Carwow Video: Giulia QV vs M3 CS vs C63 (coupe) drag race

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by erind

It's a shame they didn't add a 911 to the comparison.

[erind]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

[RickFLM4]

Originally Posted by KevinM

Two things seem consistent from all these comparisons:

1. Alfa really knocked it out of the park with the QV...hat's off.
2. For those of us who use these primarily as daily drivers, the performance of all of them are so close that it's a non-issue for daily use. Get what you want based on your preferences for looks, price, etc.

So, for me, only two things stand in the way of making my next DD be the Alfa - lack of MT in the US (hopefully to be remedied, but I'm not holding my breath) and reliability (hopefully to be proven). Well, there is a distant third - BMW loyalty after so many years; and an even more-distant fourth - changing R compound tires every 5K - 10K miles. Well, actually, I'd put on Michelin Pilot Sport 4Ss at the first change.

P.S. Nothing wrong with vaginas.

I agree with these thoughts. I'd add 2 more potential negatives: (i) Alfa dealer network (may range from good in some places to Chrysler-like in others - not that BMW impresses me locally) and (ii) lease residuals. Just like the C63 I expect it will be a tough financial comparison to BMW M if you lease, even a year from now when the QV isn't brand new to market. Nevertheless, I'll definitely consider one when the time comes.

[modkrazy]

The dynamics of this car are great. It makes all the right sounds and feels right. Problems are as follows:
1. Ugly.
2. Primitive interior amenities.
3. Worst depreciation and reliability ratings of pretty much any car manufacturer.
3a. When you take it in for inevitable repairs, 95% chance the dealer is owned by some greasy Persian who will not exactly be gracious or accommodating.

[Sleeper]

Originally Posted by modkrazy

The dynamics of this car are great. It makes all the right sounds and feels right. Problems are as follows:
1. Ugly.
2. Primitive interior amenities.
3. Worst depreciation and reliability ratings of pretty much any car manufacturer.
3a. When you take it in for inevitable repairs, 95% chance the dealer is owned by some greasy Persian who will not exactly be gracious or accommodating.

RE: 3a

WTF?

[sublian]

Originally Posted by fusionchicken

what happened to the Merc...

I believe if it was the sedan c63s it would have been quicker since the coupe is even heavier, too heavy imo.

[evanescent03]

Alfa is impressive to compete so closely with the other guys... all the cars are so close in performance that every journalist on the planet has done a comparison of all the segment and tend to come up with subtle differences to split the pack (and usually with a different order of champions).

the newcomer seems to have a very slight edge in straight line speed but isn't perfect and actually has many flaws, it seems (looks are polarized but the hips don't lie, brake by wire, no folding rear seat, dealer availability, no manual option) ... Chris Harris isn't even convinced it's better than the M3 overall and he has a lot of M3 seat time. the brake-by-wire thing sounds awful although the MT duo thinks they can overlook it.... braking feel has always been really important to me (and most) on the track to sense when fade is creeping in, when ABS is kicking in, etc.... not sure how this will play out.

all-in-all i think it's going to be a great option for a lot of people .. the alfa has a nicely exotic appeal to it with a very unique and special interior (not perfect, but it has some nice touches for sure), a reasonable sound, and it is something new and different. i was drooling over one yesterday and thinking "okay, yeah, this is gonna be my next car" but i think there is a list of things i dislike about it that will add up and make me go a different direction.

i will still give anyone driving one down the street a big

[RACEM4TE]

Originally Posted by sublian

I believe if it was the sedan c63s it would have been quicker since the coupe is even heavier, too heavy imo.

C63 is shit imo just a lookers car i would rather have chassis balanced M with dct

[AlexZTuned]

Originally Posted by sublian

I believe if it was the sedan c63s it would have been quicker since the coupe is even heavier, too heavy imo.

The Coupe is about 100 lbs heavier than the Sedan because of chassis stiffening (it's the same used for the C63S Cabrio), and wider front/rear track (beefier rims and tires).

Despite the weight penalty, the Coupe actually accelerates faster than the Sedan because it uses a shorter final drive ratio and much better traction with 285 rears (compared to 265's on the sedan).

I actually just ran my bone stock 17' C63S Coupe at New England Dragway yesterday and ran 11.6 @ 121.7 (best ET) and 11.8 @ 122 (best trap). Much faster than any sedan that's been tested in mags.

[modkrazy]

Originally Posted by Sleeper

RE: 3a

WTF?

Maybe it's a Houston thing. All the Maserati, Alfa, import, etc. dealerships are run by Persians who take it as a personal affront any suggestion that a vehicle they sold you is having any kind of issue. It's why I'll never own another Maserati or any other low volume import vehicle in Houston.

[CaryTheLabelGuy]

But can the QV be tuned in the aftermarket? As far as I know, not currently. The M3 can be tuned to run circles around the QV with just a flash tune or a JB4 piggyback.

The C63s is fugly as hell, so the M3/M4 is still the king of this segment in all the ways that count.

[RACEM4TE]

Originally Posted by CaryTheLabelGuy

But can the QV be tuned in the aftermarket? As far as I know, not currently. The M3 can be tuned to run circles around the QV with just a flash tune or a JB4 piggyback.

The C63s is fugly as hell, so the M3/M4 is still the king of this segment in all the ways that count.

B9 RS5 is gonna be a beast with that V6 top mounted turbo set up.