Last Update: Apr. 05, 2020, 5:08 a.m.
Home >>> >>> Alfa Romeo 166 and Audi A8

What is Better Alfa Romeo 166 or Audi A8?

Comparing Alfa Romeo 166 with Audi A8 might help drivers decide which vehicle is better. We found 4 vital arguments why Alfa Romeo 166 is undoubtedly a more sensible buy than Audi A8. But Audi A8 also has got a lot of pluses: look at 9 points why it's better than Alfa Romeo 166. The review of Alfa Romeo 166 and Audi A8 considers every vital feature and summarizes data. So we propose you compare two cars and figure out which vehicle you'd want to purchase. Alfa Romeo did everything to present 166 as the most worthwhile model in its competitive section. But take into account that A8 has the unique technologies of Audi. If you had the chance, which model would you go for?


Alfa Romeo 166 Audi A8

4 reasons to buy Alfa Romeo 166

Fuel consumption
Less fuel consumption (Combined cycle) 29.1 mpg vs 29.5 mpg 1% or 0.4 mpg
Less CO2 emissions 143 g/mile vs 146 g/mile 2% or 3 g/mile
Other specs
Less weight 1420 kg vs 1975 kg 39% or 555 kg Weight of the vehicle affects: fuel consumption, acceleration dynamic, braking distance, etc.
Less turning radius 11.6 meters vs 12 meters 3% or 0.4 meters

9 reasons to buy Audi A8

Engine and transmission
More cylinders 8 vs 4 4 more cylinders. The more cylinders = the less vibration and the engine runs more smoothly.
More engine power

512 bhp vs 150 bhp

vs 110 kw.

71% or 362 bhp. More power of car = more top speed.
Faster acceleration from 0 to 60 mph 4.1 sec. vs 9.8 sec. 5.7 sec.
More top speed 155 mph vs 131 mph 24 mph
Higher european emission standard EURO 5 vs EURO 3 2 generations
Weight and capacity
More minimum boot capacity 510 liters vs 490 liters 4% or 20 liters
More capacity of fuel tank 90 liters vs 69 liters 23% or 21 liters
More maximum towing weight without brakes 750 kg vs 500 kg 33% or 250 kg
More maximum towing weight with brakes 2300 kg vs 1500 kg 35% or 800 kg

Neutral reasons Alfa Romeo 166 vs. Audi A8

Engine and transmission
Engine capacity 1970 cm3 vs 3993 cm3 51% or 2023 cm3 less
Fuel supply Distributor fuel injection vs With a twin-turbocharged
Turbocharging Yes vs Yes
Speeds 6 vs 8 2 less
Length 4720 mm vs 5146 mm 8% or 426 mm shorter
Width 1800 mm vs 2111 mm 15% or 311 mm narrower
Height 1416 mm vs 1458 mm 3% or 42 mm lower
Wheels and tires
Wheelbase 2700 mm vs 2994 mm 10% or 294 mm less
*Specs may vary depending on configurations and year of production(taken parameters of last released versions)