Alfa Romeo 164 (164)
Car comparison
Alfa Romeo 164 (164) 3.0 24V QVvsSubaru Impreza I (GC) GT 2.0 Turbo
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonSubaru Impreza I (GC)
GT 2.0 Turbo
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Alfa Romeo 164 (164) 3.0 24V QV
- Fastest top speed250 km/h155 mph Unrestricted240 km/h149 mph Restricted
- Most powerful232 hp173 kW
- Lowest city consumption13.5 L/100 km17.4 mpg US20.9 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption7.5 L/100 km31.4 mpg US37.7 mpg UK
- Largest trunk410 L
- Best economy score82/100
- Best practicality score71/100
Subaru Impreza I (GC) GT 2.0 Turbo
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.3 s
- Highest torque290 Nm214 lb-ft
- Lightest1,255 kg2,767 lb
- Best power-to-weight168 hp/t125 kW/t5.9 kg/hp
- Best overall score60/100
- Best performance score56/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 232hp173kW | 211hp157kW |
| Torque | 280Nm207lb-ft | 290Nm214lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,680kg3,704lb | 1,255kg2,767lb |
| Gross weight | 2,165kg4,773lb | 1,750kg3,858lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph Calculated | 231 km/h 144 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 76.9s99% target: 248 km/h / 154 mph Calculated | 52.5s99% target: 229 km/h / 142 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.7s | 6.3s |
| 0-200 km/h | 25.6s Calculated | 22.7s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.3s Calculated | 6.0s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 9.4L/100 km25mpg US30.1mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption city | 13.5L/100 km17.4mpg US20.9mpg UK | 13.7L/100 km17.2mpg US20.6mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 7.5L/100 km31.4mpg US37.7mpg UK | 8L/100 km29.4mpg US35.3mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.5s Calculated | 14.3s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 138hp/t103kW/t63hp/1000 lb Calculated | 168hp/t125kW/t76hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 167Nm/t112lb-ft/ton Calculated | 231Nm/t155lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 798km496mi Calculated | - |
| Displacement | 2,959cc181cu in | 1,994cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,555mm179in | 4,350mm171in |
| Width | 1,760mm69in | 1,690mm67in |
| Height | 1,356mm53in | 1,415mm56in |
| Wheelbase | 2,660mm105in | 2,520mm99in |
| Front track | 1,532mm60in | 1,460mm57in |
| Rear track | 1,506mm59in | 1,455mm57in |
| Trunk volume | 410L | 353L |
| Doors | 4 | 4 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 75L | 50L |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Alfa Romeo 164 (164) 3.0 24V QV: Power / Torque
- Subaru Impreza I (GC) GT 2.0 Turbo: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | 6,300 rpm | 5,000 rpm | 6,550 rpm |
| SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo | 5,600 rpm | 4,000 rpm | 5,850 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.3 s | 6.0 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.7 s | 6.3 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 25.6 s | 22.7 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph Likely limited | 231 km/h 144 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.8 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.0 s | 6.5 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.4 s | 9.5 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.2 s | 12.1 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.5 s | 14.3 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 158 km/h 98 mph | 167 km/h 103 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | 232 hp 173 kW |
| SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo | 211 hp 157 kW |
Alfa Romeo 164 (164) 3.0 24V QV has 21 hp more than Subaru Impreza I (GC) GT 2.0 Turbo.
The biggest power difference is between Subaru Impreza I (GC) GT 2.0 Turbo and Alfa Romeo 164 (164) 3.0 24V QV: 21 hp (16 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | 280 Nm 207 lb-ft |
| SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo | 290 Nm 214 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | 1,680 kg 3,704 lb |
| SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo | 1,255 kg 2,767 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph |
| SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo | 231 km/h 144 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | 7.7 s |
| SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo | 6.3 s |
Although Alfa Romeo 164 (164) 3.0 24V QV has more power, Subaru Impreza I (GC) GT 2.0 Turbo is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Subaru Impreza I (GC) GT 2.0 Turbo and Alfa Romeo 164 (164) 3.0 24V QV: 1.4 s.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | 138 hp/t 103 kW/t 7.2 kg/hp |
| SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo | 168 hp/t 125 kW/t 5.9 kg/hp |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | 232 hp 173 kW | 7.7 s | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph |
| SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo | 211 hp 157 kW | 6.3 s | 231 km/h 144 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Alfa Romeo164 (164)3.0 24V QV | SubaruImpreza I (GC)GT 2.0 Turbo | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 232 hp 173 kW | 211 hp 157 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 280 Nm 207 lb-ft | 290 Nm 214 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.7 s | 6.3 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 250 km/h155 mph Restricted 240 km/h149 mph | 231 km/h 144 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,680 kg 3,704 lb | 1,255 kg 2,767 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 798 km 496 mi | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 410 L 14.5 cu ft | 353 L 12.5 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 138 hp/t 103 kW/t 7.2 kg/hp | 168 hp/t 125 kW/t 5.9 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Alfa Romeo 164 (164) 3.0 24V QV |
|---|---|
| Consumption | 9.4 L/100 km25 mpg US30.1 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 16.45 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 26.47 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,410 L372 US gal310 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,468 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Alfa Romeo 164 (164) 3.0 24V QV
- Has 21 hp more
- Has 19 km/h (12 mph) higher top speed
- Has 57 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Heaviest
Subaru Impreza I (GC) GT 2.0 Turbo
- Has 10 Nm more
- Is 425 kg lighter
- Is 1.4 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 30 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Lowest power
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























