I need your help /o/

>>13831518
>buying a diesel

>>13831518
Mazda

>>13831585

>>13831518
want reliability?
mazda

want fun?
alfa

>>13831583
>not buying diesel

Get the Mazda. Reliable, fun, reliable. Also fun.

>>13831633
Alfa is the same, and does also look better.

>>13831646
And pricey

>>13831660
but it looks better and has more HP

>>13831684
But it's less reliable

>>13831684
If it's like the rest of FCA's product it'll be hugely unreliable, and it makes less torque which is what matters more in the real world

>>13831646
>Trusting Italians

I don't think so, Tim.

>>13831711
>>13831723
>>13831744
>hurr durr le FCA = shit meeme

where are your proofs?`

>>13831757
FCA = Fecal Crap Automobiles

>>13831824
e/b/in!

> Fuckin commendable Automobiles

>>13831757
pretty much every survey puts them bottom.
it's so god damn consistent that it's hard to ignore.
kinda like lexus always being on top.
at this point you need to provide proof of them not being shit.

>>13831845
>in america
these proofs proof nothing

>>13831845
>>13831853

>>13831851
no, not just in america

File: 1430837895682.gif (993KB, 255x271px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 255x271px

>>13831597
>>13831597
this

>>13831885
I believe that you are just telling shit because you don't like Alfa

>>13831897
Italian quality is bad enough
Italian multinational quality is worse
Italian multinational quality combined with shit american detroit quality = DISASTER

>>13831914
that may have been back in the day gramps, but we have 2015 now

>>13831897
I don't especially like modern Alfas, much prefer the Alfetta platform and older Lancias, but I certainly don't have anything against Italian cars. Far from it.
It's just hard to argue in favour of them on the grounds of reliability, and while I'm sceptical of reliability surveys when they all say the same thing year after year you kinda have to accept that data. I would be less inclined to believe the midfield results in those surveys because the variance is too great.
But don't let me stop you enjoying your Punto anyway.

>>13831953
>when they all say the same thing year after year you kinda have to accept that
that's how the kikes made you believe in the holocaust :^)

>>13831949
so all that plus modern economizing and cost-reduction techniques, and that's somehow better and not worse? Keeeeek

>>13831967
better cars are better, yes anon
are you mentally challenged?

>>13831969
>better cars are better
phrases like this, there's a term for them that I forgot. it's not 'recursion' it's something worse.
>sad dog is sad
is an example of the literary device I can't remember, but basically it's a worthless statement.

>>13831998
that's good to know, but all I was saying is that the quality of Fiat products are way better, and if not even better than average in their pricing segment than Fiat was 50 years ago

>>13832015
>quality of Fiat products are way better,
and how is this substantiated? bc you said so?

>>13832026
yes

It's also in almost every vehicle test mentioned about a Fiat vehicle

>>13831518

Resale value
>Alfa
Looks
>Alfa
Fun
>err...
reliability
>Mazda

>>13832039
Being better than previous FCA products ain't much when it's 2015 and you're the absolute worst besides Land Rover and Jeep.
Maybe you are also comparing to Indian and Russian cars.
In which case I'm sure Alfa's are quite reliable. Just not compared to anything Japanese.

>>13832066
Alfa also has a pretty big aftermarket

File: 50851a.jpg (28KB, 656x329px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 656x329px

>>13832074
even iff it should be a bit less reliable
>read: doesn't have that good electric connectors
it still has more power and a bigger aftermarket, and looks better (subjective)
and that makes up for the problems since you can fix most of that stuff by yourself since there are huge forums for FCA vehicles

>>13832075
True that.

Can't say anything about the guilietta but the mito being essentially the same as the fiat 500 will be bullet proof except for electronics in the 1.2 - 1.4L versions. Even then it's only the extras like bluetooth that fuck up now.

>>13831518
Alfa and Fiat in general tend to have reliability problems. Have you looked into that? I have no idea if the Giulietta model is particularly reliable or not.

If it is, I'd go with that I suppose. But the Mazda3 is great.

Test drive both, look into reliability of the Alfa, make a decision.

>>13832210
Also see what deals the dealers offer off MSRP.

The best one to go with could be the one that gives the better deal.
Not usually ideal to decide on a car before even getting offers, or else you're stuck and fucked. Also, at least in America, you can get dealers to compete against each other and driving 100 miles to get an extra $1000 off is worth.

>>13832111
well if you look at it like that, you're completely right.

>>13832210
alfa and fiat reliability literally doesn't matter in 2015, they're giving you the opportunity to visit some fantastic forums and learn valuable skills like rewiring entire cars.

>>13832222
Check'd n' Kek'd

>>13831518
Buy the Alfa.

>Mazda is more technically advanced
Nope.
Especially if you're going for a diesel.

File: 1446412318203.jpg (54KB, 600x580px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 600x580px

>>13832237
being this wrong

>>13832222
>rewiring entire cars
no, just if it tells you something like "check airbag" you just have to look if the connector is still clipped together, if not, just clip it back together and there will be no problems. You just have to know what triggers what kind of error and you can simply check and delete

>>13832244
>not knowing multiairs are probably the most advanced small displacement petrol engines
>not knowing multijets are the most advanced small displacement diesel engines
>not knowing mazda's diesel engines are PSA units
>being this weeb

File: 1437596422212.jpg (41KB, 819x633px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 819x633px

Important decisions in Europe: 150HP or 170HP

I feel so sorry for them

>>13832267
>>not knowing multiairs are probably the most advanced small displacement petrol engines
they most certainly are not. you don't understand engines.
>>not knowing multijets are the most advanced small displacement diesel engines
i dont know things that are not true
>not knowing mazda's diesel engines are PSA units
they absolutely are not, Mazda makes their own diesels, and have since the 70s and have always used their own diesels in more vehicle than PSA units, and have not used a PSA diesel for years

Mazda has the most advanced consumer diesels on the market right now, when considering actual engine parameters like BSFC, NOx emissions (without after treatment) and CO2 emissions. Oh yeah, and they're more torquey than competitors and have been since the days of the MZ-CD 2.2L ironblock.

You dont know that which you speak of, typical.

>>13832222
>telling people to buy cars to wrench on is OK if it's a beat up RX 7 and other shitcars liek the Foxbody, but suddenly it's wrong if it's a FIAT
nice double standarts /o/

>>13832267
LMAO
>Multijet's claim to fame is staged multiple injections per cycle
>Welcome to 2004
"technologically advanced' hahahahaa

File: 1446937362619.jpg (10KB, 215x211px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 215x211px

>>13832267
>Multijet still having 2 valve per cylinder option
>2015

>>13832309
>wrenching
>on a brand new car

>>13831518

5-10 years from now you will still be able to get parts for the mazda

alfa in 5-10 years ? who knows

>>13832333
I don't see the problem in optimizing your car

>>13832299
>they most certainly are not. you don't understand engines.
Really? What other 1.4l petrol engine produces 190hp in the market, while still being extremely fuel efficient and reliable?

>>i dont know things that are not true
>8 injections per cycle
>produces more torque per liter than any other engine with the same displacement
>16v standard, while most diesels still are 8v

>>13832321
>>13832327
Nice samefagging.

>>13832344
>bragging about 190hp
>135hp/l
kek.

>>13832365
This must be a new level of retarded.

File: PwMo215[1].jpg (101KB, 357x554px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 357x554px

>>13832348

>>13832344
>1.4l petrol engine 190hp
>muh specific output = technological advancement
MOST 1.4 are 120hp lol. Tell me why they arent all 190hp?


Thermal efficiency and combustion control = technological advancement.
High specific output = tuning advancement, something anyone can do.
Just a heads up to the magazine reading casual.

Skyactiv engines, both petrol and diesel, are among the most thermally efficient and cleanest units on the market. Unlike high tuning an engine, thermal/emissions efficiency is much more difficult to achieve while also driving emission down to class leading levels.

If this was about specific output motorbike engines would be considered the most advanced engines. (protip: they're absolutely not)

>>13832391
>worlds greatest engine
>does nothing well
>mostly doesn't work
>fitted in partially assembled cars
>because lol FCA

>>13832365
And that's with a turbo
So fucking lame!

>>13832410
It's still better than your shitty rustbucket japbox.

>>13832416
>Diesel
>no turbo

lol?

File: 160[2].gif (613KB, 295x221px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 295x221px

>>13832431
>italy in charge of anti-corrosion

>>13832438
>he lives in pre 2003
lel

>>13832410
>muh /o/ memes!

>>13832434
he was talking about the petrol 1.4 190hp uses a turbo that's not impressive at all

>>13832447
what diesel engine used in cars doesn't use a Turbo?

fucking hell, FCA delusion is strong

>>13832457
fuck are you asking about nigger we're not discussing diesel engines in the posts quoted it was about Fiat 1.4l PETROL GASOLINE TURBO ENGINE

>>13832469
>show me a 1.4l petrol
how about you show me a turbo engine that can't produce more than 130hp/l

File: 6d5[1].png (276KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 1280x720px

>>13832469
well maybe no one else does it because pumping up 1.4s is a shit idea

>>13832447
>that's not impressive at all
Well then, show me a 1.4l petrol that makes more power than that.
Friendly reminder VW makes a 1.4 TSI which produces 170hp and it's unreliable as fuck.

>>13832493
stop deleting your posts retard

>>13832488
>how about you show me a turbo engine that can't produce more than 130hp/l
Are you blind? How about reading what I wrote?
That 1.4 TSI barely makes more than 120hp/l. And that's the second most powerful 1.4 in the market, behind the 1.4 multiair 190.

>>13832492
>couch engineering at its finest
Pumping small displacement engines with turbos is literally the future, you nigger.

>>13832516
Don't be rude. It's a bug in the script.

>>13832298
nigger, this is econobox crap.

you think putting a ford focus against a maserati would be fair?

>>13832517
>That 1.4 TSI barely makes more than 120hp/l. And that's the second most powerful 1.4 in the market, behind the 1.4 multiair 190.
That doesn't mean they're technologically advanced. You are supposed to support your claims that they're the most technically advanced engines where 'find me another 1.4 engine......" is not a case. I am telling you that it has nothing to do with technological advancement. I can show you 1985 Japanese engines making over 250hp/l on stock hardware, am I supposed to be impressed with 130hp/l out of a 1.4 or think that it's high technology??

>>13832541
Read what I wrote again in a previous post.
It manages to make that amount of power while still being fuel efficient, clean and reliable.
Three things those japanese engines weren't on stock parts.

>>13832527
>nigger, this is econobox crap.
Nigger, 170hp, 310lb-ft of torque. Does your burgerclap ass even realize that they're talking about Turbodiesel engines? Do you know how TDs even work?

>>13832517
>Pumping small displacement engines with turbos is literally the future, you nigger.

And companies do it with displacements other than 1.4 litres.
It's like asking "find a more powerful 1.75 litre engine than the multiair" knowing that no one else makes engines in that displacement, it's mainly 1.6 and 2.0 litres.
hp/litre is fair, and Multiair engine is not special and unreliability is guaranteed with a FCA product.

>>13832563
no

>>13832575
>2015
>still spewing maymays

>>13832563
>diesel passenger cars
>relevant after the VW scandal

>>13832559
>Three things those japanese engines weren't on stock parts.
name them, genius!! name then and I'll embarrass you so fast.....

>>13832559
>fuel efficient, clean and reliable.
this is consumer speak for muh opinions.
Come at me with some sunstantive technical specifications such as CO2, BSFC and serviceability stats.

>>13832575
>unreliability is guaranteed with a FCA product.
10/10 meme

>>13832585
>it's a meem because I don't like it
CRY THEN NIGGER

>>13832563
>310lb-ft of torque
haha no. 360Nm.
The Mazda makes 380Nm

>>13832633
>>it's a meem because I don't like it
>FCA is shit because I don't like it

>>13831518
>Alfa
get the mazda.

>>13832647
No they're shit because FCA QC is non existent and EVERY SURVEY bears that out.
Only Land Rover are worse.

>>13832633
Some model get 410Nm@2000 standard. Chip tune on 380Nm model raise to 410

>>13832677
>correction raise up to 480Nm

>>13832677
>but you can't chip a mazda because that's not fair
typical italian retard

>>13832687
Where did he say that?

>>13832696
why is he bringing it up? do you not think the skyactiv could do similar?

>>13832724
He was just saying that you could, if you care that much about torque, get a tune for the Alfa and have a better looking, more torque and same quality car as the Mazda

>>13832747
>better looking
>more reliable
>more torque
FCA shill pls go

>>13832747
or you could tune the mazda and have even more torque than a tuned alfa with a more reliable and better handling car

>>13831998
The word is 'tautology'.

>>13832754
> 480 nm is not more than 380 nm
> implying Alfa isn't the most beautiful car maker out there
Mazda shill pls go
>>13832763
I don't think it will handle better. The Alfa has sport her genetic

>>13832785
>> 480 nm is not more than 380 nm
>>13832677
>>13832684
protip; he was talking about the Skyactiv

>>13832785
>The Alfa has sport her genetic
alright man, it's obvious you're italian. i understand why you are saying the things you are now. Saluti

>>13832785
>The Alfa has sport her genetic
you sound incredibly biased. which is fine. i'll let you believe what you want. but you're wrong.

>>13832796
> implying I'm from pasta island :^)
Ciao ragazzo

File: Intel_Pentium_133.jpg (215KB, 1300x1212px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 1300x1212px

>>13832785
>480 nm
What is this - 1993?
We're down to 14 nm these days

>>13831518
Op here, I've test driven both of them, the Alfa it's more fun and has more handling but is also more uncomfortable in the city, the Mazda is a more grown-up car, it seems a little slower but it's more comfortable. The price tags are a lot similar, the Alfa is 32k and the Mazda is 31k