Alfa Romeo Arna: Which Version Should You Buy?
The Alfa Romeo Arna was offered in one generation from 1983 to 1987 as a Mini 5-doors with five listed versions. Because there is no later generation to compare, the buying decision comes down to the engine: three entries named 1.2 MT, plus 1.4 MT and 1.5 MT.
The Alfa Romeo Arna was offered in one generation from 1983 to 1987 as a Mini 5-doors with five listed versions. Because there is no later generation to compare, the buying decision comes down to the engine: three entries named 1.2 MT, plus 1.4 MT and 1.5 MT. Every version combines a naturally aspirated Gasoline engine, 4 cylinders in an Opposite layout, a front longitudinal engine position, a 5-speed Manual gearbox, and FWD. The 1.5 MT is the strongest and fastest choice, while the 68 hp 1.2 MT has the best documented weight-to-power ratio. The 60 hp and 63 hp 1.2 MT versions suit buyers who prioritize the least powerful specification, but their available performance data gives them no measurable advantage in fuel economy.
Alfa Romeo Arna generations and versions
The Alfa Romeo Arna has one generation, produced from 1983 to 1987. This generation uses a Mini 5-doors body and contains five database entries: 1.2 MT with 60 hp, 1.2 MT with 63 hp, 1.2 MT with 68 hp, 1.4 MT with 86 hp, and 1.5 MT with 95 hp. No separate restyling or later generation is listed, so there are no generation-to-generation changes to evaluate.
Alfa Romeo Arna engine and specs
The three identically named 1.2 MT entries must be distinguished by output. The 60 hp and 63 hp versions have an 1186 cc engine, while the 68 hp version is listed at 1200 cc. The 1.4 MT has 1400 cc and 86 hp, and the 1.5 MT has 1490 cc and 95 hp.
| Version | Power | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders | Layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.2 MT — 60 hp | 60 hp (44 kW) | not measured | 1186 cc | Gasoline | 4 | Opposite | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1.2 MT — 63 hp | 63 hp (46 kW) | not measured | 1186 cc | Gasoline | 4 | Opposite | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1.2 MT — 68 hp | 68 hp (50 kW) at 6000 rpm | 92 Nm at 3200 rpm | 1200 cc | Gasoline | 4 | Opposite | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1.4 MT | 86 hp (63 kW) at 5800 rpm | 121 Nm at 4000 rpm | 1400 cc | Gasoline | 4 | Opposite | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1.5 MT | 95 hp (70 kW) | not measured | 1490 cc | Gasoline | 4 | Opposite | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
Output per litre helps separate engines that otherwise look similar. The 60 hp 1.2 MT produces approximately 50.6 hp per litre, and the 63 hp 1.2 MT produces approximately 53.1 hp per litre. The 68 hp 1.2 MT reaches approximately 56.7 hp per litre, while the 1.4 MT delivers approximately 61.4 hp per litre. The 1.5 MT leads at approximately 63.8 hp per litre.
Moving from the 60 hp 1.2 MT to the 63 hp 1.2 MT adds 3 hp with the same 1186 cc displacement. The 68 hp 1.2 MT has 8 hp more than the 60 hp version and 5 hp more than the 63 hp version. Compared with the 68 hp 1.2 MT, the 1.4 MT adds 18 hp and 29 Nm, while displacement rises by 200 cc. The 1.5 MT adds another 9 hp over the 1.4 MT, with 90 cc more displacement; its torque is not measured, so the torque difference cannot be calculated.
Alfa Romeo Arna performance and economy
| Version | 0–100 km/h | Top speed | City consumption | Highway consumption | Combined consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.2 MT — 60 hp | not measured | 155 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1.2 MT — 63 hp | 14.1 seconds | 155 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1.2 MT — 68 hp | 14.1 seconds | 155 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1.4 MT | not measured | 173 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1.5 MT | not measured | 175 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
The recorded top speed does not distinguish the three 1.2 MT entries: each is listed at 155 km/h. The 63 hp and 68 hp versions also share the same measured 0–100 km/h time of 14.1 seconds. Acceleration for the 60 hp 1.2 MT, 1.4 MT, and 1.5 MT is not measured.
The 1.4 MT raises top speed by 18 km/h over every 1.2 MT entry. The 1.5 MT reaches 175 km/h, which is 20 km/h above the 1.2 MT versions and 2 km/h above the 1.4 MT. This makes the 1.5 MT the clearest choice when maximum recorded speed and engine output carry the most weight.
City, highway, and combined fuel consumption are not measured for any version. Consequently, no version can be recommended over another on verified mpg or fuel-consumption figures.
Alfa Romeo Arna dimensions, weight, and chassis specs
Exterior length, width, and height are not measured for any version. Gross weight, fuel-tank capacity, and wheel sizes are also not measured throughout the range. Ground clearance is 170 mm for every listed version.
| Version | Kerb weight | Gross weight | Ground clearance | Fuel tank | Wheel sizes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.2 MT — 60 hp | not measured | not measured | 170 mm | not measured | not measured |
| 1.2 MT — 63 hp | 920 kg | not measured | 170 mm | not measured | not measured |
| 1.2 MT — 68 hp | 850 kg | not measured | 170 mm | not measured | not measured |
| 1.4 MT | 920 kg | not measured | 170 mm | not measured | not measured |
| 1.5 MT | 850 kg | not measured | 170 mm | not measured | not measured |
The 68 hp 1.2 MT and 1.5 MT are each listed at 850 kg, making them 70 kg lighter than the 63 hp 1.2 MT and 1.4 MT, which are each listed at 920 kg. Kerb weight for the 60 hp 1.2 MT is not measured.
Using the documented kerb weights, the 63 hp 1.2 MT carries approximately 14.6 kg per horsepower. The 68 hp 1.2 MT improves that to 12.5 kg per horsepower, and the 1.4 MT records approximately 10.7 kg per horsepower. The 1.5 MT has the strongest ratio at approximately 8.9 kg per horsepower. Its advantage over the 68 hp 1.2 MT is especially clear because both weigh 850 kg, but the 1.5 MT provides 27 hp more.
All five versions use Independent, spring front suspension and Independent, spring rear suspension. Each also has Disc front brakes and Drum rear brakes. There is therefore no listed suspension, braking, ground-clearance, gearbox, or drive-system advantage attached to choosing a larger engine.
Which Alfa Romeo Arna version should you buy?
Choose the 1.5 MT if the priority is the strongest specification. Its 95 hp output exceeds the 1.4 MT by 9 hp, the 68 hp 1.2 MT by 27 hp, the 63 hp 1.2 MT by 32 hp, and the 60 hp 1.2 MT by 35 hp. It also has the highest listed top speed at 175 km/h and the best documented weight-to-power ratio at approximately 8.9 kg per horsepower. The trade-off cannot be quantified through consumption because its city, highway, and combined figures are not measured.
Choose the 1.4 MT as the middle engine option. Its 86 hp and 121 Nm provide 18 hp and 29 Nm more than the 68 hp 1.2 MT, although it is 70 kg heavier. It reaches 173 km/h, only 2 km/h below the 1.5 MT, but its weight-to-power figure of approximately 10.7 kg per horsepower is less favorable than the 1.5 MT result.
Among the three entries named 1.2 MT, the 68 hp version is the strongest numerical choice. It provides the highest output of the group, is listed at 850 kg, and achieves 12.5 kg per horsepower. The 63 hp 1.2 MT weighs 920 kg, so the 68 hp car combines 5 additional horsepower with 70 kg less kerb weight. Both have a measured 0–100 km/h time of 14.1 seconds and a top speed of 155 km/h, however, so the better power-to-weight calculation does not produce a measured acceleration or top-speed advantage in the supplied figures.
The 60 hp 1.2 MT and 63 hp 1.2 MT share the same 1186 cc displacement and 155 km/h top speed. The 63 hp version supplies 3 hp more and has a measured 14.1-second 0–100 km/h result, while acceleration and kerb weight for the 60 hp version are not measured. On the available numbers, there is no performance-based reason to favor the 60 hp entry over the 63 hp one.
Overall, the 1.5 MT is the best documented performance choice, the 1.4 MT is the intermediate option, and the 68 hp 1.2 MT is the preferred member of the 1.2 MT group. Price, availability, reliability, interior condition, and sale-market comparisons cannot decide the ranking here because those values are not measured in the supplied data.