makes cars like the 166 more transparent.

It wouldnt pass the NCT if it wasnt mechanically sound, decent set of tyres etc...

A lot of the cars on this thread have 1 or 2 months and people think its great.

coffeenuts

coffeenuts wrote: »

It wouldnt pass the NCT if it wasnt mechanically sound, decent set of tyres etc...

A lot of the cars on this thread have 1 or 2 months and people think its great.

It probably passed it a year or so ago, that should not be interpreted as the car now being mechanically sound with a decent set of tyres. What I love about the NCT though is that you can get an ole sh1tter past it and some f***tard will give you €400 more than it's worth based on the NCT pass :pac:

L-M

RoverJames wrote: »

What I love about the NCT though is that you can get an ole sh1tter past it and some f***tard will give you €400 more than it's worth based on the NCT pass :pac:

Yeah... It's great... :L;)

Eoin

Surely the point (and inherent value) of an NCT in bangernomics is that it's a hassle that you don't have to go through for however long is left on the cert?

eoin

eoin wrote: »

Surely the point (and inherent value) of an NCT in bangernomics is that it's a hassle that you don't have to go through for however long is left on the cert?

Most definitly, but reckoning that the car is sound mechanically with good tyres etc based on that NCT is imo stupid.

Eoin

Even a fresh NCT on a 4 year old car wouldn't mean much to me as an indication of its condition. But it would make it more desirable.

RoverJames wrote:

What I love about the NCT though is that you can get an ole sh1tter past it and some f***tard will give you €400 more than it's worth based on the NCT pass

Your language aside - an old car is worth more with a long NCT. It doesn't mean that it's completely sound; but it does mean that it can be driven legally - and that's a massive plus.

samih

If I was on a market for a barge I would defo go to see that Alfa. It's gorgeous.

And whatever anybody says a car tested until 01/2012 is a better buy than it's identical sister tested until 01/2010 unless the untested one was going for less than peanuts (a grand or less for a clean 166 *is* peanuts), and even then you'd be asking yourself why was it not put through a test year ago (or maybe it failed with something expensive).

kermitpwee

coffeenuts wrote: »

I dont need another car. If I did I'd have a look certainly, get it checked out. Could be a bargain.

Your dismissal of the NCT system and a full years test left is a complete joke though.

I dont like it as much as the next person but it means cars on the roads now are a lot more roadworthy and it makes cars like the 166 more transparent.

It wouldnt pass the NCT if it wasnt mechanically sound, decent set of tyres etc...

A lot of the cars on this thread have 1 or 2 months and people think its great.

That alfa was tested in january. A lot of problems could have arisen since then, this is the point that is been made. Just because it has an nct does not mean that now 10 months later it is in good mechanical condition although it may be, we dont know without inspecting it. If I owned it and it was a good one I wouldnt be selling it for a grand!

MidlandsM

Basic as they come, but hey its Bangernomics.

http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/vintagecars/1729462

MidlandsM

MidlandsM wrote: »

Basic as they come, but hey its Bangernomics.

http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/vintagecars/1729462

Bordering on an investment that is me thinks

thewintermute

MidlandsM wrote: »

Basic as they come, but hey its Bangernomics.

http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/vintagecars/1729462

Basic and easy to work on, very tidy by the look of it. If it looks as good in the flesh I'd put my hand in my pocket no sweat. Used to have one years back, great car.

furtzy

MidlandsM wrote: »

Basic as they come, but hey its Bangernomics.

http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/vintagecars/1729462

Hmmm.....may take a little look at that

MidlandsM

furtzy wrote: »

Hmmm.....may take a little look at that

Can't say I'd blame ya, you'd loose little on it.

L-M

That won't hang around long at all!

mickdw

Re the Alfa 166. I wouldnt be afraid of running one on a budget now provided engine wasnt ****ed and it didnt need a mountain of suspension work. I had a 3 year old one in 2002. It cost a fortune at that time to keep it right as nothing was available except through dealers. It should be possible to get most stuff used now though. I had lots of problems but believe it or not, electrically, it was 100% apart for the ICS (radio) system which went dead but worked again when new car battery was installed.
I wonder what this one is like?

VolvoMan

Limerick man wrote: »

This is an even better way to spend a grand over than poxy Volvo :P

http://www.gumtree.ie/dublin/71/70494271.html

LM, I get the feeling you've never experienced a T5, let alone any nice Volvo other than your typical S40.

Check out this video and see what you're missing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiWQl4Eb_jM

coffeenuts wrote: »

Which would you rather this or a rectangle of a volvo. :pac:

That statement is so ignorant and immature that it doesn't even warrant commenting on.

davoxx

VolvoMan wrote: »

LM, I get the feeling you've never experienced a T5, let alone any nice Volvo other than your typical S40.

Check out this video and see what you're missing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiWQl4Eb_jM



That statement is so ignorant and immature that it doesn't even warrant commenting on.

i drove an a6 quattro diesel faster than that around there .... is that the four wheel drive version in the video?

Marlow

davoxx wrote: »

i drove an a6 quattro diesel faster than that around there .... is that the four wheel drive version in the video?

There are no Volvo 850 T5 4WD versions, ever. The only AWD Volvo 850 existed with the 2.4 low-pressure turbo engine and was the first 4WD car Volvo build. Subsequently those became the Volvo XC70.

/M

davoxx

Marlow wrote: »

There are no Volvo 850 T5 4WD versions, ever. The only AWD Volvo 850 existed with the 2.4 low-pressure turbo engine and was the first 4WD car Volvo build. Subsequently those became the Volvo XC70.

/M

cheers .. dunno why i thought that some t5s were awd .....

Max Power1

Just going to leave this barge in here...

MidlandsM

Max Power1 wrote: »

Just going to leave this barge in here...

4.2..........Rarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr:pac:

-Corkie-

Looks mint. I would love something like this. No NCT though.

Max Power1

-Corkie- wrote: »

Looks mint. I would love something like this. No NCT though.

Yep, but at 900 euro its a steal.

That same car was listed at €4544 6-9 months ago. They must really be just trying to get rid at this stage.

If they had brought in the tax on fuel instead of motor tax i'd be down there tomorrow, cash in hand!

-Corkie-

Max Power1 wrote: »

Yep, but at 900 euro its a steal.

That same car was listed at €4544 6-9 months ago. They must really be just trying to get rid at this stage.

If they had brought in the tax on fuel instead of motor tax i'd be down there tomorrow, cash in hand!

You would. I could give you a spin home in it....:pac::pac::pac:

L-M

VolvoMan wrote: »

LM, I get the feeling you've never experienced a T5, let alone any nice Volvo other than your typical S40.

Oh I've experienced them alright, one of them left me sitting before :P I'm more of a looks than personality man myself :L

Gary ITR

Limerick man wrote: »

That won't hang around long at all!

Be interesting to see what the colour is like in the dry, red always looks better when it's wet

L-M

Onkle wrote: »

Be interesting to see what the colour is like in the dry, red always looks better when it's wet

Nah I wouldn't say it's faded, you'd still be able to tell. I thought it was actually that Orange colour that comes standard in them, but the boot floor tells a different story!

VolvoMan

Limerick man wrote: »

I'm more of a looks than personality man myself :L

I admit that the 850 design looks dated, but I personally think they look awesome in either T-5 or 'R' spec. They are no where beautiful like an Alfa, but they're not ugly either.

In fairness actually, in saying you're a 'looks man', a W124 is hardly thing of beauty either is it? Sturdy looking and purposeful maybe, but definitely not a looker.

L-M

I adore the W124, and I have done for years... That's kinda my taste, I'd pick an S8 over an equivilant sports Coupe anyday.

I love the S80 R, I think they're cracking looking,