scottevest" said:
Without writing a long treatise, Mal CSL 3.0 summed it up well when he wrote: "E9 feels much more solid and is a smoother drive being a GT car rather than a sports car." Expanding on that, the e9, with it's 6 cylinder engine, is a sedate, grand touring car. On the other hand, the Alfa has a high-revving, lower torque, 4 cylinder, is lighter, has a shorter wheelbase and less sound insulation.
stevehose said:
I've always wanted one but can I fit in one if I am 6'5" ?
Well, try before you buy. I know that Mal CSL 3.0 fits in his, but a lot depends on your leg:torso ratio, and what you consider a comfortable driving position. Many say that Alfas were designed for orangutans; you need long arms and short legs, as the pedals are close to the steering wheel.
gkb said:
Most GTVs I saw had low mileage because they were frequently in the shop.
The myth of Italian car unreliability is partially due to the cheapness of Fiats and the complexity of Ferraris. It also stems from prejudice against Italians. Alfas and BMW's are built with the same components that come from the likes of Bosch, ATE, Lemforder and other major European parts suppliers. Consequently, reliability isn't very different.
I will concede that back in the 80's - 90's, when they were just cheap used cars, Alfa tended to be owned by impoverished students and musicians, while the more expensive & prestigious BMW's were owned by doctors & lawyers. So the levels of preventative maintenance each marque received tended to be quite different. Today, they are both highly collectible, and I doubt that gap still exists.