I've been to see a couple Bravos this week, having owned a Stilo for 6 years, but have been left disappointed. Don't get me wrong, in terms of appearance, its much more modern than the Stilo but build quality and spec wise I'm not so sure...

It seems as though they've scrimped on lots of little things, things you could argue don't really matter but I beg to differ! Gas bonnet struts for example. Why would they go back to a regular manual stick thing you have to faff about with when working on the car? The dash looks cheap and nasty compared to the Stilo. No leather gaiter either for the handbrake, just some horrible corrugated bit of plastic. No battery enclosure under the hood, which caused no end of problems with the Stilo when you lost the lid and water got in. You don't even get a proper oil filler cap any more! Just some yellow thing that looks like it cost 5p! Come on Fiat, you can do better than that.

I've had both a Stilo (2006 Active Sport 1.4) and the current tjet sport bravo. I'd say the build quality was better in the Stilo - that's not to say the Bravo is poor, it's just little things that when compared to the Stilo make you think "really".

On the upside there's no cooler glovebox hinge failures here or dodgy under seat electric issues.

I loved my Stilo, was impeccably efficient at what it did and was probably the most reliable car I've owned (no faults in 2 years). I'm hoping the Bravo is the same but as I'm intending on a longer ownership time, I'm expecting one or 2 things to crop up.

Half a dozen of one and 6 of the other I'm finding at the moment when comparing.

Had my 1.8 stilo for about 5 years when I got it in 2003 so there has been a gap inbetween the ownership of that and our bravo. The tjet is a good engine and you can get some very reasonably priced examples.

I would agree the dash of the Stilo feels more German (not sure if that's a good thing), but I do think the Bravo's interior is nicer to look at. At least the Sport one...

A friend of mine has a Stilo and it literally lives at his local mechanic's garage. I know it's a question of luck, but I'm thinking at least some of the Stilo's issues has been resolved in the Bravo.

I have owned a 2003 1.6 dynamic Stilo, which I think is a unbelieveble nice car to look at. It still looks modern.

I can compare both cars quite good I think, so there we go:

Pro Stilo:
- Better seats than the Bravo (even with the Bravo sport interior)
- Better armrest than the Bravo (goes further to the front)
- Hight of the seat (goes lower than the Bravo)
In the end, the driving position of the Stilo is much better.
- Gas bonnet struts on the Stilo and not on the Bravo
- Noise inside (same as the Bravo)
- Dials were easier to read

Pro's Bravo
- Much modern and better preforming engines (have to say: 1.6 16v was really fast for 103HP)
- Nicer interior to look at
- Bigger boot
- Less electrical problems than the Stilo

Wow, it suprises me. I really love my Bravo for the looks and performance, but if you sum up the things, I really think the TS got it right. The Stilo is a better car. I just can't imagine more Pro's for the Bravo.
Offcourse there are some things better on the Bravo (like multimedia) but that are just things that the Stilo can't do anything about because it's older.
When you look at the basic of the car, the Stilo is the better car I think.

Wouldn't agree about the interior; and the armrest on the Bravo can be pulled, so it is pretty comfy. Also about the riding position - maybe true for the 3-door version, but not for the 5-door, which on top of it is ugly as hell (as opposed to the 3-door one which looks really nice).

lyubohar said:

Wouldn't agree about the interior; and the armrest on the Bravo can be pulled, so it is pretty comfy. Also about the riding position - maybe true for the 3-door version, but not for the 5-door, which on top of it is ugly as hell (as opposed to the 3-door one which looks really nice).

Click to expand...

I had the 3-door Stilo.
The armrest in the Bravo can't be used to lay down your elbow on it and on the same time have your hand at the steering wheel. Even in the most frontward position. In the Stilo you can, and it is placed higher.

LSP said:

I had the 3-door Stilo.
The armrest in the Bravo can't be used to lay down your elbow on it and on the same time have your hand at the steering wheel. Even in the most frontward position. In the Stilo you can, and it is placed higher.

Click to expand...

I also had a 3-door Stilo and now have a Bravo and I have to agree with You, the front armrest in the Bravo is utterly useless.

I think my Stilo was a bit more soundproof than my Bravo but I'm considering mounting some soundproofing in the doors and under the bonnet.

Well guys, than you are using it wrong I am pretty sure no armrest is designed to rest your hand *while* you hold the steering wheel, it does not make any sense...It is to use between gear changes in city driving or in long trips when you don't have to hold your steering with two hands all the time. And for that it works perfectly, at least I like it a lot. Oh, and also for the passenger if you let him/her

Don't take this the wrong way, comparing the two is pointless. You can't change either and if you like the Stilo more. Then buy a Stilo.

lyubohar said:

Well guys, than you are using it wrong I am pretty sure no armrest is designed to rest your hand *while* you hold the steering wheel, it does not make any sense...It is to use between gear changes in city driving or in long trips when you don't have to hold your steering with two hands all the time. And for that it works perfectly, at least I like it a lot. Oh, and also for the passenger if you let him/her

Click to expand...

You're very welcome to come by and show me the correct use
For me to be able to rest my arm on the armrest, I have to lean very far to the right and bend down. I have tried pushing it forward but that doesn't help much.
In the Stilo I could use it all the time (even when I was holding the steering wheel).
So for me it's useless, the only good thing about it is the cooling compartment underneath

Then you seat incorrectly on top of using the armrest incorrecctly

I would like to respectfully disagree on a few points.

I had experience with a 3 door Stilo Abarth and currently drive a Bravo T-Jet Sport.

The Stilo had on leather seats while the Bravo has cloth but I find the Bravo seats hold onto me a little better, the Stilo seats weren't all that comfortable though they looked better IMHO.

One of my biggest bugbears about the Stilo was the retarded armrest :bang:, I couldn't keep it down while having to change gears, it really was only useful on the freeway (if I didn't have to change gears there too as the NA engine needs more winding) but I still prefer my seating position, with the armrest, in the Bravo. The cushioning on the door is great for my right arm while it holds the steering wheel while I personally can put my left arm on the armrest and at the same time hold the steering wheel or still change gears without having to move the armrest out of the way. The only other cars I find to have a better seating position are BMWs, VAG cars are horrible.

The perceived interior quality of the Stilo was better agreed; someone cared a bit more but I wasn't a fan of how it looked but everyone is entitled to their opinion here though. The Bravo isn't a Rolls Royce in the back but I find it more comfortable than the back of the Stilo; I wanted to die a little when we took 120 mile trip and I rode in the back of the Abarth.

The features in the Stilo were smarter too and this was great and all until these features stopped working. The keyless start feature for example had me stuck on halfway on a cross-country trip because the "emergency start" procedure wouldn't work either and the sunroof also gave up on me.

It felt a good magical in the back when you took a corner... slower. The Bravo is a lot more planted in corners and gives a lot more feedback (in Sport mode) through the wheel. It corners like its on rails when compared to the Stilo, an Abarth by the way, which wallowed. In-gear acceleration for the Abarth was quite stellar between 60 MPH and about 90 though but I love how elastic my Sport's engine is; I hardly need to get out of 6th gear on the freeway.

All in all I sort of understood why the Bravo was a simpler car than the Stilo and learnt to appreciate it, it is more reliable and was overall lighter than the Bravo. Seeing as the features exist, Fiat could have easily made these available on the Bravo but they didn't and for that you must ask yourself why.

To top it off it looks simply seductive compared to the Teutonic design of the Stilo. That Abarth sounds delectable though. :worship:

LSP said:

I have owned a 2003 1.6 dynamic Stilo, which I think is a unbelieveble nice car to look at. It still looks modern.

I can compare both cars quite good I think, so there we go:

Pro Stilo:
- Better seats than the Bravo (even with the Bravo sport interior)
- Better armrest than the Bravo (goes further to the front)
- Hight of the seat (goes lower than the Bravo)
In the end, the driving position of the Stilo is much better.
- Gas bonnet struts on the Stilo and not on the Bravo
- Noise inside (same as the Bravo)
- Dials were easier to read

Pro's Bravo
- Much modern and better preforming engines (have to say: 1.6 16v was really fast for 103HP)
- Nicer interior to look at
- Bigger boot
- Less electrical problems than the Stilo

Wow, it suprises me. I really love my Bravo for the looks and performance, but if you sum up the things, I really think the TS got it right. The Stilo is a better car. I just can't imagine more Pro's for the Bravo.
Offcourse there are some things better on the Bravo (like multimedia) but that are just things that the Stilo can't do anything about because it's older.
When you look at the basic of the car, the Stilo is the better car I think.

Click to expand...

decypha77 said:

I would like to respectfully disagree on a few points.

I had experience with a 3 door Stilo Abarth and currently drive a Bravo T-Jet Sport.

The Stilo had on leather seats while the Bravo has cloth but I find the Bravo seats hold onto me a little better, the Stilo seats weren't all that comfortable though they looked better IMHO.

One of my biggest bugbears about the Stilo was the retarded armrest :bang:, I couldn't keep it down while having to change gears, it really was only useful on the freeway (if I didn't have to change gears there too as the NA engine needs more winding) but I still prefer my seating position, with the armrest, in the Bravo. The cushioning on the door is great for my right arm while it holds the steering wheel while I personally can put my left arm on the armrest and at the same time hold the steering wheel or still change gears without having to move the armrest out of the way. The only other cars I find to have a better seating position are BMWs, VAG cars are horrible.

The perceived interior quality of the Stilo was better agreed; someone cared a bit more but I wasn't a fan of how it looked but everyone is entitled to their opinion here though. The Bravo isn't a Rolls Royce in the back but I find it more comfortable than the back of the Stilo; I wanted to die a little when we took 120 mile trip and I rode in the back of the Abarth.

The features in the Stilo were smarter too and this was great and all until these features stopped working. The keyless start feature for example had me stuck on halfway on a cross-country trip because the "emergency start" procedure wouldn't work either and the sunroof also gave up on me.

It felt a good magical in the back when you took a corner... slower. The Bravo is a lot more planted in corners and gives a lot more feedback (in Sport mode) through the wheel. It corners like its on rails when compared to the Stilo, an Abarth by the way, which wallowed. In-gear acceleration for the Abarth was quite stellar between 60 MPH and about 90 though but I love how elastic my Sport's engine is; I hardly need to get out of 6th gear on the freeway.

All in all I sort of understood why the Bravo was a simpler car than the Stilo and learnt to appreciate it, it is more reliable and was overall lighter than the Bravo. Seeing as the features exist, Fiat could have easily made these available on the Bravo but they didn't and for that you must ask yourself why.

To top it off it looks simply seductive compared to the Teutonic design of the Stilo. That Abarth sounds delectable though. :worship:

Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply. There are some point I can agree with you on, but some I really think different about.

Seats:
I never ever experienced the seats in my Stilo as uncomfortable. The seat was long enough to support your legs and the support in the back was perfect.
But even more important, they had much more lateral support! I think that was because you sit into the seat in the Stilo and sit onto the chair in the Bravo. I hate it, in my Bravo. Fast corner to the left, and you are almost sliding onto your passanger seat. I then I mention the Bravo Sport seats. I can't imagine how bad the seats of the normal Bravo are.

Armrest
I have to agree that changing gear was difficult with the armrest down. But on the highway it was lovely. So, for me a bit 50/50.

Features
I didn't had a full option Stilo. Only cruise control, Airconditioning, and some other minor features where on my car. They are work fine. I have never saw a Stilo with keyless go, radar cruise control, and xenon. Did you had all this features?

Driving abilities
The Bravo is indeed much better, but that's also because the caracter is more sporty. Despite the 17'' alloys, the Stilo was very comfortable. My Bravo on 18'' is really hard. Although I do like it.

My Stilo Pluses:

Multiwagon was neat.
Amazing Sky Roof.

My only bug bear with the Bravo is a total lack of sportswagon version.

It's really disappointing that the only/ last "sportswagon" estate made by the FIAT group was the 159 and now that's gone what have we got left now?

Fiat 500L? lol..

The 3 door Stilo was by far the best looking of the 3 Stilo body options.

The 5 door rear end looked boring and uninspiring (and front bumper didn't look as good as 3 door).

As for the estate... Hmm yeah not pretty.

RobBravo said:

My only bug bear with the Bravo is a total lack of sportswagon version.

It's really disappointing that the only/ last "sportswagon" estate made by the FIAT group was the 159 and now that's gone what have we got left now?

Fiat 500L? lol..

Click to expand...

At least they put the tjet engine in the 500L now and hopefully they release an abarth version like they've planned.

Best things about my stilo was the colour - murano blue and the claw alloy wheels

We had a 3-door 1.8 Stilo that was 'Abarth-ised' complete with Side-Skirts and 17" Claws.... It looked superb and I agree - still look modern and fresh now.