Advertisement
Canada markets open in 7 hours 53 minutes

  • S&P/TSX

    21,885.38
    +11.66 (+0.05%)
     

  • S&P 500

    5,048.42
    -23.21 (-0.46%)
     

  • DOW

    38,085.80
    -375.12 (-0.98%)
     

  • CAD/USD

    0.7329
    +0.0005 (+0.07%)
     

  • CRUDE OIL

    83.96
    +0.39 (+0.47%)
     

  • Bitcoin CAD

    87,802.65
    +155.47 (+0.18%)
     

  • CMC Crypto 200

    1,387.10
    +4.53 (+0.33%)
     

  • GOLD FUTURES

    2,348.10
    +5.60 (+0.24%)
     

  • RUSSELL 2000

    1,981.12
    -14.31 (-0.72%)
     

  • 10-Yr Bond

    4.7060
    +0.0540 (+1.16%)
     

  • NASDAQ futures

    17,760.00
    +192.50 (+1.10%)
     

  • VOLATILITY

    15.37
    -0.60 (-3.76%)
     

  • FTSE

    8,078.86
    +38.48 (+0.48%)
     

  • NIKKEI 225

    38,022.32
    +393.84 (+1.05%)
     

  • CAD/EUR

    0.6827
    +0.0006 (+0.09%)
     

2017 Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio vs. 2017 BMW M3, 2017 Cadillac ATS-V, 2017 Mercedes-AMG C63 S

TONY QUIROGA
Updated

From the March 2017 issue

A brand that once ruled racing, gave a young Enzo Ferrari his start, and produced bubbly little macchine throughout the 1950s and ’60s is also a company whose cars earned a reputation for electrical malignancies and for dissolving with the speed of an Alka-Seltzer tablet. Plop, plop, fizz, fizz.

Those ghosts define Alfa Romeo, simultaneously elevating and haunting the brand as it tries to launch its American comeback tour, attracting and repelling us in equal measure. We will not forget that, in the late ’80s, we had two very charming Milanos fail to complete long-term tests. Two.

So it’s with equal parts skepticism and excitement that we approach the Alfa Romeo Giulia, the beachhead of Alfa’s return to America. Aimed squarely at the usual suspects in the compact-luxury-sedan segment, it starts at $73,595 in Quadrifoglio form, and with 505 horsepower it is equipped to take on some of the world’s best sedans. Engineered and designed in Italy, the Giulia is built on FCA’s new Giorgio rear- and all-wheel-drive platform that will also form the basis for Alfa’s second mooring, the Stelvio SUV.

ADVERTISEMENT

Breaking with our usual comparison-test protocol, we brought back all the players from the last test of this genre. Ordinarily, we’d only invite the test winner, in this case the BMW M3, but we recalled the also-rans from that comparo as well, even though they are unchanged since their last visit. The Cadillac ATS-V still has a twin-turbocharged 464-hp V-6 and Nürburg­ring-developed moves; the Mercedes-AMG C63 S still has a sugary-sweet 4.0-liter twin-turbo V-8 that pours out 503 horsepower.

Of the returning cast, the M3 has changed the most. BMW now offers the car with a Competition package, a $4750 option that includes 19 more horsepower from the twin-turbo 3.0-liter inline-six, forged 20-inch wheels with wider Michelin Pilot Super Sports, and a retuned suspension with new springs, dampers, and anti-roll bars. It’s a more intense M3 that shifts the sedan toward the track-focused M4 GTS.

Inviting the entire group back allows us to give the Giulia the necessary context to accurately place it in the segment. At least that’s the case we made in the editorial meeting. Actually, the truth is we wanted to play with all these cars again. So we headed to the vast emptiness of Death Valley to exercise them and in the course of a few days drove 1100 miles. It took every bit of that ­distance to find a winner, because superiority in this segment is a game of inches.

Last place is now becoming too familiar to Cadillac’s ATS-V. As before, it proved su­perior to the German sedans in ride and handling. Cutting up through the mountains that surround Death Valley, the ATS-V is a hero. Cadillac’s magnetorheological dampers balance both wheel control and comfort better than the AMG and the M car. The steering feel earned top marks, there’s big grip from the Michelins, and the brake pedal balances effort and travel, providing the right bite when you misjudge a corner and dive in too deep. We didn’t find a road in our travels that the ATS-V couldn’t master. So why didn’t it finish higher?
We call the 3.6-liter twin-turbo V-6 to the witness stand.

There’s no denying it has the power. In acceleration tests, the Cadillac passed 60 mph in 3.9 seconds and went through the quarter in 12.2 seconds at 117 mph. It’s a snap to launch, too. Simply put your left foot on the brake and your right on the accelerator, raise the revs to 2000 rpm, and release the brake. No need for launch control here.

The M3 is the loudest, most hard-core of the bunch. Yet it also has this group's most spacious interior, the best outward visibility, and the greatest fuel efficiency.

There’s still plenty to love about the M3. At something closer to its $64,995 base price it offers excellent value, but pumping it up with options until it reaches $88,045 offers diminishing returns. It does remain a practical choice in the segment, bringing interior space that’s lacking in the Cadillac and Mercedes. An upright greenhouse makes it easy to see out of and place on the road, and the lightweight seats from the Competition package fit well and adjust to the perfect driving position behind large and clear analog gauges. On the outside, the sheetmetal still looks fresh, and the Competition package’s additional gloss-black trim is a welcome highlight.

But unless you spend your weekends at the track and your commute involves the Stelvio Pass, we’d skip the Competition package. A base M3 is fun no matter how you drive it. Making an M3 more extreme does make it marginally more exciting, but at the expense of its on-road contentment.

To the test equipment, these cars all look alike. But the test equipment can’t appreciate the sublime nature of AMG’s 503-hp V-8. It’s the defining element of the C63 S and gives it a major advantage in a group of six-cylinders.

That engine comes with a $73,725 price tag, which doesn’t seem too high for a ­luxury sedan that can clip off 60 mph in 3.7 seconds and hit the quarter-mile in 11.9 seconds at 123 mph. But that’s just the opening bid; our test car came in at an S-class–like $94,770. Some of the extras included 19-inch wheels ($1250), AMG performance seats ($2500), carbon-ceramic front brake rotors ($5450), and the Premium 4 package ($5700), which adds many of the decadent features of the aforementioned S-class—right down to the air perfumer.

Three-quarters of a Ferrari V-8 is enough to make the Giulia the quickest car to 60 mph. Beyond 100 mph, though, the C63's full V-8 takes the lead.

There are a few things the Giulia doesn’t do well. Apparently, no one thought of making it possible to disable the automatically backtracking driver’s seat when you turn off the car. Alfa promises to fix that for 2018. The bottom cushions are a bit short, and the hard B-pillar trim is an elbow poker. Despite that, we did find a comfortable seating position. The interior design blends a lot of Mazda cues with some Ferrari flair. It’s familiar and attractive, but not as rich as the AMG’s interior. A leather-topped dashboard looks and feels expensive, but the lower you look here, the harder and cheaper the materials become. The audio-system controls and displays are easy to decipher, but the sound from the optional stereo lacks the depth of the other systems. In a world of Google Maps, every new car should have a sharp and clear navigation system. The Alfa’s is years behind the Germans’, although the map view that makes houses into little Italian villas is a charming reminder of the Alfa’s roots.

Another reminder that we were in an Italian car hit us when we briefly warmed up the Giulia using the remote-start feature. After we entered the car and pushed the start button, the Alfa died. A quick restart illuminated the check-engine light and brought up two messages: “Service Electronic Throttle Control” and “Service Engine.” The Giulia still drove, but it wouldn’t move out of its low-boost advanced-efficiency mode. Fortunately, at the next stop, our always prepared assistant technical editor, David Beard, plugged in his OBD II scanner and cleared the codes. It cured the Alfa, but the fault returned when, in the interest of science, we tried remote-starting the car again. Alfa should include an OBD II scanner as standard equipment, and customers should consider themselves part of the development team.

We are willing to overlook this hiccup, but it’s a reminder that Italian cars are part comedy and part tragedy. In the Giulia’s case, the comedy far outweighs the tragedy, at least for now.

2017 Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio2017 BMW M32017 Cadillac ATS-V2017 Mercedes-AMG C63 SVehiclePrice as Tested$79,195$88,045$78,930$94,770Base Price$73,595$64,995$61,690$73,725DimensionsLength182.8 in184.5 in184.0 in187.2 inWidth73.2 in73.9 in71.3 in72.4 inHeight56.1 in56.3 in55.7 in56.1 inWheelbase111.0 in110.7 in109.3 in111.8 inFront Track61.2 in62.2 in60.6 in63.3 inRear Track63.3 in63.1 in60.5 in60.8 inInterior VolumeF: 53 cu ft
R: 41 cu ftF: 54 cu ft
R: 42 cu ftF: 50 cu ft
R: 34 cu ftF: 50 cu ft
R: 42 cu ftTrunk13 cu ft12 cu ft10 cu ft13 cu ftPowertrainEnginetwin-turbocharged DOHC 24-valve V-6
176 cu in (2891 cc)twin-turbocharged DOHC 24-valve inline-6
182 cu in (2979 cc)twin-turbocharged DOHC 24-valve V-6
217 cu in (3564 cc)twin-turbocharged DOHC 32-valve V-8
243 cu in (3982 cc)Power HP @ RPM505 @ 6500444 @ 7000464 @ 5850503 @ 6250Torque LB-FT @ RPM443 @ 2500406 @ 1850445 @ 3500516 @ 1750Redline / Fuel Cutoff7000/7250 rpm7500/7500 rpm6500/6500 rpm7000/7000 rpmLB Per HP7.68.28.37.9DrivelineTransmission8-speed automatic7-speed dual-clutch automatic8-speed automatic7-speed automaticDriven WheelsrearrearrearrearGear Ratio:1/
MPH Per 1000 RPM/
Max MPH1 5.00/5.0/36
2 3.20/7.8/57
3 2.14/11.7/85
4 1.72/14.6/106
5 1.31/19.1/138
6 1.00/25.1/182
7 0.82/30.6/191
8 0.64/39.1/1851 4.81/4.6/35
2 2.59/8.6/65
3 1.70/13.1/98
4 1.28/17.4/131
5 1.00/22.3/163
6 0.84/26.6/163
7 0.67/33.3/1631 4.56/5.7/37
2 2.97/8.7/57
3 2.08/12.4/81
4 1.69/15.3/99
5 1.27/20.4/133
6 1.00/25.9/168
7 0.85/30.4/189
8 0.65/39.8/1891 4.38/6.1/43
2 2.86/9.4/66
3 1.92/14.0/98
4 1.37/19.7/138
5 1.00/26.9/180
6 0.82/32.8/180
7 0.73/36.9/180Axle Ratio:13.093.462.852.82ChassisSuspensionF: multilink, coil springs, anti-roll bar
R: multilink, coil springs, anti-roll barF: struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar
R: multilink, coil springs, anti-roll barF: struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar
R: multilink, coil springs, anti-roll barF: control arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar
R: multilink, coil springs, anti-roll barBrakesF: 14.2-inch vented, cross-drilled disc
R: 13.8-inch vented, cross-drilled discF: 15.8-inch vented, cross-drilled ceramic disc
R: 15.0-inch vented, cross-drilled ceramic discF: 14.6-inch vented disc
R: 13.3-inch vented discF: 15.8-inch vented, cross-drilled ceramic disc
R: 14.2-inch vented, cross-drilled discStability Controlfully defeatablefully defeatable, competition mode, launch controlfully defeatable, traction off, competition mode, launch controlfully defeatable, competition mode, launch controlTiresPirelli P Zero Corsa Asimmetrico 2
F: 245/35ZR-19 (93Y)
R: 285/30ZR-19 (98Y)Michelin Pilot Super Sport
F: 265/30ZR-20 (94Y)
R: 285/30ZR-20 (99Y)Michelin Pilot Super Sport
F: 255/35ZR-18 (94Y)
R: 275/35ZR-18 (99Y)Michelin Pilot Super Sport
F: 245/35ZR-19 93Y
R: 265/35ZR-19 98YC/D Test ResultsAcceleration0–30 MPH1.6 sec1.8 sec1.6 sec1.7 sec0–60 MPH3.6 sec4.0 sec3.9 sec3.7 sec0–100 MPH8.1 sec8.6 sec8.8 sec8.1 sec0–160 MPH24.2 sec26.7 sec28.8 sec22.5 sec¼-Mile @ MPH11.9 sec @ 12112.2 sec @ 12012.2 sec @ 11711.9 sec @ 123Rolling Start, 5–60 MPH4.2 sec4.3 sec4.3 sec4.2 secTop Gear, 30–50 MPH2.5 sec2.1 sec2.3 sec1.9 secTop Gear, 50–70 MPH2.8 sec2.8 sec2.7 sec2.9 secTop Speed191 mph (drag ltd, mfr's claim)163 mph (gov ltd, C/D est)189 mph (gov ltd, mfr's claim)180 mph (gov ltd, mfr's claim)ChassisBraking 70–0 MPH143 ft155 ft150 ft156 ftRoadholding,
300-ft-dia Skidpad1.00 g0.98 g0.99 g0.97 g610-ft Slalom46.1 mph46.1 mph45.5 mph44.5 mphWeightCurb3822 lb3662 lb3839 lb3958 lb%Front/%Rear52.6/47.452.3/47.752.6/47.453.8/46.2FuelTank15.3 gal15.8 gal16.0 gal17.4 galRating91 octane93 octane91 octane91 octaneEPA Combined/City/Hwy20/17/24 mpg19/17/24 mpg20/17/25 mpg20/18/24 mpgC/D 1100-Mile Trip18 mpg20 mpg18 mpg18 mpgSound LevelIdle48 dBA46 dBA50 dBA52 dBAFull Throttle80 dBA88 dBA83 dBA79 dBA70-MPH Cruise68 dBA70 dBA65 dBA68 dBA
Tested by Tony Quiroga and David Beard in California City, CA
Final ResultsMax Pts. Available2017 Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio2017 Mercedes-AMG C63 S2017 BMW M32017 Cadillac ATS-VRank1234VehicleDriver Comfort109899Ergonomics108886Rear-seat Comfort53342Rear-seat Space*55552Trunk Space*55554Features/Amenities*1051059Fit and Finish1081097Interior Styling109886Exterior Styling109887Rebates/Extras*50011As-tested Price*2020161820Subtotal10081818073Powertrain1/4-mile Acceleration*2020201819Flexibility*54444Fuel Economy*1088108Engine NVH1081076Transmission1010877Subtotal5550504644ChassisPerformance*2020181919Steering Feel109889Brake Feel107989Handling1010889Ride1010869Subtotal6056514955ExperienceFun to Drive2524232123Grand Total240211205196195

* These objective scores are calculated from the vehicle's dimensions, capacities, rebates and extras, and/or test results.