164L Auto

["Howard K. Warren" <110043.2627@domain.elided>]

<<<<<
I'm considering a 91 164L - impressive example with low miles and excellent
maintenance.  So...what's the problem?  It's an automatic! Yeah, I know. 
Heresy.  But then again, it IS a big sedan...and automatics ARE more
pleasant for heavy traffic commuting....rationalize rationalize.... :-)  

 What is the concensus on the automatics in the 164's, specifically
driveability and reliablity?  I know there are some very high mileage 164's
in the world - any of y'all have automatics?  How are they holding up?
>>>>>

There is nothing wrong whatsoever with a 164 automatic.  While a lot of
die-hards around here (notice I didn't say Russ Neely by name?) consider a
164 to not be a TRUE Alfa Romeo, take the car for what it is: a large,
luxury sedan.  It's not meant to autocross, it's not a racecar (as most
other Alfas are or can be.)  The 164 is the equivalent of a BMW 700 series,
not a Z3. 

I have both an automatic Milano and an automatic 164, and they are
wonderful commuting cars.  I'm not completely shifless, though... I have
the GTV-6 for Hell-raising fun.  I have had no second thoughts about the
auto trannys.  Like everything else Alfa, MAINTENANCE is the key.  Take
care of it, and it should last a long time.

Now for specific things to watch for, check out the 164 page.

Howard K. Warren
1988 Milano Platinum, "SnowHawk", 156k miles ORIGINAL AUTO TRANNY
1991 164L, "Peregrine", 53k miles (first tranny replaced under warranty)
1984 GTV-6, "Falconi", 131k miles 

------------------------------