Square-jawed linebacker and sometimes-Alfa chief Reid Bigland took the covers off the 2016 Alfa Romeo Giulia QV for the first time in North America on Tuesday.
The car, which has been delayed about six months, will boast 505 horsepower and a price tag in the “$70,000 range” when it goes on sale next year. According to Bigland, the Giulia QV’s 7:39 lap around the Nurburgring is the quickest for any sedan.
For the reveal, Alfa brought out its big guns. A compendium of cars from the automaker’s heritage lined its outdoor tent, including a 2008 8C, 1967 GTV, 1970 Giulia 1300 Ti, et al. (Why no Milano, no 164, or you know, ones I can actually afford? — Aaron)
The highlights:
• 505 horsepower
• 443 pounds-feet of torque
• Six-speed manual or automatic
• 3-liter, twin-turbocharged V-6
• 3.8 sec. 0-60 mph
• 191 mph top speed
• 7:39 Nurburgring lap time, 13 seconds faster than 911 Turbo
• 50/50 weight distribution
• 8.8-inch wide infotainment system
• Carbon fiber accents
• Probably not the best climate controls for a luxury sport compact
Bigland also outlined the base Giulia, which cost in the “$40,000 range” when it goes on sale. An all-new 276-horsepower, direct-injection four cylinder engine will power that model from 0-60 mph in around 5.5 seconds.
The Giulia’s exhaust note — not as potent as the 1968 Alfa Romeo Tipo 33 Stradale — sounds impressive in person.
So, Dodge with some oregano.
Wait… 70K? Oregano and basil.
That is some aspirational pricing for an FCA product.
Like the Fiats it will share the lot with, this will never leave the door for anywhere near sticker.
Where have you been? Dodge can’t make enough 70k cars to satisfy the demand.
So this 4cyl base model, will it have a rear weight bias or will front end components get heavier to maintain balance? Not only are you dropping from a V6 to a I4 but I’d imagine you’re also dropping the driven front wheels so that could be quite a bit of weight coming out of the front.
Are you asking if the 4 and the 6 will use different spring rates?
I can’t imagine that they wouldn’t. Even GM uses different springs for different engines.
No; I assume the springs would be different for different trim levels and especially engines.
I’m asking what they will do (or not) to the center of mass for the base model car. A rear weight bias is not a good thing for safe, predictable handling of a road-going automobile. Going to a lighter front engine and removing driveline components from the front end will move the center of mass toward the rear. When you’re starting out front-heavy that’s fine. When you’re starting out with a 50/50 weight balance that’s not so good.
Just because they say 50/50 does not mean it is. V6 is likely around 52/48 and the 4 will be 50/50. Even if the V6 is 50/50 I don’t see the turbo 4 going to more than 48/52 not a dangerous rear basis.
Meh, my BMW wagon is 48:52 and it handles brilliantly. The 4cyl e91 wagons are even more rear biased. A couple points either way is insignificant.
There are a lot of carbon fiber components on the QV version of the Giulia, so putting those back in aluminum or steel will add weight to the front (roof and hoof should both push the weight distribution forwards). And you’ll likely be losing that trick rear diff, which is a bit of weight out of the rear.
The quadrifoglio version shown is rwd not awd. Also the weight difference between the 4 cyl and 6 cyl isn’t as substantial as you are thinking.
From the front it’s very distinctive and attractive. From any other angle it just says generic Eurocar. If I saw just the profile I would have said it was maybe some recent vintage BMW 3 series.
Exactly. The front clip is all designers can work with anymore unless you’re Nissan and getting all into finlets.
High hopes that this car will feel like BMWs used to — simple, direct, focused on the driver.
Fears that this car will have typical FCA build quality.
Yup. Look at the cup holder placement, for cripes sakes. You can have a drink, or you can shift and use climate control. Pick!
Uhh a 7:39 ring time is not even vaguely close to being 13 seconds faster than a 911 turbo. Unless you’re comparing it to a 911 turbo from 16 years ago. Where are you getting these crazy figures from?
A 7:39 is actually 9 seconds slower than the new Carerra S let alone the current Turbo. It’s also slower than the last generation Careers S for that matter.
Even the 997 Turbo managed to run the ring in 7:38. The QV running it in 7:39 is definitely impressive for a sedan but why are we cooking up claims that it’s faster than a 911 Turbo?
Yeah, I found the same 911 turbo ring time for a 2008, so a 997.1, recorded at 7:38, just like you stated. Basically 2-3 models ago, depending on how you calculate that.
I did find a 911 Turbo S (991.1) time of 7:24. Usually when I see 911 track times it invovles a GT3 or similar model, not a 911 Turbo.
He said it was faster than any SEDAN.
Shhh! Youre ruining this for them!
All 911 are sedan!
This is what Sergio is betting the FCA farm on?!?!
/facepalm
There’s a branch full of Infiniti G37s lurking in that family tree.
I like it! Will look forward to some in depth reviews.
For those assuming an obsolete FCA reliability stereotype, I pity you. I strongly recommend you drive one before you make any assumptions about it (and I don’t mean a ‘beat to death’ rental unit.)
I’m honestly pleased by the fact that Italy finally has some automotive presence in the US again as many of my favorite cars of the past were Italian, whether they be Lambo, Ferrari, Fiat or whomever. The fact that they have survived despite their absence in the US market means a lot about who the companies really are. The fact that I now own a Fiat product myself (a real Fiat, not a Fiat Chrysler) when I, too, questioned its capabilities before test driving means it simply isn’t what too many people want to believe of it. I look for continued success from FCA.
Ha ha.. cartoon fox has little cozy coupe 500 for short little time and now is expert. Much funny, good for digestion!
What do you consider a, “short little time”, hmmm? How many miles is a, “short little time”?
So far, “cartoon fox” happens to really like the base model Fiat 500 and hasn’t needed to take it into the shop for any purpose.
Anything under 3 years is laughable for reliability testimonials. Re: Germans.
Even hot glue and pop rivets could hold something together for as long as you’ve had that little booger.
If one looks at JD Power Dependability Study which is based on 3 year old vehicles: Fiat products are the worst of the worst… read… at the very bottom of the list.
That would be 273 problems per 100 vehicles i.e. 2.73 problems per vehicle.
They are right at home with Chrysler at 173, Dodge at 192 and Jeep at 197.
Vulpine owns a Jeep so if that is one’s personal benchmark then the Fiat line doesn’t look all that bad.
Fiat’s chief rival for worst cars sold in the US is Land Rover. That’s pretty impressive company to keep, when you consider that most Land Rover products are among the more complex cars you can buy while Fiat has what may be the simplest cars of any brand. If you look their failure rate on a per component basis, Fiat may be twice as bad as Land Rover!
LOL, I love Fiat hating, because it’s easy and factual and backed up with data/reviews.
CoreyDL – “Fiat hating” . No one ever likes being confronted with the harsh realities of well reality.
Reality for some is apparently not the same reality for others. Personal experience tells me that your reality is pure fantasy where it comes to Fiat’s reliability. Even my Jeep, supposedly one of the worst on the different lists, is damned reliable–though I acknowledge that it had two issues coming from Daimler’s screwing over Chrysler and using the cheapest parts they could find. I think the stupidest issue you could think of is to have the ratchet teeth break off of the hand brake handle and prevent the handbrake from ever fully releasing. One or two teeth may never be noticed, but when six or seven teeth are missing, the brake is always dragging. FIAT fixed it, not Daimler. They actually created a new part number because the old one was basically a pot-metal part.
And Lou, while I won’t argue your experience, I would ask if your GC was a Daimler or an FCA. So far, my Fiat has not gone to the shop… ever. Outside of scheduled maintenance–i.e. oil change.
Ive seen enough broken Darts, 200cs, and Cherokees to convince me the old FIAT phrase is still relevant.
On the other hand, Korean cars, GMs, China Volvos, and uber unreliable German cars seem to be doing okay.
“I strongly recommend you drive one before you make any assumptions about it.”
I bought one brand new. The reputation is not obsolete. However if you won the FCA quality lottery with your 500 and want to keep buying them, more power to you.
Wanna bet the reliability is based more on how you treat it than any ‘fault’ in the product itself? I’ll grant I don’t baby the thing, but I also don’t thrash it out to maximum revs all the time, either.
What’s foxy about implying that a unanimously acknowledged smart guy here would ever white trash his brand new, hard-earned ride?
First you have to assume a lot with your statement, RH. By no means is he “unanimously acknowledged” of anything, smart or not. I’m the sort to give anyone a chance to prove themselves. And all I have to do is look out my back door to see people “white trashing” their hard-earned, brand new rides every day. My Jeep, built by Daimler, had more problems than this Fiat has offered so far. And Fiat is the one company who properly fixed an ongoing, six-year-old problem by actually finding the cause of the problem instead of constantly fixing the symptom and ignoring the cause.
Hey, don’t feel slighted, mate… you’ve certainly earned your very own unanimous acknowledgement here, too!
Tolerance of less than “ideal” treatment, is a large part of what most people consider practical reliability. Baby it well enough, and even a snowflake can remain pristine for quite some time.
I do not thrash my vehicle and the car is stock. My issues have been electrical and build/trim quality related and the vehicle is just now a year old so I’m not sure how mis-use could be an underlying cause here.
The drivetrain and suspension have been fine save for an alignment issue around delivery.
Vulpine “Wanna bet the reliability is based more on how you treat it than any ‘fault’ in the product itself?”
We drive my wife’s Sienna no different than the Grand Caravan we had before it.
The Sienna had had 3 minor repairs in 6 years. The GC was in the shop 3-4 times a year for minor and major stuff.
FCA products I’ve driven within the past three years:
3 Chargers
4 Grand Caravans
1 Journey
2 300s
2 200s (new generation)
1 sad-sack last-year Liberty
1 Compass
Of those, only the 300s did NOT have some kind of glaring build quality issue. Between that and the reliability statistics… yeah, FCA has to prove itself a bit.
How many of those were brand new? How many of those were NOT rentals? Considering the number of different vehicles you name, I find it highly unlikely you’ve owned even a fraction of that list. My Jeep and my Fiat are not the first Chrysler products I’ve owned and while even my first Dodge had an interesting quirk–the 318 c.i.d. engine always blew off the top quart of oil–I also managed to achieve 25mpg on a 2,000 mile road trip while exceeding the national speed limit at the time. No, I don’t baby them, but I also don’t “white trash” them as one here has suggested.
All rentals except for one friend’s Grand Caravan; I rent plenty of other cars and rarely see flaws as glaring as Chrysler’s, except sometimes with Nissan interiors (obvious flashing, loose parts). For comparison it’s been some time since I had a GM or Ford rental with a serious quality problem.
I also forgot one Ram 1500 with a uConnect system that insisted on turning on the radio every time I started the truck.
I think I have ample reason to distrust Chrysler build quality, whether or not you got the best 500 ever built.
Does one really need 505 horsepower? Most people probably won’t be able to handle that much power in everyday driving. I wish Alfa brings their more down to earth cars like the Giulietta with a 1.4 engine which I think would have a more wider appeal.
“Does one really need 505 horsepower?”
What other gimmick is left to automakers besides nanny systems?
505 hp
Looks like this car and Bigland are on “roids”.
You can get the Dodge version of this car with up to 707 hp.
There is no Dodge version of this car.
Wha? Just leave.
Does one need 505 horsepower. Does one need a car with a V8? Does one need one with massaging ventalated seats. Do you have to go back for seconds on Thanksgiving? No. But you would want all those things.
Cars themselves create an emotional response because of want. Not need. If this how you think this is how the world should be, you can always find a Trabant for yourselve.
Considering how few of these probably will be sold compared to the regular model. Most people won’t be getting one of these.
This is the obligatory minimalist comment ithat appears in every thread about an Uber high performance car. Let it ride, some just don’t get it.
This is their equivalent of an M3. Presumably the 328i equivalent will come later. I’m looking forward to it. I have no need for 505hp either, 250 would be plenty in this. Make mine a sickshift wagon please.
Im too busy looking at the vinatage Alfas , to notice theyve parked a Honda Accord amist them.
OMG yes! It looks like a transgender Accord!
Them Eyetalians, they got their fingers on the pulse of the times!
I only wish an Accord had those proportions. I bought a used Legend partly because it was the best of the Hondas with the longitudinal layout that gave them great proportions.
Your new avatar still makes me flinch.
Lets see the great Lesley make someone flinch! Hah!
Can someone explain all the Alfa hate among the B&B? You’d think enthusiasts would be enthusiastic about additional automotive options.
I can only explain myself. I’m a turd and this is my idea of a good time :-D
Plus, I’m on vacay and the yard work’s all done!
Because it’s a dumb idea? The US already has a surplus of car brands. Most experts agree someone’s going to have to bite it in the near future (leading contenders include Mitsubishi and Volvo).
So, in an overcrowded market with far too many mid-range brands (Volvo, Acura, Lincoln, etc are all barely hanging on), FCA wants to add ANOTHER one.
And it’s a brand with either zero equity or negative equity among people who remember the last time Alfas were stateside.
Finally, FCA is blatantly eating it’s seed corn for this idea. They’re taking the healthy profits that Jeep and Ram are making, and plowing them into this ill-conceived adventure. Like the last 2 corporations before them, they’re harvesting the warm corpse of Jeep/Chrysler for cash while deliberately under-investing in the R&D and production improvements that will be needed in 4 years.
One nice little recession will once again bring the house down. And what – we’ll bail out Chrysler a THIRD time?
That’s why people are down on this idea. It’s dumb six ways to Sunday.
COTD
I agree there are too many brands, but between the fact Mitsubishi will now import new models from Japan, the fact Volvo Cars is building a US factory, and the fact Acura IS USDM Honda/Lincoln IS Ford for more margin I think we will continue to see them. The one I’d like to see removed is KIA since its simply a superfluous Hyundai but recognize due to the ownership structure this is unlikely to happen. I’m not against Mazda per se, but this is another brand which we could lose and not much would change but I doubt anything will happen to it. If anything you will see MOAR brands as Chinese owned marques come Stateside.
“The US already has a surplus of car brands.”
I very strongly disagree. We have too few brands offering cars that are way too similar.
I agree everything is similar but its not because of a “brand”, more because of engineering and business reasons. GM had five divisions for most of its previous existence which more or less sold the same car with changes across all brands. Sergio seems to want to do something similar with the major difference being all of the brands are under one roof as opposed to separate channels and dealer networks (which is smart). However adding a new marque doesn’t guarantee success or even much volume. Many have said Scion has not been a success for Toyota and have called for its culling some time ago. Does Toyota need Scion? I tend to think not. Would it make sense to Honda to create a tweener brand in between itself and Acura? I’m not thinking it would work. I see what Sergio and perhaps yourself are going for but I don’t think its going to be a success. In the case of Alfa, its at least something very different than what the other Chryco marques offer so there is little to no overlap. If existing brands just spun up marques above and below themselves it would simply be an exercise of marketing which I think only goes so far. Alan Mulally killed Mercury and wanted to kill Lincoln because he felt they were superfluous brands in the portfolio. More brands doesn’t seem always to equal more sales.
No overlap? But 90% of the B&B think its a rebadged Charger and the rest think its a rebadged Dart. Cant get much more overlap than that.
Wait, scratch “overlap” out of that last line, insert “ignorant” instead.
I agree with you JMO. The US is a bland desert when it comes to cars. Of course, most here would be happy if the only choices were a panther, Camry, corolla, and the cuv equivalents, plus a truck or two.
The benefits of investing in giorgio don’t end with Giulia or Alfa itself.
They are nothing more than a whole much of EINO’s. They say they are disgusted with the shift in the car market to SUVs/CUVs from sedans/wagons. But when we get a brand who attempts to make some of what they supposedly want, they get treated to the same as the guy who walks by the monkey cage after the monkey got done digesting its last meal.
Alfa is bringing us a true sports sedan, and we are getting all that stinky stuff being thrown at it. I for one can’t wait until I’m able to lease one of these.
I agree, and am also very interested in this car. Although we’ll both probably wait until there is a ridiculous pile of cash on the hood. Not exactly what’s required to make this thing a success.
Somewhere, my old Dart is at auction. My hopes of having a reliable Chrysler product were dashed with that car.
Sadly, the new Alfas fall into that category.
It’s a good looking car, but I shall not have one darken my driveway.
You and I obviously thrash our vehicles too much.
Even the sterling machines built by FCA can’t hold up to our apeish brutality.
Savages.
Doesn’t seem to matter if it’s 1988, or 1994, or 1999, or 2010 or 2015 – if you have an FCA product you’re gonna have issues.
AC
Transmission
Build/trim
Electrical
Engine (Mitsu)
I wonder which tuba is the quickest around Nurburgring ….. Or, if that is really the task people buy tubas and sedans for.
I wanted an Alfa 159. Instead I got this. If you cover the grill with your thumb, it looks like a refreshed Chrysler 200.
I agree. The profile is generic. The front is too busy.
It seems I’m a big fan of green leather jumpsuits.
Are healthy bosoms now politically unacceptable?
All that supple, pliant leather. So little to mold it.
RideHeight – ‘Are healthy bosoms now politically unacceptable?”
Just silicon or saline bladder bosoms perhaps.
or maybe Bigland didn’t want anyone on stage with a bigger chest than his?
I think that matrix of front grilles, both really and textured plastic, is a bit much. Especially the textured plastic ones. Good luck Alfa-Romeo. You’re going to need it.
It went to the design school of C-Max.
Those are the cruise control buttons from a Cruze.
How could this be faster than a Panamera Turbo or an Aston Rapide?
V=MA
And a few other things.
All this car needs is two tone paint, maybe pink over black, some nice, red and green plaid seat covers, and a matte green painted metal dash.