Greetings, fellow Curbsiders, and welcome to another instalment of my automotive misadventures. It’s been a little over two years since I last asked you to weigh in on an automotive choice and I’m really not sure where the time went. This time around I found myself in roughly the same position as the last time, with about the same amount of money to spend. The 406 Coupe hung around for a little while but did not end up being used as much as I wanted to, one reason being that getting my daughter’s gigantic car seat into the rear required flexibility that I did not possess! Also, though it was undoubtedly a nice car, I didn’t really bond with it very much, so I figured it would be best to move on.
The sale fetched a decent sum, but a large chunk of it had to be redirected into buying and refurbishing our new home, which understandably took priority. So I’m once again looking at cars in the 2-3 Million Sri Lankan Rupee price bracket (roughly 6,800-12,500$ at current rates) and the criteria are pretty much the same as before: A car that is interesting to me, that I enjoy owning and driving, that I can take my family in, but which will basically be a “fun” extra car, not a daily. This time there were a couple of added caveats in that two seaters were off the table and my lovely (and generally very patient) wife requested that I try to avoid buying an Alfa Romeo (because “they are trouble”). With all of that in mind, let’s meet our contestants.
Contestant Number 1 – 1992 BMW 525i (E34)
The E34 5 series is a car I have always admired, and I have a fair bit of seat time in them because a friend owned a very tidy example for over a decade. I like how it looks and very much enjoy how it drives. It feels very right from behind the wheel, with a well designed and comfortable cockpit that is very driver focused, and a remarkable fluency to the way it goes down the road. Most E34’s in Sri Lanka are the base 518 or 520i but I want something with a bit more oomph, so a 525i it is, one of just a handful here (we don’t have any bigger engined examples that are likely to come up for sale, unfortunately).
This example was previously owned by a person known to me, who restored it from a very shabby state. He sold it about two years back when he left the country, and the car has not been used very much since. The guy who bought it from him is now selling it. Unfortunately, I somehow didn’t take any pictures of the car when I went to see it, so the sole image is from the previous owner’s social media.
Good Stuff: Engine and mechanicals in good shape, drives well, pulls strongly across the rev range, handles as it should, body and paint look good up top, parts are widely available locally, as is the knowledge to fix them.
Bad Stuff: Underside of the body is not as good as the top, has some rust issues that need addressing (but not major), interior will need a retrim to be considered very good.
Contestant Number 2 – 1987 Toyota Celica GT (ST160)
The 16x series Celica marked a major change in approach for Toyota’s sporty coupe, as it was the first Celica that was front wheel drive. Although this is considered a bad thing by certain types of enthusiasts, at the time it was considered to be one of the best handling cars in its class, with high praise from all quarters. Also, the turbocharged, all wheel drive GT-Four version was another level altogether and made a potent rally weapon. The car we’re looking at is not a GT-Four sadly but a normal GT, imported to Sri Lankan from Europe when new. The first owner was a German gent who moved here so it is a German spec, left hand drive example with the 3S-GE 2.0L 16Valve engine in 160BHP form. Apparently the first owner kept the car from new until 2022 and really cared for it, because it is in very good shape for its age, as you can see.
The Celica is definitely the sportiest looking car under consideration and has undeniable 80s cool. It’s been through a couple of hands since the first owner gave it up, but they haven’t done any damage, fortunately.
Good Stuff: In fantastic shape cosmetically considering the age, no rust, very original, relatively low kms.
Bad Stuff: Engine feels hesitant on the move, left hand drive has practical issues in an RHD country, rear seats are cramped and would have the same issues with the car seat that the Peugeot did, parts are rare in this part of the world
Contestant Number 3 – 1988 Mercedes Benz 200 (W124)
Well it wouldn’t be a car hunt of mine if there wasn’t a W124 somewhere, would it? Learning from my previous ownership experience, where the added complications of the facelift caused problems, we’re back to basics with a plain old 200, the absolute base model of the range. I should point out that W124 prices have been on a steady upward march over the last few years and my budget could only get one that needed a fair bit of work. This particular example is with a guy who had bought it to restore but has changed his plans. It seems like an honest unit, but clearly needs some work.
Good Stuff: Mechanically sound, drives fairly well, basic 200 manual so uncomplicated as a W124 can get, parts freely available, not difficult to fix.
Bad Stuff: Quite a lot of rust repair needed, interior has some missing trim, slow as molasses, carburettor can be finicky with age.
Contestant Number 4 – 1980 Mercedes Benz 200/240D (W123)
I’m using the pictures of the very tidy example I drove some time back here, but I don’t have a specific car in mind for this right now. Good W123s are quite expensive now and petrols are way out of my price range, but a diesel may be a possibility. There are still some cared for examples around so there is a bit of choice available.
Good Stuff: Solid as a rock, reliable if well kept, parts are still easy to find, uncomplicated to fix.
Bad Stuff: Most have been badly abused, rust is a problem, acceleration is more theoretical than actual, not really an entertaining drive.
Contestant Number 5 (with sincere apologies to my wife!) – 2000 Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS
Despite my wife’s misgivings, Alfa Romeos have a hold on my heart and I really do want to own a working example for a little while at least. Unfortunately the classic rear wheel drive Alfas are extremely rare and inaccessible, so the only option is 90s stuff. The 156 was a car I drooled over when new and it has always been on the list of “cars I’d like to own one day”, so why not today? Sri Lanka got a fair number of 156s back in the day, all with Alfa’s lovely twin Spark 4 cylinder (sadly no V6 examples made it here, but the fours drive better anyway).
This car is a 2.0 Litre example which I’ve been familiar with for nearly two decades, as the current and previous owners are friends. It was a daily driver for the previous owner, and proved to be quite reliable for him, but the current owner (who has had it since 2019 or so) has not driven it much at all, so the car needs a bit of TLC.
Good Stuff: Really pretty, nice interior, lots of fun to drive, it’s an Alfa.
Bad Stuff: Has been sitting for a few years, parts are impossible locally and will have to be imported, possibility of random breakdowns, it’s an Alfa.
Contestant Number 6 (with even more sincere apologies to my wife!) – 1999 Alfa Romeo 166 3.0 V6 24V
If you’re going to put yourself through the er, experience that is Alfa Romeo ownership, why not take it to the extreme with Alfa’s biggest 90’s car? Besides the fact that the 166 is a very imposing looking thing, it has the 3.0 Liter, 24 valve Busso V6, widely considered to be among the greatest engines of all time, mated to a six speed manual gearbox! The mostly forgotten 166 replaced the 164 and was Alfa’s competitor in the 5 series/E class segment. Contemporary opinions considered it to be more fun to drive than the Germans, despite being front wheel drive, but ultimately not as polished as them.
They made about 100,000 in total, which is a rounding error in 5 series sales, and quite a few have met their end thanks to people wanting the Busso to swap into other things. This is the pre-facelift model, whose looks are definitely subjective. It’s certainly not a pretty car like the 156, but I think it looks quite handsome, especially in this colour combination. The 166 is owned by a collector with two other Alfas, and he’s had it for almost 15 years. It’s not been driven a lot in the last few years as he is no longer in the country much, but it hasn’t been completely stationary like the 156, and was regularly used earlier in his ownership.
Good Stuff : Busso, with a manual! Also, it feels very special, appears to be in fair shape and felt ok on the test drive. It’s an Alfa.
Bad Stuff : Still needs some maintenance work, same parts and service issues as the 156, and likelihood of random breakdowns. It’s an Alfa.
So there you have it CC, these are the current contenders for the available slot in my little fleet. Each has unique appeal and different strengths and weaknesses. The Mercedes’ and possibly the Celica might even be relatively sound investments, but that’s not really a major concern. As before, I’ll let you know which choice won out in due course, but I really want to know what you’d do in this situation, and I hope the discussion will be interesting.
Also, if you want to tell me I’m a blithering idiot, please feel free!
#6. May as well go extreme.
Can’t really argue with that!
My advice? No way for any of them. Find a GREAT AMERICAN LAND YACHT, with Old School OTT comfort and power. It’s HUGE! It guzzles gas! It pollutes the air! It scares the birds! Other cars part like the Red Sea to get out of the way. What’s NOT to love? Of course this comes from a Vintage 1947 Rolls Canardly who Rolls down one hill and Can ardly get up the next. 😅 🤣
Alfa Romeo 166.
It really is appealing strongly!
Thanks for the input. Unfortunately our roads are not that well suited to American Land Yachts. Partly because of this, they are almost non-existent here.
WELCOME HOME =8-) .
As a Journeyman Mechanic my first comment is : avoid anything rusty, period .
You’ll never be rid of the tin worm once it’s there and it’ll ruin any joy the vehicle might otherwise provide .
You’re smart to consider the baby seat, that was 47 years ago for me but it _is_ important when hauling precious cargo .
Let us know what you decide, congrats on the house repairs .
-Nate
Thanks Nate, yeah the baby seat was an important consideration because I’d like my kid to also enjoy the car.
#2….you can’t go wrong with this car…
True, it’s probably unlikely to go wrong. Only real problem for me is the LHD
Really? Find a clean older Honda Accord 4 door with a stick. Fun to drive, plenty of room for the family, snob appeal as you will spend more time on the road than in the shop.
Thank you for your input, yes, really.
This won’t be a daily driver so time off the road is not really a major concern. I do like and respect Hondas but they just don’t appeal quite as much as at this lot do.
Agreed, #6 because it felt special to you. Which means that whatever trouble crops up, as it probably will with all these cars, you will be more likely to treat it as a labor of love.
And Alfas are the type of cars that encourages owners to join the Alfa family and share knowledge and experiences. Which means you might be able to get on top of potential issues ahead of time, which your wife would appreciate because it sounds her favorite car is a running car!
#5 is runner up, especially if you and your wife are of average or smaller physical size.
As to Alfas that feel special, my dad had an ’87 Milano Verde with the 3.0L Busso V6, and while he readily admits that it was a kinda expensive PITA to keep maintained (via a local indie shop, as the closest Alfa dealer was 2 hrs away), all of that was Absolutely Worth It for the daily driving satisfaction he got from it.
Yes that’s the general thing with Alfas, it’s always a balance of driving satisfaction/general pain in the ass-ness
I couldn’t agree more Paul, it really did feel special. The 156 did too but the sonorous V6 on the bigger car just elevates it to another level.
The upholstery in the W124 is interesting.
Protective covers?
And if so: What condition is the original upholstery in?
By the way: when it comes to corrosion on a W124, the rear axle mounts should be checked carefully.
I believe the seats may have been re-done, it seems this car had original cloth upholstery (which you can see on the doors, but the seats don’t appear to match that pattern.
As for corrosion, the underside was not bad except for two spots in the front arch/floor joint area, but there was quite a bit on the upper part of the car.
Either Alfa Romeo if you really want true pain.
I always was a fan of the 164, don’t think the 166 made it to the US..Never owned one though. I can personally vouch for the e34. I recently bought my 5th one. A1992 525 auto sedan from the 2nd owner of the last 24 years.. Had to do some deferred maintainance and just had the heater blower motor replaced. I got a used set of 16 inch Borbet 5 spokes to change it up a bit, a little more aggressive looking. Such a cool old school driver.. Kind of like a larger smoother e30. Of which I’ve owned 7. I also have the ultimate 5er, that being a 2002 e39 530i auto sedan.. They both are the best 5s that BMW ever built… Neat to go from one to the other and feel the vast differences in the drive.. But both great cars… Anyway that’s where my vote lies… Choose wisely and enjoy the drive…!!!
It’s true, they ARE very likely to bring pain!
Tom Wasney: wow that’s a lot of E34s, and E30s too! The E34 is a car that I like very much too, and it drives really nicely, but there is a fair bit of rust that needs addressing.
Wife says no Alfas, baby seat means no coupes so the list has two Alfas and a coupe on it. My kind of list! Haha.
I would be awfully tempted by a W123 if I were me as I have very fond memories of my W115. But rust sucks so realistically buy the least rusty one … which might be one of the Alfas. Probably the 156. Apologies to your wife.
Haha yes I’m not exactly known for making the most sensible (automotive) choices.
You’re right, the Alfas don’t actually have any notable rust issues, but the Celica is even better in that respect!
I’m working on changing the wife’s mind too. Wish me luck!
Pretty schizophrenic grouping…but if true dependability is the goal…4 Euro money pits vs Toyota? No brainer, just the wrong Toyota. Or maybe Lexus.
Well yes, I do have pretty broad tastes in an automotive sense. Dependability is not the goal in this case, as it won’t be a daily. A car that stirs the soul, so to speak is what I’m looking for here.
Among those I would choose the Mercedes W123 or the Alfa 156.
The BMW is also a great car, but it is not my favorite BMW.
Good luck with your choice.
You are a lucky man, with this cold weather in the US I would love to be on a beach in Sri Lanka :). Cheers!.
Thank you Nick, yes it’s certainly quite warm and sunny over here right now, excellent beach weather.
Well the Toyota wouldn’t fix the car seat issue, so that should be out.
The rest all seem like expensive to keep up vehicles. I’d say the MB diesel for just the ability to have a nice 4 door and some semblance of cost effective driving.
Yes unfortunately the Toyota has a worse rear seat situation than the Peugeot did.
Yes all of them will likely not be particularly cheap, but a Diesel 123 is likely to be the least expensive to run
BMW! Was my first choice looking at the pics, and based on your description it sounds like it would be one of the best to drive and one of the most practical.
The BM is a nice car, but the rust worries me a bit.
Celica, hands down no debate.
It’s certainly a really nice example, and very rare here.
My vote is the Celica. If you see yourself as an aging middle aged man, with your youth long gone, buy a 4-door sedan.
Yes it is nice for sure, but my kid’s seat is a rather large concern.
Dont think you can beat the feeling of a 166, beautiful cars.
Also better built than and more reliable than one might expect as Alfa put some effort into this one. Also I think from now on they will hold or even increase their value.
The 166 really does feel pretty special, from what I’ve been reading, you’re right, they seem to be better put together than we would assume.
Serial Alfa Romeo owner here from the Netherlands (mostly the transaxle RWD models, but also some more modern stuff which is not so much to my liking driving-wise, so I moved on for my dailies…) Anyway, I do know these Alfas pretty well. They are not paragons of reliability, but not as unreliable as you might think/fear. They do require regular maintenance though.
Cambelts every 3 years or 60.000km, whichever comes first. Don’t think you can get away with 4 years, especially on the Twin Spark – you would not be the first to see 8 out of 16 valves make their acquaintance with the pistons. The job requires special tools on either engine to do it right, and doing it on the 24v Busso is no mean feat with the packaging being what it is. It is a lovely engine though.
The 156 can rust like nobody’s business; not conspicuously so, but once you do see it, it is likely to be terminal. They also have a habit of eating front wishbones quickly. The 166 is a much better built thing, and much less likely to rust. However, parts supply is worse for 166-specific parts than for 156-specific parts – some rear suspension parts are virtual unobtanium (or at least, they were, and that’s mainland Europe where you’d stand the best chance of finding any…).
Especially the 156 has a surprisingly cramped rear, and the boot is pretty laughable for a family saloon. But, in its defense, the pre-facelift version may just be the best looking saloon launched in the last 30-odd years, the interior is a lovely place to be and it does drive well for a FWD car. It feels very agile with its quick steering. As you would expect, the 166 is a much more mature and sedate thing on the road, but with that comes a superior ride to the 156.
The 156 for looks – that one has a lovely color combination, or the 166 for the Busso. Both will fit the baby seat and I recall both being pretty reliable from reports of friends. A 156 wagon would be really practical – were they ever sold in Sri Lanka? The Italian cars will always feel special and these are 2 of the best driving Alfas.
I agree with Nate – once cars have started rusting, or been restored, they will never be as good as original, and particularly with a family, that would trouble me. The Alfas are pretty safe, being more modern than the other choices, so use that to persuade your other (better?) half…
Plus, she got out voted by your CC friends!
Rust = walk away.
I don’t really follow Mercedes but a 1988 Mercedes with a carburetor (carburettor?)?? I understand the a manual transmission, in fact 2 of the 3 MB’s that I have driven were manuals, albeit column shift, but I would have thought that by 1988 even a base model 200 would be einspritzer.
Oh, which car for you? Alfa 166 by a mile. Or the W123.
“…but I would have thought that by 1988 even a base model 200 would be einspritzer.”
Depended on market.
166. Huge wedge of unusualness, never fails to look interesting. Side profile actually very nice. Well-reviewed when new. And you have a manual, which eliminates one possibly big expense – rebuild of a modern-ish electronic auto. Check out what electrical gremlins show up in forums (I seem to recall mainly dash-related).
No Mercedes at the bottom of their pricing ranges: if you can’t get to a good one, don’t buy one, especially as rust is an issue. Besides, just quietly, I think a W124 with a groany four or (whisper it) a W123 generally won’t really be fun to drive – utterly respectable, theoretically reliable, bodily tough, serious, and dull.
You don’t have to keep the Alfa forever, you know!
My choice ? This one:
Love these, had a number of 7-945s..965 turbos also and 3 780 turbo bertones… Great cars. One of my 745 ti’s…
The Alfa, obviously.
As Clarkson once said, “you can’t be a true petrolhead until you’ve owned an Alfa Romeo.”
Of course, he could afford to fix them. I say enjoy the suck and get the Alfa.
My wife’s 1990 Spider has been remarkably reliable. My (late) 1995 164Q, not so much.
Once thing you MUST NOT defer is the timing belt on the 166.
My ’95 164Q ate the belt at 25,000 miles and 24 valves vs.6 pistons is a very expensive fix.