Good morning, and welcome back! This week will have a giant turkey-sized hole in the middle of it, so we’ll only have three Showdowns, and then probably play track-daily-burn again on Friday, unless I come up with something better. We’re starting off this week with two cool rare sedans from the other side of the Atlantic. But first, there is the small matter of Friday’s results to consider:
Yeah, I had a feeling that would be the case. If it weren’t for fifteen seasons of chasing down evil beasties, an old Chevy sedan like this would be a parts car. And it’s still not worth $7500; the show wasn’t that popular.
Today, we’re looking at a couple of sporty sedans, one from Italy and one from England, both with manual gearboxes and famous engines. Neither one is exactly known as a paragon of reliability, but both have the potential to make you the talk of any Cars & Coffee event you can manage to limp them to. Let’s take a look.
1991 Alfa Romeo 164L – $2,500
Engine/drivetrain: 3.0 liter SOHC V6, 5 speed manual, FWD
Location: Laguna Beach, CA
Odometer reading: 173,000 miles
Runs/drives? “Ran excellent when parked 6 months ago”
Alfa’s last sedan sold in the US until the Giulia arrived a few years ago, the 164, had an interesting origin story. Its platform was a joint venture between Alfa Romeo, Lancia, Fiat, and, somehow, Saab. Two of them, the Saab 9000 and the Alfa 164, made it to America; the Lancia Thema and Fiat Croma were never sold here. Three of the cars look very similar, and share some sheetmetal, but since Alfa tapped legendary design house Pininfarina for styling, their variant looks radically different from the others.
Alfa’s variant had another thing the others didn’t: their famous “Busso” overhead-cam V6, here turned sideways and driving the front wheels. Some enthusiasts might scoff at a front-wheel-drive Alfa, and I personally have never driven one so I can’t comment, but by all reports this car is one hundred percent Alfa Romeo. And at least it has a proper five-speed manual, like all Italian cars should.
And if the idea of a dashboard full of buttons pushes your, um, buttons, you’re in luck; the 164 center stack is nothing but row upon row of identical gray squares, each with a tiny pictogram above it. This is life before touchscreens, and I’m not sure these ergonomics are any better, frankly, but I bet it’s a whole lot more satisfyingly clicky to use.
This 164 is in good shape, especially for the mileage, and the seller says it ran perfectly before being put in storage a scant six months ago. That shouldn’t have been long enough to do much more than rust over the brake surfaces and make the gas go sour, so waking it up shouldn’t be a chore. You’ll want to do some maintenance like a timing belt change right away, of course, but that’s life with an Italian car.
1980 Rover SD1 3500 – $2,200
Engine/drivetrain: 3.5 liter OHV V8, 5 speed manual, RWD
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Odometer reading: unknown
Runs/drives? Runs, but needs a little work to be drivable
Not exotic enough for you? How about a rare US-market version of a British Leyland five-door fastback? The Rover SD1 was only available in the US for two model years, and they hardly sold any. The US version featured four round sealed-beam headlights in place of the smooth composite lights of the British and European versions, and only came with the top-of-the-line Buick-designed Rover V8, with Bosch fuel injection. It was badged simply as the “Rover 3500,” but any British car enthusiast worth their salt knows an SD1 when they see one.
This Rover has been around the block and seen some things. It originally came with a sunroof, which probably leaked, and was deleted with a welded-in steel panel and a non-sunroof headliner many years ago. It also wears the hood and rear hatch of a different green car. The seller says there is a little more rust repair to do, but not much, and they’re including the panels.
The 3500 cc (215 cubic inch) V8 in this car originally came from General Motors. It’s all-aluminum, developed by Buick and used in Buick and Oldsmobile cars between 1961 and 1963. Oldsmobile’s hottest version was turbocharged, and produced 215 horsepower – one horsepower per cubic inch, a respectable benchmark at the time. Rover purchased the tooling for the little V8 in 1965, and used it in everything for the next two decades. This 3500 runs well, and the seller was told it was rebuilt, but has no documentation to back it up.
All the really hard stuff to find – interior trim and the like – appears to be intact, though I’d like to see what’s under that dash pad. The seller says the brakes are all new and ready to go, but the suspension and steering haven’t been touched and should be “gone through.”
Obviously, you’re not going to get the carefree motoring experience of a Toyota Camry, or even a Ford Contour, out of either one of these. But if you have the guts, and the know-how, either one could be one hell of a conversation-starter, even if some of those conversations are with tow truck drivers. And either one could be really rewarding to drive when it is running. Which one will it be?
(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)
The Rover engine was a little different from Buick when they started using it in the 60s, different material compounds, wet to dry liner (or other way around). It then saw a fair bit of development over the following four decades. A good engine should always be able to have a long life
This was intended to be a reply to Dave Horchak
Okay dont care for either but eent Alpha but have 2 questions.
1. In the 1980 Rover you have an early 1960 Buick motor. Was that a swap or were they actually putting 20 year old design motors in these cars? The article wasnt clear.
2. When people dont buy all the cars made what happens to them? Crushed, eventually sold, rental fleet, huge Arizona parts parking lot?
Not a swap. Rover bought/licensed the design for use in their cars. British Leyland was never known for making great decisions. This was one of their better ones, believe it or not.
No, it’s true. Rover used that engine for ages. I had the aluminum 215 in its original, proper home: a ’62 Skylark. I was amazed to discover that same engine puttering along on Rovers from the 80s and 90s. I think the 2004 Discovery was the last Rover to use the 215 V8 based upon that ancient design.
That was Alfa’s best era for reliability. Of course, we’re talking relatively. It is an old Alfa. But look at all those miles it’s traveled. That was a pretty good car for someone(s). And it sure is fun to drive. And listen to.
But, damn that Rover is cool…
I’m gonna start using “Ran excellent when parked 6 months ago” as my go-to answer to questions I don’t want to answer.
Have you seen my stapler?
It ran excellent when parked 6 months ago.
Is there enough sugar in these brownies?
They ran excellent when parked 6 months ago.
Do you think Uncle Steve is gonna make it?
He ran excellent when parked 6 months ago.
That Alfa center console – wow. It seems kinda ridiculous to imagine that a human being actually tried using that stack of buttons before signing off on that design, but the more I think about it, the more I realize it’s essentially the same as the grid of icons on every touch screen. We’ve just replaced mechanical buttons (that likely broke within the first month of ownership) with virtual buttons (behind a screen that breaks within the first month of ownership).
The more things change…
Clarkson wasn’t necessarily right about much, but he was on to something regarding Italian car ownership. I’ll buy the 164 and become an Alfa male.
If nothing else, the chrome headers are a nice distraction while you’re spending half your ownership period in the engine bay.
Rover: American horses, English wagon.
Now I know how Clarkson feels when he has to chose to have Hammond or May as a driving partner. Neither are good for him, but for different reasons.
I guess I’ll take the RWD?
Alfa for me. Parts situation has to be at least marginally better, and also b/c as an owner of 2010 Ford Focus, I have a soft spot for insane button layouts like this.
Seriously, in the 21st century, Ford for some reason went all ’80s on the center console. Even moved the entertainment system readout to a pod on top of the dash seemingly just so it could be a mostly unbroken wall of buttons below the vents.
The 3800 is a derivative of that Rover engine, so it’s probably easy to swap in any GM crate motor if the need arises.
I’d take that hatch over a transverse V6 Alfa that can only be serviced with the special tools in the provided tool kit.
Rover would later rebadge Hondas, so there’s that.
I’m torn, both of these cars are gonna need work, and both are going to have crummy Yurrape-en standards of build quality and electrics.
I picked the Rover for two reasons. One, I’ll likely be the only Rover at whatever event I attend (I’m not sure I’ve ever seen one in real life), and Two, my wife can sit in the passenger seat and, doing her best Hyacinth “Boo-Kay” impression, can shout at me to “Mind the Lorry, Richard!!” 🙂
Hahaha. I love the Hyacinth bit. That show was hilarious. Occasionally my wife and I will do a “mind the ______”. I can picture Richard’s car but can’t think of what it is.
I think it was a Rover Metro, at least at one point.
I always liked Onslow’s decrepit Ford Granada.
Richard drove a Rover 213 or 216. Neighbor Elizabeth drove a Rover Metro. And I too loved Onslow’s Granada, and always thought it would’ve been a nice fixer-upper, lol.
I always loved how she would call a buffet a boo-fay, because she had to be consistent to support the absurd way she pronounced her last name.
Alfa. Worked this year, much better looking, much nicer sound, much nicer road feel. Neither is reliable. The Rover has RWD. You would have to fetishize British cars to think this was a contest.
Can anyone who voted Rover explain their reasoning? It’s ugly, the engine sucks, I just don’t see any upsides. 164 is still the hotness imho.
It really depends on what you want from your obscure European import. The Alfa is the right choice for something you can enjoy now and hopefully tinker with problems as they arise. That Rover though… If you want something really special and don’t mind a major project, it has the potential to be a fantastic car. I voted for the Alfa because I don’t want to mess around with welding in new steel.
Between the two cars from manufacturers not noted for their overall quality, I’ll take the Alfa. At least you have a decent chance of finding the parts you need.
If the Rover was a coupe, it might be a much harder decision. Looking at the original ad, it seems to be a nice reasonably priced project, owned by a sincere seller who has done some of the more difficult work needed to restore it.
It’s just that the 164 looks like a much better deal.
Apparently someone else also thought the 164 was a good deal, because it was gone before I could look a the original ad.
As temping as a manual V8 right wheel drive would normally be to me I have to go with the Alfa on this one because a) it’s in much better condition, and b) it’s an Alfa.
To quote Clarkson, “Alfa build a car to be as good as a car can be…briefly.” I’ll take the Alfa and briefly enjoy it.
The ALPHA !!! It pushes all the right buttons!
SDI??? – more like STD! NEVER buy a car named after a dog.
I took much longer than I should have trying to figure out how SD1 would be a dog name. I really need that day off I have tomorrow.
It’s SD1, not SDI.
“In “SD1”, the “SD” refers to “Specialist Division” and “1” is the first car to come from the in-house design team. The SD1 was the final Rover-badged vehicle to be produced at Solihull. Future Rover models would be built at the former British Motor Corporation factories at Longbridge and Cowley.” – wikipedia
Button up that Alfa for me! I once owned a 1993 Oldsmobile Delta Ninety-Eight Regency Elite which had almost as many dash buttons as it did alpha-numeric characters in its name. It was glorious. Besides, even though I do have a soft spot for obscure British cars, that Rover looks a little too far down the road of good intentions.
The Alfa, because that SD1 is just too grody and broken, although I love them both. My sister’s bf had the successor to this model of Alfa, in the top trim, and it was a lovely car to drive. He never had a problem with his, but he did buy it direct from the owner; a manager of an Alfa dealership.
I somehow read “FIAT Coma”. LOL
I’ll take the Alfa. Because Alfa.
Speaking from experience, these are pretty wonderful cars. Quite zippy and, once you get used to the short legs/long arms Italian Driving Position, more fun to throw around than almost any largish sedan ought to be. The sound is glorious.
That said, they weren’t always screwed together that well. I was on I-10 coming back to L.A. from Phoenix when the 164 I was driving (a press car, and thus supposedly fettled) simply died. During a long, long coast, I pounded on the steering wheel in sheer frustration. Suddenly, everything worked again. The culprit was a bad connector at the base of the steering column.
So I have to say if the electrics checked out, this would a nice choice. After so many miles, all the bugs should have been worked out.
The Rover, on the other hand…. I’ll just say “No, thanks” and leave it at that. Nice powerplant, though.
i was about to say about the build quality, when you have an actual lighter next to the auto lighter in the ashtray 🙂
I almost voted for the SD1, but my mind was flooded (pun intended) with images of the door falling off of Clarkson’s during the Top Gear BL challenge. So the 164 it is.
Went with the Alfa because (can’t believe I’m about to type this) it seems like less work.
and I have seen a few of those in the California area, so at least a few parts cars likely exist. The only thing about the rover really is the ease of install of a modern motor. you should be able to bolt up most small 60 degree v6 GM engines to the GM trans.
“Ran when parked” is the best status you can hope for with an aging Italian car. As in it ran when I parked it 5 minutes ago, but that doesn’t mean it will run now.
Did you know that in Italy, if you have a domestic car and the valet says that, you have no legal recourse?
Probably true.