Talk:Alfa Romeo 156

Cleanup

I have cleaned up the article into a more friendly to the eye manner, and have also used the template for automobiles. Have added a picture, a small section entitled 156s in Motorsport, and have made the article a stub. --Sb2k4 08:01, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Safety claims

I have removed a link and/or claim which makes serious safety accusations about this vehicle. The reason is that the only source given is a blog. Wikipedia does not accept blogs as external links and does not consider them a reliable source. If you think about it, this is essential since anyone can create a blog which says anything at all; the blog therefore isn't proof, no matter how sincere or true it is. And Wikipedia, being an encyclopedia, is not to be used to bring new things to the attention of the public, only to report what is already known. The appropriate thing to do instead is to seek a verifiable source. For this, that would pretty much mean a mainstream news report (in a newspaper or printed motoring magazine) and cite that as a source. Notinasnaid 12:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

156 in motorsport

In what way was the 156 less invested in motorsport than the 155? It won the highest series that it was eligible for, the ETCC, outright 4 consecutive seasons. The 156 was a hugely successful car in motorsport, and in fact still is, despite being out of production for 2 years already. Unless anyone objects I'd like to remove the subjective comment that the 156 was less well vested in motorsport than its predecessor. Dino246 10:43, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

yep I think it can be removed--— Typ932^{T | C}  10:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've altered the motorsport section appropriately. There was something odd about saying that it wasn't well vested in motorsport and then listing about a dozen championships it had won. Dino246 12:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Rear suspension

The rear suspension of 156 isnt real McPherson, it looks a bit same and its maybe wrong to call it as McPherson type here, beacuse it can give wrong impression that it have real McPherson.--— Typ932^{T | C}  08:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The article now says that the 156 has a multi-link rear suspension. However when I look at a press drawing of the rear suspension (here) I have doubts whether this really is multi-link. Please verify this. -- Marvin Raaijmakers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.81.28.30 (talk) 18:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

It depends what you call multilink, thre is no strict definition what is "multilink" suspension, 156> Rear This layout is particularly advanced in both geometry and construction terms. It is based essentially on a telescopic vertical strut with a coaxial spring, two long transverse links and a longitudinal strut. I dont know what this should be called --Typ932 ^T·C 19:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Only difference between this McPherson strut and ate McPherson Strut in Gtv is the construction of the lower trailing arms/wishbone. Gtv has single lower wishbone with McPherson column and 156 has 2 trailing arms WITH McPherson column. Multilink is the type of suspension that has more then 2 wishbones as has Gtv on the rear with 3 wishbones and trailing arm. Alfa Romeo calls the 156 rear suspension a McPherson Strut. This is not a multilink as it does not have multi wishbones, it has one wishboone split into two trailing arms, thats all. — Preceding comment added by Ybsone (talk) 13:06, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

And i'm sorry but the reference is just an opinion not a reference... Citation needed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ybsone (talk • contribs) 13:19, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Done some research: any double wishbones and multilink suspensions will link the wheel hub from bottom AND top. In a mcPherson suspension Type, the McPherson strut is used to link the hub from top and the control arm(s) are used to link the bottom, it may even have 3 or more control arms, but as long as they link only bottom of the hub AND the top is linked by the McPherson Strut it is called a McPherson Suspension Type. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ybsone (talk • contribs) 13:27, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I am terribly sorry, but this is simly not true. An original McPherson suspension does have the strut but at the bottom there is only an I-shaped wishbone and it uses the anti roll bar attached to that wishbone for longitudinal location. In addition, the strut does swivel when the steering is used. The rear suspension of the Alfa was originally developed by Lancia for the Beta and is named after its inventor Camuffo. The Alfa therefore does have a Camuffo-type rear suspension. This is neither multilink nor McPherson!

I reworded the suspension section, but there isnt still strick definition what is multilink. Usually they say Alfas has mcpherson type, so suspension close to mcpherson, but not pure one. -->Typ932 ^T·C 15:49, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

The 156 is a highly developed front-wheel drive car; with a double high wishbone front suspension and Camuffo type rear suspension, which consists of a telescopic vertical strut with coaxial spring and two transverse links of different lengths and a longitudinal strut. This structure means that the rear wheels have a tiny passive steering ability. Weight saving material has been used in several parts both front and rear suspension. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.221.230.191 (talk) 23:34, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank You, I think this is most truthfull description of that suspension, and intended by Alfa
and as to the multilink definition, there is, just see the Alfa Gtv rear suspension
i has more then 2 control arms AND arms are fixed to both sides of the hub, very important with front suspension as it has to be able to move horizontally — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ybsone (talk • contribs) 17:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

GT Coupe

I deleted the comment that the GT Coupe is essentially a 156 coupe. It is primarily 147-based. The 147 itself is obviously 156 based but the GT shares significantly more components with the 147 than the 156. It is more correct to describe the GT as based on a 147 platform, stretched to the wheelbase of the 156. The "156 Coupe" tag was mostly a marketing ploy to allow them to charge a premium for what is really a "147 Sprint". Dino246 06:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

GT has many things from 147: full front engine support frame is same on both cars, just see some pictures with the same engine inside. Doof miorrors, front wing is almost the same, doors are same as on the 3-door 147, side windows are same, only cutted a bit, bonnet is the same, and of course interior. On the autozine.org, GT is called as 147 Coupe, it's quite correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.219.160.76 (talk) 13:09, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

It’s a mix of both - the GT sits on a 156 GTA Sportwagon chassis and has 156 engines (neither the 1.8 TS nor 2.0 JTS were avialable on the 147), and it uses interior parts and body panels from the 147. Really it’s a third, seperate car in the same family (although it does share a model number with the 147). Jellyfish dave (talk) 23:34, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Hidden door handles -- novelty?

Usually this feature is attributed to Walter de Silva, and Alfa 156 article even claims that these were first introduced in 1994 in Fiat Coupe, but that's plainly WRONG!

Look at Nissan Terrano, which 1st generation dates back to 1986, and you'll see exactly the same hidden door handles at rear doors! They are still used in Terrano's offspring Infiniti QX56.

Unfortunately, I'm unaware of WHO was the inventor of hidden door handles, and I haven't ever heard of any relations between de Silva and Nissan, but stating that Fiat/Alfa pioneered hidden door handles is just WRONG. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bolkhov (talk • contribs) 03:14, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I changed that part--— Typ932^{T | C}  06:04, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

The Terrano's rear handles are not hidden. Yes they are in the pillar and not on the door but they are exactly the same contrasting colour as the front handles and were not designed to be invisible. On the 156 by contrast the rear handle is designed to disappear into the C-pillar while the front ones are aluminium and made to stand out. This is a deliberate attempt to give the 4-door car a coupe profile and the 156 was the first car to do this. For the record, front handles hidden in the B-pillar featured on the Ferrari Dino in 1967, as well as on the Daytona, Boxer and 308; all long before the Coupe Fiat. Dino246 06:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

They look pretty hidden to me. They don't contrast with the surrounding. Looking through Google books it seems that the four-door Pathfinder was originally a two-door model, but for 1990 Nissan added two more doors because four-door models had lower import duty; although I can't find a source direct from Nissan, this contemporary review mentions "concealed door handles" (and so does this one, from Popular Mechanics) and in my judgement Nissan's intention was to build a four-door model that looked just like the two-door model. Was Walter de Silva aware of this, six years later? You'd have to ask him; he would say no; he would probably threaten legal action if you suggested he was lying. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 13:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Auto Delta version

Note that car on this picture actually is an Auto Delta GTA

Do you have more info on that, it says on sticker that it is supercharged version? --Typ932 ^T·C 20:58, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, I took that photo and I am very sure about it. You see that sticker on the bonnet? That's the "Auto-Delta-on-tour" sticker. This sticker is also on a photo at their website: [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.81.28.30 (talk) 10:22, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Repeated links

Linking the class article and the manufacturer is obviously helpful for the readers and, as WP:REPEATLINK says, "if helpful for readers, links may be repeated in infoboxes". So obviously the first occurrence in the lead can and must be linked. Otherwise the readers would have to type the class or the manufacturer name in the search box to go to that article. It's absurd to say these links are not helpful. Take any good article in the project and compare. BaboneCar (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

the reader can found those links from infobox very easily, the infobox is usually the "fast fact" section and those links are there very easily to be seen. Italy is also so common word it does not need linking-->Typ932 ^T·C 20:31, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

WP:CONTEXTLINK and WP:LEADLINK allow for extra links in the lead to provide additional context and define technical terms. Also I read WP:REPEATLINK as defining the lead section as separate from the body; and Infobox as a third separate area. I see no problem with having links both in the lead sentence and the infobox. Have in mind that different technologies could show the Infobox at different places (mobile browsers, blind readers) or not at all. (I came here through the request for a third opinion). Diego (talk) 17:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

It might be allowed, but its not necessary to link those common words, so no need to link word Italy or other very common words -->Typ932 ^T·C 17:25, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

156 and Walter de Silva

It turns out that Mr. de Silva did not style the 156, Giugiaro did. Talking about the 1st phase of course.YBSOne (talk) 10:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

??? -->Typ932 ^T·C 12:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Aparently, Fiat didnt tell as long as de Silva was in thereYBSOne (talk) 14:08, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Proof? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.67.226.95 (talk) 18:49, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Must admit that I heard the same story 10 years ago when I asked someone inside how they let the minor facelift get Italdesign badges on the flanks. But this isn't the place to give such rumour voice and in the absence of any Reliable Source saying otherwise, the official line is what will be in this article. Dino246 (talk) 21:49, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Well it took a while but:
"In actual fact, Giugiaro contributed to the 156 during the initial stage of the project. "
http://www.alfaromeopress.com/press/article/2997
So there was some truth about this rumour YBSOne (talk) 23:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Production numbers

This is impossible that there were 680.000 cars made. Alfa probably built no more than 400.000 of all 156 versions. New source is needed.YBSOne (talk) 23:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Why its impossible? do you have some other info? -->Typ932 ^T·C 05:52, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Must admit, it sounds a little high to me too. Not sure that the 156 ever even hit 100k sales per year, let alone sustained it for 7 years. But I can't find numbers anywhere but that reference which doesn't strike me as a very reliable source. I say the 680k figure stays in the article for the moment but I suggest we put in some effort to try and find a more reliable source and I must agree with Ybsone, I expect the real number to be more like 400~500k. Dino246 (talk) 19:38, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Only original research based on ePer, the highest found VIN number is around 396,000, and this in turn is very similar number found here: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Alfa_Romeo_Pomigliano_d%27Arco_Plant

Which shows numbers as first series, but i suspect are applicable to both series.YBSOne (talk) 09:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

It is highly possible that someone was looking at the highest Vechicle Number, which for this car is around 673,000. BUT this is the only car i've seen that increments vehicle number almost twice with every VIN increment. Other cars have 1:1 VIN:Vehicle number increment. That may be the problem.YBSOne (talk) 09:54, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, its hard to belive but it might be true that there was 680,000 cars made. Will update along the way. YBSOne (talk) 16:04, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Image

Quick's - a commercial entity - has an article on the 156. They use the same headline image as this article, without credit. It would be interesting to know if they simply lifted the image, or if they have cut a separate deal with the original photographer. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 13:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

The website now seems to have been absorbed into Evans Halshaw, a used car dealer, but they still use the same image, without attribution (for the record it's 156 grey.jpg). -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 17:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

JTS engine unavailability in some markets - how to incorporate source?

I did an edit about the JTS engine never appearing in some markets, specifically Turkish market. Post-2002 156s have Twin Spark engines in Turkey as well as the first series. JTS engined 156s never made it here. But only way to know that is to check each year's catalogue and look into available cars for sale. As an active member of an Alfisti community in Turkey, I did that. Every single post-facelift 156 with a 4-pot engine IS Twin Spark. My own car (a Mk1.5 Selespeed) is a Twin Spark, with a Selespeed ECU that says JTS on it. :) So, how can we incorporate this into the article? This is important information as TS and JTS engines have a fundamental difference: Aftermarket Autogas systems can be applied on TS but not on the JTS. Emirhandongel (talk) 14:48, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Production start

Earliest found VIN clearly states that production started in 1996. This information can be additionally confirmed by manufacturer. Centro Documentazione Alfa Romeo or Archivio Storico Fiat, or simply with Fiat ePer. Date of introduction is not the sme as start of production.
VIN: ZAR93200000000003
MVS: 116.847.0.0 – BN 2.4 JTD CF2 RICCO
Vehicle: 00000003
Prod. date: 10/12/1996 YBSOne (talk) 07:13, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

They are most likely pre-production vehicles, not cars intended to be commercially available. ComradeUranium (talk) 11:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Cars with VIN are road legal cars and of that model. If a car with VIN was produced from 1996, and there is no car from 1995, then 1996 is the production start. And even pre-production (other than cars made prior to presentaion) cars do find their customers. Italian cars are not easy to comprehend with many illogical facts, but still facts.YBSOne (talk) 13:16, 15 September 2022 (UTC)