There are a couple of threads going on over at AlfaBB regarding both the Alfa Romeo 8C http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/alfa-romeo-8c-competizione-spider/179819-8c-worst-car-ever-driven-stig.html and and Alfa test mule http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/anything-about-alfa-romeos-alfabb-com/194283-alfa-road-mule.html.
Now I'm in there stiring the pot :P by voicing my belief that neither car is an Alfa Romeo and I say that because the major components of engine and chassis aren't Alfa Romeo.
The other point that I made was that no one in Alfa Romeo ownership land is changing the name of their car because they made a few or a whole heap of changes to it.
I actually goes as far to say that I believe that Alfa Romeo is a dead entity that is basically on life support from FIAT. To be used more as a marketing ploy than an actual creator of there own cars.
So what do other people believe defines a car marque?
The test mule is based on some adjusted front wheel drive Chrysler chassis and is using the GM V6. If Alfa Romeo badges started to appear on rebodied Commodores (now that FIAT are in bed with GM), would you still call it an Alfa Romeo?
Hey DUK, i thought that Fiat were no longer part of GM, [yay], GM purchased 15% of Fiat, about 10 years ago, to 'share their diesel technology', and to supply them with motors, but GM, got out of it to try and unsuccesfully avoid going broke, then Fiat brought a controlling interest in the broke Chrysler mob to supply them with cheap, 'made in America' engines, and for Fiat to sell rebadged Fiats as Chryslers in America, surely Fiat could build enough motors in Italy to supply Alfa Romeo and Lancia, and not have the indignity of Alfa Romeo having Mopar motors, Colin.
Col,
I'm the 1st person to admit I'm not up to date with car manufacture politics (sh!t, I don't buy car magazines anymore), but what about the use of GM based engines in Alfa Romeo?
Quote from: Duk on April 14, 2012, 02:03:18 PM
but what about the use of GM based engines in Alfa Romeo?
That was when they were in bed with GM... But please try to keep up :) Fiat now own Chrysler... Hence the test mule in that alfabb thread is a Chrysler under the skin. You will be excited to know that Ateco will soon be selling only the more upmarket Fiats (the ones with horses or tridents on them) - and you will be able to go down to your friendly Jeep dealer and really startle people by coming back saying "I went to buy a Jeep - but I bought an Alfa SUV instead". Or maybe you will be trying to pick between a (Dodge) Dart and a (Fiat) Viaggio....
BTW the 8C is an Alfa, and you could argue it was good of Fiat to bring the company that upstart driver, Ferrari, back in house and use the engine... Entire Chrysler chassis etc are another thing entirely from putting together a limited production special from bits you have available....
Quote from: Darryl on April 14, 2012, 05:55:44 PM
That was when they were in bed with GM... But please try to keep up :) Fiat now own Chrysler... Hence the test mule in that alfabb thread is a Chrysler under the skin. You will be excited to know that Ateco will soon be selling only the more upmarket Fiats (the ones with horses or tridents on them) - and you will be able to go down to your friendly Jeep dealer and really startle people by coming back saying "I went to buy a Jeep - but I bought an Alfa SUV instead". Or maybe you will be trying to pick between a (Dodge) Dart and a (Fiat) Viaggio....
Sorry I haven't kept up with the behind the scenes politics of FIAT's wheelings and dealings.
So you consider a Chrysler designed chassis and a GM engine an Alfa Romeo, do you?
Quote from: Darryl on April 14, 2012, 05:55:44 PMBTW the 8C is an Alfa, and you could argue it was good of Fiat to bring the company that upstart driver, Ferrari, back in house and use the engine... Entire Chrysler chassis etc are another thing entirely from putting together a limited production special from bits you have available....
Please show me the Alfa Romeo involvement of the origins of the 8C.
Did they design and build the chassis? It existed as a Maserati chassis before the 8C
Did they design and build the engine? It existed as a Maserati engine before the 8C.
So maybe they changed some suspension stuff? Well then, Whiteline Automotive here in Australia get to rename a whole bunch of cars....... ::)
As per the thread question: What Defines a Car Brand???
You don't really want to go back to the bad old days of rust, crook electrics and unreliability, but somehow Fiat have got to put more Italian character in their cars, sure they can't make everything, but the motor, [most important part of car], make it a Fiat/Lancia/Alfa, not GM/MOPAR, let them do things like whatever they are good at, but no mater what Fiat does, people like me will whinge, Colin.
This thread has been an enjoyable read. I have some ideas about what defines a brand, however I would like to clear up the GM/Chrysler thing first. My understaning is:
GM entered into arrangements to take over the ailing Fiat (including Ferrari!) in the early 2000's. GM was going to take over Fiat over a period of time. With Fiat going down the tubes and GM in the same sitaution in the US, in 2005 GM actually paid Fiat compensation in order not to take them over and Fiat was spared the embarassment of being owned by the Yanks, good thing that. There are plenty of articles, google will reveal all the detail.
During this alliance (Fiat/GM), Alfa Romeo was looking to GM to replace its six cylinder motor, why? my understanding is that Fiat wouldn't give them the budget to design a new engine that would meet Euro compliance and Alfa had no choice. This came off and Alfa has been using the GM small block six made in our own back yard by Holden Australia for a number of years now. Engines are shipped to Alfa, Alfa adds its design changes to the head and engine mgt and hey presto the new Alfa six was born (and used - brerra, 159 etc.).
GM was also developing a new compact rear drive platform for use in its prestige brands such as Cadallac and my understanding is that Alfa was looking to take on the platform as its answer to re-intrduction of a rear drive platform for its premium vehicles. This all fell through with the demise of the relationship between Fiat/GM and the global financial crisis.
In 2009, Chrysler like all American makers was basically bankrupt after the Global financial Crisis and was bailed out by the American government. The American government wanted to basically ensure that Chrysler could survive before handing over the cash and the Fiat/Chrysler alliance was born with Fiat having the right to buy a stake in Chrysler (initally 20%) over time.
Where will the alliance go? and what effect will it have on Alfa Romeo? Fiat of course will use it to get back into the American market albiet with Chrysler badged Fiats, so it'll be good for business and over time will attempt to re-establish the Fiat, Alfa, Lancia etc. brands in America.
All Alfa romeo "vanilla" cars such as the mito/gulietta etc. are cars with Alfa body design shoe-horned with Fiat drive-trains and e-diffs (to help control the less than great chasis). This is the way of the world. But whats changed? Alfa's have been Fiat parts bins cars for how long now?
The problem for Alfa Romeo in my mind is that if it wants to continue to try and compete in the premium market (BMW/Audi/mercedes etc.) it needs premium platforms and six cylinder engines which fiat just doesn't do and hasn't done for years.
Even when Fiat was doing preium platforms and six cylinder motors it was getting them from ferrari (Fiat dino etc.) and Ferrari doesn't do six cylinder engines any more. In any event even if Ferrari did do six cylinder platfroms they would be out of Alfa's league for use in $60 - $100K Alfa's. So the GM solution with an Alfa tweak was actually a good solution, Alfa would get a premium rear drive platform and we could start seeing some premium rear drive Alfa's again, but alas this is now off the table.
Whilst I get the - is it really an Alfa if its using a yank (Chrysler) six and rear drive platform - argument, it may be the only way that Alfa will get the rear drive platform it needs for its 'premium" end vehicles (159/brerra replacement), although theres been no suggestion of Alfa getting chrysler sourced stuff yet that I know of?
The problem with the Fiat group is that it doesn't do six cylinder engines and it doesn't do premium rear drive platforms, ferrari excepted and the ferrari platforms are out of Alfa's legue (except for veihicles like the 8C thru masseratti) and these platforms are just too expensive for the Alfa $60 to $100K vehicles.
But is Alfa in any different position to a number of other leading manufacturers. This is happening in all manufacturing groups. The french (renault) are tied in with the japs (Nissan), all of the English are now owned by the Chinese or Indians (Aston Martin, Rover, MG etc.), the balance (Rolls Royce and Bently) are owned by the Germans (BMW and VW) and use BMW and VW derived drive trains etc. the difference is that these groups have advanced drive trains and strong brand identity and therfore they "maintain" their brand and their engineering input into their vehicles and will for some time.
However all is not lost the Alfa 8C, albiet that its got Masserati under pinnings, I think its a testoment to Alfa's design integrity that its been able to put together a brilliant car like the 8C. And look at the 4C, whilst it uses Fiat group drivetrain, Alfa has put some serious grunt into this car, a car that Fiat could never hope to produce under its own brand. And look at Lancia (also part of the Fiat group), Lancia's are just re-badged Fiat shit boxes with Lancia having very little independance to do anything approaching individual Lancia vehicles (a true travesty given some of the brilliant past that was Lancia).
There are really only very few brands in the world today that are truly independant brands producing their own individual vehicles in their entirety (BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari, Porshe) and very few aren't owned by other manufacturers or don't product share. So the world has changed and product sharing, product badging is rife in the quest to compete and in Alfa Romeos patch - mostly the $30K to $50K and $60-$100K price ranges (except for 8C/4C limited production cars), competition is such that they will ineviatably not be in a position to produce all of their own 'exclusive" drive trains or engines as they don't have the sales to make the investment work.
What makes a brand? in a traditional sense a manufacturer that is independant, makes its own product, its own drivetrains etc.
In todays world of product sharing? its a matter of degree. Whilst Alfa may be using largely Fiat platforms it can be argued that they aren't a "brand" in the traditional sense they are just a vehicle re-packager?
However I would disagree, just for the moment anyway, its not as if they simply have Fiat cars delivered and whack on an Alfa badge. Alfa still maintain their own sense of style and design far apart from what Fiat is doing. They still maintain significant engineering packaging independance (albiet that they are using Fiat parts and drivetain packages) all wrapped up in that lovely individual Alfa body (Mito and gulietta!). The 8C and 4C are also a tour de force for Alfa and one can only hope that more of this type of product continues to come out of the Alfa stable. In fact un-like Lancia (now re-badged fiats) I think Alfa has maintained a level of independance that we should celebrate, albiet that there have been some hits and misses. And yes Alfa is currently experiencing some issues with sales and some of its product is getting a bit long in the tooth, but with Mito/guilietta 4C they are at least still punching.
It doesn't matter that Alfa may use various platforms either from Fiat or Chrysler or anyone else, whats important is that Alfa, unlike some other manufacturers who are simply re-badging someone elses products are still maintaining their design independance and have the brand cred to continue to produce cars like the 8C and 4C and bring them to market. In todays market, in the patch that Alfa's in, I don't think where they get their under-pinnings or engines from is the issue, what matters is that they continue to have their own engineering credability and independance to make those platforms into unique cars - Alfa Romeo's - and whilst they are not as independant as we'd all like, if they continue to move forward with cars like 8C and 4C and at the lower end mito and guilietta, then I think the Alfa brand is still alive. When they are reduced to re-badging Fiat shit boxes like Lancia then I think they are in trouble and have lost their Brand.
Quote from: colcol on April 14, 2012, 11:14:53 PM
You don't really want to go back to the bad old days of rust, crook electrics and unreliability, but somehow Fiat have got to put more Italian character in their cars, sure they can't make everything, but the motor, [most important part of car], make it a Fiat/Lancia/Alfa, not GM/MOPAR, let them do things like whatever they are good at, but no mater what Fiat does, people like me will whinge, Colin.
Don't you think that they could do the basics of producing a well made, durable body and electrics? That stuff's not rocket science.
1750GT: That is a huge write up. Much appreciated.
1 thing tho. As awesome as the concept of the 4C is, isn't it really a KTM Longbow chassis underneath?
It seems as if there is another renowned styling house in Italy.
Pininfarina
Bertone
Alfa Romeo............... :'(
Quote from: Duk on April 14, 2012, 08:47:03 PM
Quote from: Darryl on April 14, 2012, 05:55:44 PM
That was when they were in bed with GM... But please try to keep up :) Fiat now own Chrysler... Hence the test mule in that alfabb thread is a Chrysler under the skin. You will be excited to know that Ateco will soon be selling only the more upmarket Fiats (the ones with horses or tridents on them) - and you will be able to go down to your friendly Jeep dealer and really startle people by coming back saying "I went to buy a Jeep - but I bought an Alfa SUV instead". Or maybe you will be trying to pick between a (Dodge) Dart and a (Fiat) Viaggio....
Sorry I haven't kept up with the behind the scenes politics of FIAT's wheelings and dealings.
Sorry you are sorry - I haven't tried to keep up either - its all rather depressing, despite emoticon - it has just made enough noise in media I unfortunately didn't miss it...
Quote from: Duk on April 14, 2012, 08:47:03 PM
So you consider a Chrysler designed chassis and a GM engine an Alfa Romeo, do you?
Um no. I couldn't find an emoticon for sarcasm and bitterness to go with the comments about jeep/chrysler - just pretend I'd put css tags <class="sarcastic"> around the whole thing. With sarcasm removed:
A chrysler with some alfa panels "stretched" over it is not an alfa (or even a fiat)
I don't understand the marketing brains that seem to think "alfa badge = premuim = more money per unit", "suv = what lots of people buy", therefore combine the 2 to get "Alfa SUV = something that lots of people buy and pay more for..." but that is what I've read/seen proposed. I think the whole idea is abhorrent. Maybe that market does exist, is huge, and thats enough to make the powers that be at Fiat prostitute the Alfa badge.... Neither you nor I, nor I suspect anyone reading this thread, is in that market, if it exists, which I really hope it doesn't but am expecting to be disappointed...
And given that you missed the media around Fiat/Chrysler - maybe that means you have been lucky enough to miss those "I bought a Jeep" adverts. I was desperately trying to find some humor in them and the thought of someone walking into a dealership that sells "Jeeps" and "Alfas" and ends up walking out with an "Alfa" SUV (does this also mean they could buy a "Jeep" coupe?)... Bah...
Quote from: Duk on April 14, 2012, 08:47:03 PM
Quote from: Darryl on April 14, 2012, 05:55:44 PMBTW the 8C is an Alfa, and you could argue it was good of Fiat to bring the company that upstart driver, Ferrari, back in house and use the engine... Entire Chrysler chassis etc are another thing entirely from putting together a limited production special from bits you have available....
Please show me the Alfa Romeo involvement of the origins of the 8C.
Did they design and build the chassis? It existed as a Maserati chassis before the 8C
Did they design and build the engine? It existed as a Maserati engine before the 8C.
So maybe they changed some suspension stuff? Well then, Whiteline Automotive here in Australia get to rename a whole bunch of cars....... ::)
As per the thread question: What Defines a Car Brand???
The Alfa romeo involvement in the 8C? Um - they decided to make a car, went looking to the parent company parts bin and found some bits to use as a basis and modified them to suit. The "Maserati" engine is the Fiat group's high performance V8 design and was developed to power Ferraris first, Masers second, Alfas third - why not? What how would a modern "Alfa" V8 be different? I realise the Maserati and Ferrari variants are different and the Alfa gets the Maserati version - what would you change if you were designing an Alfa V8 to go in a car of the 8Cs configuration and intent (ie a GT more than an all out supercar)?
As to the chassis - they picked a basis and modified it *a lot*. Have a look at some of the detail in alfabb thread - there are huge chassis changes involved - if anything its the suspension components that they did re-use.
Its a limited production car - would it have been better in some way if they had gratuitously re-engineered the car from scratch?
We are comparing very similar cars "in spirit" here - across the Alfa/Ferrari/Maserati portion of the Fiat group. But - I can take one look at a debadged 8C and tell its an Alfa. Its very hard to tell what should distinguish a modern top of the line GT from Alfa vs one from Ferrari beyond the styling, although Fiat marketing have - mostly- stuck to the Ferrari should be all out supercar not a GT and the Maserati badge is the GT car - letting Alfa in is a bit of a one of special reviving the Alfa of old.
Chrysler as a group is too broad a brand - but overall it tends to stand for cheap (in its home market at least) and agricultural at best, badly built, badly styled crap at worst.
It has some reasonably strong brands within it though. Dodge "Mopar" raw grunt (agricultural as it may be) is still "cool" - shame about the big barges built around it (Viper is an exception to that). Jeep did have some vestiges of simple/tough credibility left last time I looked but its getting pretty dodgy with the scale model made out of margarine container plastic 2wd "jeeps for mums" stuff...
None of that branding crosses to anything the alfa badge stands for... And that is the problem with sharing anything beyond basic parts.
FWIW - I think anyone having a problem with the intra-italy sharing of tech and the ":where did that design come from" stuff needs to look at a bit of history...
A long time ago (1910) a company called ALFA was created... They made cars, in Italy.
Just before some pesky little war in 1914 they built their first DOHC racing engine/ grand prix car but it wasn't that fast and in any case didn't get to race before the war.
During the war some bloke by the name of Romeo bought the company and at the end of the war the leftover stock of prewar ALFAs were assembled and sold with Alfa Romeo Milano badges....
The racecars were dragged out too but wasn't terribly successful in 1919 (unlike the 1914 GP FIAT it raced against).
In the 1920 Targa Florio a bloke called Ferrari was driving the second string / smaller car which finished (always helps), won the touring car class and came second overall.
By 1924 Alfa had hired a couple of ex Fiat GP guys, Bazzi (a friend of Ferrari's) and Jano. The GP car produced won the European GP in France convincingly and Fiat pulled out of GP after that. Jano was now Alfas primary designer / engineer especially of racing engines.
1925 world championship was won by Alfa, at which point the laurel wreath border was added to the Alfa Romeo badge...
Ferrari was running Scuderia Ferrari, Alfas factory race team, and still racing himself until 1932.
Stuff happened, including a depression and a government bailout... Ferrari was briefly independent (Alfa had no money for racing) before being brought back in house briefly - this didn't last long and Ferrari left and started his own racing parts/engineering company.
In 1937 Jano moved from Alfa to Lancia
There was another war...
After the war as things got back on some sort of footing Ferrari was an Alfa competitor -in the 1948 GP there were Alfas racing against Ferraris.
Lancia briefly entered F1 in 1954 with the D50, a V8 powered car massively ahead of its time and designed by Jano. For a number of reasons Lancia exiteded F1 the same year and the race division with Jano transferred to Ferrari. Ferrari F1 through the 50s were evolutions of this car.
Jano's V8 engine or an evolution of it, and the related V6 design were introduced in the Dino series and evolution of this V8 design powered all V8 Ferraris until a new design was introduced in the F430. It is this F430 (admittedly not Jano designed - he died in 1965) version that is related to the contemporary Maserati V8 and is used in the 8C...
So, there's just one thread of italian race / high performance engine and car design drawn along the 8C branch of the whole tree of such development. And the whole thing has at its roots Fiat, but a huge period of development under the Alfa umbrella, before the racing side of things split off into Ferrari, and Jano's engineering brilliance departing to Lancia, being pulled back together into the Fiat conglomerate at the end. Thats a "brand" worth preserving rather than destroying by rebadging Chryslers...
Well said all, re this. For I too generally have to agree with what has been said in defence of Alfa. One really minor mistake in a point that 1750GT was making re Fiat not making top end 6 cylinder motors apart from the Dino, which of course was by Ferrari.
Both the luxury 130 Sedan and Coupe had their own V6, twin cam not quad cam as per the Dino, originally it came in 2.8L and later for most of the 130s made in 3.2L. While many have tried to attribute these as being Dino motors in fact they had virtually nothing in common with the Dino engine. The 130 engine was a superb, torquey motor. I know as I had a 130 sedan and my brother still has a collection of coupes and sedans. However, before the 130, Fiat also made the 1800, 2100 and 2300 sedan/coupe (basically the predecessor to the 130) and all of these were straight 6cylinder motors. The coupe even came in an Abarth version and by most motoring journos of the era they viewed the 2300 coupe as a cut price Ferrari. Also if you go back sufficiently in time to the late '20s and 30s Fiat also made a range of models with 6 cylinder motors. Also don't forget the Otto Vu (otherwise known as the 8V) in the late 50s early 60s, for that was a limited production high end sportscar, effectively the equivalent of the Alfa 8C.
My point being that Fiat actually has a history equal to that of Alfa as a significant Italian car maker, including upper shunter models. I can bet you anything for instance that if the 130 coupe had been given a Ferrari badge rather than a Fiat badge it would have better appreciated by many, for the quality of the cars is that good.
Fiat also as many of you may remember also have a long and proud history of sportscars and sport sedans over the past 100 years. I could list them but it might take too long.
So ultimately for me, I have absolutely no problem with Alfa being a part of the Fiat group and with Ferrari, Lancia and Maserati DNA in the fold, as far as I am concerned we really shouldn't have anything to fear, and rather on the contrary much to look forward to.
What I would seriously love to see is an Alfa sedan the equal of if not better than the BMW 3 series and especially the M3 and Audi A4 equivalent. That in my view would be the market to target, and give Alfa heaps of cred. Basically a reborn Giulia Super, how cool would that be.
Alfa Romeo? - prettiest Fiats ever made!
DavidM/Duk thanks for generally agreeing and yes it was a long response (the passion!). David, thisnk for reminding me of the Fiat sixes I thought the sixes used in the Fiat Dino were a Ferrari six.
Darryl I too see the notion of a JeepAlfa SUV as being awful but I don't think its a change to Alfa's strategy its just Alfa trying to lift sales and cover a market niche (like BMW - X1/X3, Porsche with Cayenne, Merc with M serious etc.)
Whilst I can see the discussion about is the 8C/4C an Alfa or do they have drivetrains by others, when I look at the overall product and design I see an Alfa? not another car and in the end the market buying these vehicles sees Alfa and this is a good thing. Don't forget some of the worlds most prestigious makers (aside from probably Merc and BMW) product share, consider these:
Lamborghini (owned by Audi/VW) - use Audi/VW engines and FWD drivelines and their switch gear has been said to come straight out of an Audi A8. Bentley (also owned by VW) use VW engines and drivelines
Rolls Royce (owned by BMW) uses BMW tech
Porsch (part of the VW group) uses VW tech for its SUV's, they are now looking at "affordable" porsche cars which will use VW tech, engines and drivelines. A agree with DavidM, the overall objective is for Alfa to produce cars that match BMW,Audi and Merc, product sharing can only help Alfa so if they are product sharing (even for the 8C and 4C) this is a good thing as long as the spirit of the Alfa product remains and they produce truly great cars comparable to the other prestige brands. Alfas being the best Fiats ever built, lets hope so.
1750GT
Hi 1750GT, yes actually you are correct, the Fiat Dino coupe and spider used exactly the same engine as per the "Ferrari Dino" Originally they came as the all alloy 2.0L and later changed up to the classic 246 engine (that is 2.4L), cast iron block with alloy heads. These engines were a quad cam V6. In the Fiat Dino's they mated these up to the ZF gearbox, while Ferrari used a different gearbox.
What I was referring though was in respect of Lampredi's design for the 130 sedan and coupe, which also was a V6 but only single overhead cam and of a different V angle. Hence my comment that while many pundants claim the 130 had the Dino engine or a Dino inspired engine, in fact they were completely different. The only shared parts between the Fiat Dino coupe and the 130 was in respect of some suspension and brake components.
As to the comment re Alfa's being the prettiest Fiat's ever made, hmn, no sorry can't agree with such a view. If you want to look at the prettiest Fiat ever made, you could be hard pressed to go past say the Fiat Dino spider (no Alfa in that one) although I actually like the coupe better, or perhaps the 124 spider, nice, or even the Barchetta, again zip Alfa in those. Ditto the 1600 Osca spider (cool and so rare), some of the Otto Vu's were equal to some of the best Maserati's, Ferraris and even Pagaso's of the late '50s and early 60s.
The current generation of Alfas made from the 156 onwards are not Fiats, but Alfas in their own right IMHO. Sure they are under the umbrella of Fiat and therefore share design elements with Fiat but so are Ferrari (have been since the late '60s) and yet I never hear anyone complaining that they are overpriced Fiats. Ditto Maserati for quite a few years. My 156 is an Alfa, it does things that Alfa's do, it speaks to me with soul and passion. It has design ques from the 1750 Berlina, as does say the 159 have links to the 2L Berlina. If you doubt me have a look at the instrument panels. While the GTV/GTV6 to me felt like a modern version of the classic 105 coupe, albeit FWD.
Then how about Lancia. You only have to think back to the awesome Delta Integrale. Trust me, my brother has one, as well as a Flamminia pininfarina coupe and the Delta is a Lancia. It ain't no Fiat, it is far too querky to be one.
I think this is a topic of conversation which polarises peoples opinions. That is perfectly fine, but all I can suggest is try to be a little rationale in one's thinking on this. As others have said, and I agree, this sort of thing has always happened, and is only likely to get worse re "badge engineering' rather then better. The days of major brands being solely owned rather than part of a larger group are long gone. The economics simply don't work for that sort of business model, as nice and nostalgic it might be to think otherwise.
DavidM I think we basically agree as I said in my response when listing a number of premium manufacturers who use parts and chasis from parent companies and the fact that I agree that the bar is for Alfa to get back on even par with BMW/Mercedes/Audi.
If Alfa is using chasis and parts from within teh Fiat group then thats fine as long as they continue to keep their desgin independance. Parts and chasis sharing can only help the brand survive and move forward as your right the days of Alfa making their own cars, as with many other premium manfacturers are probably over.
By saying that - Alfa's, best Fiats ever made, Lets hope so, I was responding to Peter's quote the reponse before; it was not meant to suggest that Alfa's are simply Fiats.
1750GT
Quote from: Davidm1750 on April 15, 2012, 10:17:07 PM
The current generation of Alfas made from the 156 onwards are not Fiats, but Alfas in their own right IMHO. Sure they are under the umbrella of Fiat and therefore share design elements with Fiat but so are Ferrari (have been since the late '60s) and yet I never hear anyone complaining that they are overpriced Fiats. Ditto Maserati for quite a few years. My 156 is an Alfa, it does things that Alfa's do, it speaks to me with soul and passion. It has design ques from the 1750 Berlina, as does say the 159 have links to the 2L Berlina. If you doubt me have a look at the instrument panels. While the GTV/GTV6 to me felt like a modern version of the classic 105 coupe, albeit FWD.
I think this is a topic of conversation which polarises peoples opinions. That is perfectly fine, but all I can suggest is try to be a little rationale in one's thinking on this. As others have said, and I agree, this sort of thing has always happened, and is only likely to get worse re "badge engineering' rather then better. The days of major brands being solely owned rather than part of a larger group are long gone. The economics simply don't work for that sort of business model, as nice and nostalgic it might be to think otherwise.
I think this is a topic of conversation which polarises peoples opinions. That is perfectly fine, but all I can suggest is try to be a little rationale in one's thinking on this. As others have said, and I agree, this sort of thing has always happened, and is only likely to get worse re "badge engineering' rather then better. The days of major brands being solely owned rather than part of a larger group are long gone. The economics simply don't work for that sort of business model, as nice and nostalgic it might be to think otherwise.
[/quote]
At last there are some people talking sense in this argument. I have been following the Alfa BB thread as well, but this is the most informed discussion in my opinion. DavidM and 1750GT have articulated what I have thought all along. I agree that the 156s etc are every bit Alfas.
I would love to add a Delta Integrale to my collection. A friend of ours in Italy had a fabulous red one, but foolishly I didn't get her to take me for a blast in it or take a pic of it. It was one of the higher performance ones with the full body kit. I didn't realise what they were at the time, (2002).
AH oz3litre, a man after my own heart, the Delta Integrale!! a beautifual car, I've only been in one once, a right hand drive converted job that was painted up with the Integrale rally body kit in racing colors.
Unfortunatlely the Integrale has never become a collectors car, in Australia anyway and all the examples I've seen (except for the one I got a drive in) have either been shockingly looked after or modified or the owner thinks they have a rare ferrari and want big dollars for a car thats just not worth it.
I have come close to the brink of purchase, the last time was just before I bought my current Alfa a 1750GT. Boy I love the Alfa but a real deal integrale would be sublime (when the prices become realistic).
Maybe one day. By the way thats a neat collection of family Alfa's, how did you manage the get the whole brood to drive an Alfa?
1750GT
Opinions on this subject will always vary, and that is good. If everyone had the same opinion, the world would be a very boring place indeed.
But, there has been very little commented on what people believe constitutes a car brand.
For me, the car starts with the chassis.
Not just some numerical value of how far apart the wheels are, but the design of the suspension, half of the suspension's geometry, the torsional and bending rigidity characteristics, the placement of the major masses (engine, transmission, occupants) and what wheels send the car down the road.
But how much change, if any, allows 1 car name to take ownership or credit for that particular chassis?
I maintain that the chassis should start life designed by the manufacturer whose name adorns the body.
A personal point, I've modified my Alfa 75's chassis with additional bracings and some seam welding, so does anybody consider it to be different chassis or a modified Alfa chassis? I call it a modified Alfa chassis.
Same said for the suspension. If you put different brand of dampers (shock absorbers) into you car, then it's no longer to original specs, but how many people would call it a new suspension system/design?
Even with geometry changes, pivot point change's, wheel alignment spec change's, spring and damper change's, I still call what I'm doing with my Alfa, simply 'modified Alfa Romeo suspension'.
Quote from: Duk on April 28, 2012, 06:58:13 PM
But, there has been very little commented on what people believe constitutes a car brand.
This probably boils down to what is essentially a subjective argument and we could discuss it until the cows come home and never reach a conclusion. Alternatively you might end up deciding that there is no such thing as a car brand any more and it will all start to get a bit silly. Even in the pre war days, many cars were a mixture of parts. Cords, Auburns and Duesenbergs for example, ran Lycoming engines, so was a Cord a Cord, or a Lycoming, or a Cordoming? It was also common for companies to produce the rolling chassis and customers would commission a coach builder to build a body for it. What would you have called the car then, if you wanted to be pedantic about it? As far as I am concerned, Alfas are still Alfas and I am happy to leave it at that.
I wonder if the supporters of the FIAT ere Alfa Romeo's would be so supportive and so sure about these cars being an Alfa Romeo, if the equivalent year model FIAT's were also sold here in Australia at the same time, so a direct comparison could be made.
I might try to answer some of the interesting points made. Yes Duk, I would be perfectly happy to have been in a position to make a direct comparison between a Fiat and a post Fiat takeover Alfa, but for us in Aus this is a moot point as for the period of time post the Regatta and until the introduction of the new model Fiats, no new models were available. Australia in fact missed out on Fiats for longer than we missed out on Alfas. We still don't get Lancia either.
The Barchetta if it had been made in RHD and available in Aus would have been a very tasty number, ditto the Abarth 130TC Regatta, the Turbo Uno etc etc. I am sure if one went searching on Google or read the UK or Euro motoring press such comparisons may well have been done.
1750GT and OZ3Litre you guys rock. For me you understand that the world of manufacturing, economics and also ultimately customer demand dictates what is available in the market place. Yep you were spot on re the Duesenbergs, Cords etc. As I previously noted none of this is new and no one really should be surprised. For me, the brand of a car is not the sum part or for that matter necessarily a single component (even be it the "chassis") of a car. Let me try to explain what I mean, we all know that Maserati, Lamborghini, ASA, Iso, even Ferrari, or Lotus (just for a UK brand), all raided the parts bins of other manufacturers be they Fiat, Ford or even yes Alfa to create their car, and yet I would argue that the rationale person would still say they were unique brands.
For me and hopefully in a part this kind of answers Duk's question, a car Brand is about the person or company that has tried to establish it in the first instance. For a modern example, take Lexus (now I don't ever want one as I don't like them), but Toyota would I am sure strongly argue that Lexus is a car brand in its own right, even though we all know they are upper shunter Toyotas. But to an extent beyond my cynicism, maybe they are right, for I suspect the average punter would probably agree it is a car brand in its own right. Its one downside is that it has relatively little history, and perhaps this is the real point behind a car brand ??
Should for example HSV or FSV be considered a brand, afterall they have a marketing edge given this, ditto AMG, M series, Abarth (well I will come back to this in a sec), and are sold as such. No I don't actually think these are brands albeit they are a specialised version of an existing brand. Abarth perhaps being the exception, historically, as it was a brand in its own right designing and building its own cars. Having said that Abarth originally was doing the same as the above to very basic Fiats and of course that is again where it is at.
Take Porsche, originally the designs for Porsches were based around VWs but as we all know they very rapidly established themselves as a brand in their own right, albeit that again the wheel has turned and they have very good links once again to VW.
As I have said before, while there is a world of small brand solo manufacturers making specialised cars, in large, cars these days regardless of their badge or name (which perhaps today is all that is left, hopefully not), are made by a relatively small number of manufacturers. Therefore what to me defines ultimately the brand is for a large part the history behind it. This much I know we all can agree on Alfa Romeo has truck loads of this to help define its brand. In terms of any new model that is made by the company, it then becomes important (to me) that there is evidence of the brand's DNA, and I am not simply referring to a name or a badge etc. As said before I find sufficient DNA evident in my 156 for me to be satisfied it is an Alfa, obviously others will disagree. I don't have a problem with that.
To me, the 156 was precisely the car Alfa needed at the time, it has significant design qualities within it, as per previous Alfas, look at the hidden rear door handles, or the elegance of the front door handles, the historical references in the grill to earlier models, the instruments are pure 1750 Berlina (albeit updated), the shear beauty of the design of the sedan or Sportwagon an ethos of previous good Alfa sedan design. I could go on. Also they drive bloody well, and then there was the GTA version.
Nuff said from me on that.
Hey OZ/1750GT, yes me too I am still waiting to go for a ride in my brother's Integrale. I don't know what he paid for it (he is kind of cagey re such things), it is an 8V version but apparently they go very well and are less complicated than the 16V. He blew the turbo and is in the process of getting this rebuilt so hopefully it will be on the road, soonish. His is red, and not mucked around with apart from a big white flash on the bonnet with Malborough script on it. Well it was typically Rally advertising in the '80s.
Quote from: Davidm1750 on April 29, 2012, 10:53:27 AM
1750GT and OZ3Litre you guys rock. For me you understand that the world of manufacturing, economics and also ultimately customer demand dictates what is available in the market place.
I don't agree that the customer has much say or influence in what type of Alfa Romeo's are produced. Since the FIAT take over, with the exception of getting a few more years out of the 75 and the brief stint of the SZ/RZ, where have the rear wheel drive cars been? Please, no mention of the 8C! Apart from the fact that I don't consider it to be a true Alfa Romeo (as mentioned all ready), it's not a realistic car for the masses.
The only influence I've been able to have over Alfa Romeo is to vote with my feet and simply not buy a newer 1. I'm pretty sure that hasn't shown up on some analysts pie chart at FIAT ::).
Quote from: Davidm1750 on April 29, 2012, 10:53:27 AMFor me and hopefully in a part this kind of answers Duk's question, a car Brand is about the person or company that has tried to establish it in the first instance. For a modern example, take Lexus (now I don't ever want one as I don't like them), but Toyota would I am sure strongly argue that Lexus is a car brand in its own right, even though we all know they are upper shunter Toyotas. But to an extent beyond my cynicism, maybe they are right, for I suspect the average punter would probably agree it is a car brand in its own right. Its one downside is that it has relatively little history, and perhaps this is the real point behind a car brand ??
As an active Toyota owner, the general consensus amongst 'true' Toyota fan (those guys who get their hands dirty working on their cars) is that Lexus is not a stand alone manufacturer and just an upmarket name that gets applied to Toyota's more luxury orientated cars. For example, there were no Lexus versions of the Supra, but there were Lexus versions of the Soarer.
Having said that, the Lexus LFA is wholely and solely Lexus, with no Toyota equivalent. So at that point Lexus could, and probably should, be considered a car manufacturer in its own right.
The Lexus name is just a marketing ploy to help sell upper market cars in the USA. After all, Toyota can definitely build the cars with quality and luxury, but the Yanks have this negative association with names like Toyota and Honda (Accura). Much like they can't handle numbers being used as or in car names, the 75 became the Milano, the MX5 became the Miata all because of marketing. I believe that to be insulting to the designers, but the idea is to sell cars............
Quote from: Davidm1750 on April 29, 2012, 10:53:27 AMShould for example HSV or FSV be considered a brand, afterall they have a marketing edge given this, ditto AMG, M series, Abarth (well I will come back to this in a sec), and are sold as such. No I don't actually think these are brands albeit they are a specialised version of an existing brand. Abarth perhaps being the exception, historically, as it was a brand in its own right designing and building its own cars. Having said that Abarth originally was doing the same as the above to very basic Fiats and of course that is again where it is at.
I don't think that many people would ever consider the likes of HSV, FSV, FPV, AMG or M series cars to be manufactures in their own right, but company approved specialist vehicles or 'an in houses tuning house'.
And those that whinge about look what Fiat done to Alfa Romeo, just remember Fiat saved us from a fate worse than death, Ford buying us, the Ford executives were in Italy in 86 sniffing around looking for a new toy they could play with, and most likely call their sporting cars Alfa Romeo's, just like they used to call their luxury cars 'ghia', i beleive the sticking point was with the Italian Goverment, was the cars being built outside Italy, then after all the offers and prices were looked at, Fiat came in and purchased them, look what General Motors did to poor old SAAB, another good car maker gone to the wall, and i am genuinely upset about SAAB, because we need more SAAB car makers around and less Toyotas, what happened to SAAB, could have easily been Alfa Romeo, Colin.
Quote from: colcol on April 29, 2012, 12:08:11 PM
And those that whinge about look what Fiat done to Alfa Romeo, just remember Fiat saved us from a fate worse than death, Ford buying us, the Ford executives were in Italy in 86 sniffing around looking for a new toy they could play with, and most likely call their sporting cars Alfa Romeo's, just like they used to call their luxury cars 'ghia', i beleive the sticking point was with the Italian Goverment, was the cars being built outside Italy, then after all the offers and prices were looked at, Fiat came in and purchased them, look what General Motors did to poor old SAAB, another good car maker gone to the wall, and i am genuinely upset about SAAB, because we need more SAAB car makers around and less Toyotas, what happened to SAAB, could have easily been Alfa Romeo, Colin.
You anti-Toyota people really have got to get out there and drive some decent, sporty ones.
And what's this 'us' business? Are you a share holder of Alfa Romeo?
Quote from: Davidm1750 on April 29, 2012, 10:53:27 AM
Hey OZ/1750GT, yes me too I am still waiting to go for a ride in my brother's Integrale. I don't know what he paid for it (he is kind of cagey re such things), it is an 8V version but apparently they go very well and are less complicated than the 16V. He blew the turbo and is in the process of getting this rebuilt so hopefully it will be on the road, soonish. His is red, and not mucked around with apart from a big white flash on the bonnet with Malborough script on it. Well it was typically Rally advertising in the '80s.
I have just been looking up details and photos of the Integrales and our friend's car in Italy was definitely a 4WD, 16v and was either an Evo 1 or Evo 2. It had the muscular guards, bonnet bulge and four round headlights. I went through my photo album from that trip in 2002 and sadly I can't find any photos of it so far.
This 'us' business, we bleed for Alfa Romeo when it goes wrong, we defend Alfa to the hilt against neighbours, people at work when they try and sully the name of Alfa Romeo, thats why we get up early on a Sunday morning and go for a drive in our sports cars, only to be held up by people in their 'whitegoods' Toyota Camrys, does that define a maker?, Colin.
Duk rememebr this is an Alfa Romeo forum! so your always going to get some stick if you mention toyota in the same breath as Alfa Romeo. Even the guys who persist in talking about rexes and lancer evo's get some stick.
I know what you mean about Toyota (supra, soara, early celica's, sprinter etc. etc.) tunable fun cars, some well ahead of their time in terms of tunability, all wheel drive etc. but those days have gone and the LFA is just not the common mans car (a similar thing has been said about the 8C on this forum when anyone mentions it!), todays toyotas, except possibly the new FT86 are just blue rinse cars.
Alfa romeo definitely has the cred over toyota even though Alfa has from time to time produced some lemons. The japs decided long ago that they were going to produce you and me cars for the masses (with a continued obsession with four wheel drives) and whilst they have produced some great boring cars, this has meant that their cred in the sports car market has gone south. The japs unlike the euro's also decided that rather than having skin in the game in both sports cars and you and me cars they stuck to the you and me cars, and front wheel drive from the 90's.
Imagine if toyota, mitsubushi and nissan decided to take on the Euro's in the sports car market rather than become volume junkies! with the sort of stuff they were producing in the 80's we may all be celbrating the new luxury sports car makers as being the japanese.
But alas this did not happen and the euro brands, including Alfa still reign supreme in the sports luxury class.
1750GT
Just going slightly off topic for a second, hey OZ my brother's Integrale has the bulging flared guards, not sure re bonnet bulge, will check. It is definitely AWD, but given its an 8v I would assume (perhaps incorrectly) an Evo 1. It definitely has 4 round headlights. I do have a photo of it somewhere and can post later.
Ok, Duk I somehow doubt I can convince you of my convictions as similarly you won't convince me that the modern Alfa isn't one and that the brand doesn't exist. I do realise this is also perhaps not quite what you originally asked as a question. Perhaps this is immaterial and we each are entitled to think what we will. It is the same for anyone else who has commented, the one thing though perhaps hopefully you might accept that what constitutes a brand historically is perhaps a little different today.
I certainly wasn't trying to imply that the consumer dictates to the company what to make but at least our buying power can perhaps to a point influence this. Maybe I am nieve in my thinking re this and it is really the marketing/advertising guys who really dictate what happens.
As to my comments re Lexus and ditto per the other comments re tuning houses, I was trying to simply extrapolate a number of points re where does a brand originate from. As you would have read from my comments I too don't see them as a car brand but rather a marketing perspective only. However, some people might disagree with this view, and that is what I was trying to point out.
Now I am perfectly happy to admit I have no love for Toyotas. Personally I have never driven any of the sportish models, ie. Celica of any model, Supra or Sora, and somehow don't ever wish to. I have driven normal white good model sedans and wagons/4WDs and while perfectly competent, to me they are so insipid and uninspiring. On the other hand, and perhaps this also dates me I am aware that Toyota actually did once make a superb (albeit very limited production) sports car with a Yamaha engine.
For my money Honda has more cred as a sports car maker, and ditto Nissan/Datsun and even Mazda. One only has to think of models such as the S600/S800 Honda or the S2000, the MX5 and similarly the Datsun 1600/2000 roadster, the incomparable 240Z and 260Z, while more modern versions such as the 350/370Z and of course Skyline coupes (various models) are characteristic sports cars in their own right. Similarly Subaru's WRX has been without exception a superb performance car. But these models are not by and large the bread and butter of these brands.
So I hopefully am indicating I am not anti Japanese, and happy to give credit where it is due., but and back to the topic of Alfas, for as 1750 GT correctly notes this is an Alfa forum, in simple terms I love Alfas, be they sportscars or sedans or even wagons, and just because Fiat is the parent doesn't matter an iota to me, so long as it feels like, drives like and looks like an Alfa to me. The day they stop doing this, then I too will be sad.
Quote from: 1750GT on April 29, 2012, 05:14:09 PM
Duk rememebr this is an Alfa Romeo forum! so your always going to get some stick if you mention toyota in the same breath as Alfa Romeo. Even the guys who persist in talking about rexes and lancer evo's get some stick.
I know what you mean about Toyota (supra, soara, early celica's, sprinter etc. etc.) tunable fun cars, some well ahead of their time in terms of tunability, all wheel drive etc. but those days have gone and the LFA is just not the common mans car (a similar thing has been said about the 8C on this forum when anyone mentions it!), todays toyotas, except possibly the new FT86 are just blue rinse cars.
Alfa romeo definitely has the cred over toyota even though Alfa has from time to time produced some lemons. The japs decided long ago that they were going to produce you and me cars for the masses (with a continued obsession with four wheel drives) and whilst they have produced some great boring cars, this has meant that their cred in the sports car market has gone south. The japs unlike the euro's also decided that rather than having skin in the game in both sports cars and you and me cars they stuck to the you and me cars, and front wheel drive from the 90's.
Imagine if toyota, mitsubushi and nissan decided to take on the Euro's in the sports car market rather than become volume junkies! with the sort of stuff they were producing in the 80's we may all be celbrating the new luxury sports car makers as being the japanese.
But alas this did not happen and the euro brands, including Alfa still reign supreme in the sports luxury class.
1750GT
First thing I need to say, and I'm sure that most people will be in agreeance, is that there is the very real potential for 'the communicated message' to be misinterpreted, when shared in written form. Without being able to properly communicate tone and facial expression, the desired attempt at communication can be all sorts of things to all sorts of people.
Certainly Oz and myself have had some 'interesting' conversations on the AlfaBB.............. ;)
Next:
I'm not trying to be some sort of religious door knocker, trying to convert anyone, and the only flag I wave here is the Alfa Romeo one, but one thing that has been obvious to me over the years, is the ignorance of people who prefer their dedicated brands/make/marque of car. And this is truly a sticking point for me!
Quote from: 1750GT on April 29, 2012, 05:14:09 PMAlfa romeo definitely has the cred over toyota even though Alfa has from time to time produced some lemons. The japs decided long ago that they were going to produce you and me cars for the masses (with a continued obsession with four wheel drives) and whilst they have produced some great boring cars, this has meant that their cred in the sports car market has gone south. The japs unlike the euro's also decided that rather than having skin in the game in both sports cars and you and me cars they stuck to the you and me cars, and front wheel drive from the 90's.
1750, the above comment tells me that you really, and I mean REALLY need to go out there and enjoy some more of the world!
Some of the real drivers cars from the various Japanese manufacturers since the late 80's to the late 90's. This will be a pretty long, but brief in detail list:
Toyota:
AW11 mode MR2 (1985-1989). Mid engined car with either the very sporty NA 1.6 litre, 16 valve twin cam engine or the very similar thing with a positive displacement supercharger. Sort of built from the Corolla parts bin 'cause they share the engine and to a degree, transmission and things like wheel bearings. (Notice how this car is first and I have 1 too? How absolutely amazing :P ;) ;D)
SW20 MR2 (1990-1999). Again, a mid engined car. Using the bigger 2 litre either normally aspirated or turbo charged. These shared parts with the Celica's of the same era.
JZX90 Chaser. Front engine, rear wheel drive, twin turbo 2.5 litre 6 cylinder 4 door sedan. McPherson strut front suspension, multi-link rear suspension. Very similar to the Cressida's that were sold here, but sportier and gruntier. Same said for the (MZ and JZ70) Supra's of that era.
The JZX100 Chasers. Very similar to the above but with more development. They used a single turbo'd version of engine that now had variable valve timing.
The JZA80 Supra. Multi link suspension front and rear, that used forged aluminium control arms. Front engine, rear wheel drive. The
TOUGH AS NAILS, sequential twin turbo engine that mad oodles of torque everywhere (no, 'your(who ever is reading this)' Alfa Romeo engine does not compete with this engine! Except in music 8)). A real sports car and super tourer.
Nissan:
S13-S14-S15 model Silvia's, 180SX and what we know as the 200SX. Very similar underneath with variations in chassis as the car matured. McPherson strut front suspension and a multi-link rear suspension. Engines were either normally aspirated or turbo charged 1.8 (early) or 2 litre engines. The engine is set back(ish) in the engine bay to help with weight distribution and give a lower polar moment of inertia. The following of these cars though Japan, Australia and America is ABSOLUTELY MASSIVE!!!! I rate these cars as the best, modern incarnation of a 105 GTV ever. OK, maybe they can argue with the MX5........... ;)
R32-33-34 Skylines. Multi link front and rear suspension. Solid, rear wheel drive chassis. The only ones worth mentioning are the turbo'd GTSt variants and obviously, the GTR variants of each model. There is no need to mention the Group A era of Australian Touring Car Racing (whops ;)) The R34 GTR was the fastest production car around the Nurburgring when it was first produced.
There were also various sporting sedans available at the same time using variants of the Silvia and Skyline chassis but using either the Skyline straight 6 cylinder engines or the V6 engines.
Z32 300ZX. very similar to the R32 Skyline chassis but they used the normally aspirated and twin turbo, 3 litre V6 (quad cam, 24 valve) engine.
Honda:
The NSX! Not much more needs to be said other than when it was new, it was a beautifully engineered, all aluminium chassis with forged aluminium control arm multi-link suspension, a variable valve timing V6 engine that upset Ferrari (by churning out a better power per litre number) and Ayerton Senna helped Honda set it up!
Mazda:
FD3S (series 6-7-8) RX7. A well proportioned, front engine, rear wheel drive chassis. Forged aluminium control arm, mult-link independant suspension front and rear. The sequential twin turbo rotary engine was set behind the front axle line and the gearbox was linked to the differential via a 'ladder bar'.
Remember when Mazda took on and beat Porsche in the production car racing in the late 90's? I do!
I also remember no Alfa Romeos out there.
In the above era, there was a sort of 'gentleman's agreement' that no car manufacturer would produce any car with more than 280PS (Power Stroke, a metricated version of the horsepower) or about 208KW's and this had rather limiting effect on the performance of the bigger, heavier and potentially much more powerful cars like the Supra, the GTR and the RX7.
Think about the 3 litre Supra Turbo. 3 litre, twin cam, 24 valve (with variable valve timing in the later versions) engine that had 440Nm or torque @ 3600rpm and could have easily made 100hp/litre or 300hp. The 2 litre Evo Lancers and STi WRX's got to the 280PS mark quickly, so they were close to 140hp/litre. The Supra's 2JZGTE (Toyota's engine code) engine is
MASSIVELY strong and 140hp/litre would have been a walk in the park for it. A grand total of 420hp! 8)
Now, I've left out the AWD rally-esk style cars like the WRX and Evo Lancers and I'm the first to admit that some of those cars were pretty expensive when new, but between the late 80's, with the exception of what was left of the 75's and the late 90's, what were Alfa Romeo churning out? Nothing but front wheel drive cars! So, sorry mate, but:
Quote from: 1750GT on April 29, 2012, 05:14:09 PMthis has meant that their cred in the sports car market has gone south. The japs unlike the euro's also decided that rather than having skin in the game in both sports cars and you and me cars they stuck to the you and me cars, and front wheel drive from the 90's.
is very, very wrong.
Duk there is no need to remind me, what these forum responses don't tell you is that I am of the more mature persuasian and some of the lovely cars you mention and which i hinted at in my response I have actually driven and rallyed when a more younger guy. My son is also currently looking at preparing one for drifting purposes so I know great cars! and i wouldnt mind having a Nissan GTR or wrex or evo in my garage in amoungst my other cars. As I said great cars and some ahead of their time.
But that was the eighties and all that remains now is wrex, eveo and GTR. As I said if the japanese had continued to roll out their models and created a lineage into the 2000's for all of these lovely cars the world would be a different place in my view as to their credibility in the market place rather than (unfortunately) being mucked around with to the point where finding a decent example that hasn't been destroyed by multiple (and cheap) attemtps to wind up power and doof doof mod's is becoming very difficult and of no interest in the "classic" ownership market. For others the cars are obviously still popular. I am also a supporter of the Toyota/Subaru FT86 cars now arriving as this brings the japs finally back into the rear drive market and perhaps the hope of more to come.
I probably should have made myself clearer but in the "classic" market Alfa still remains ahead in my view and its only my view. They have built up their brand (with whatever sucess only the market can judge or is a personal opinion) on the basis of lower end and premium sports cars and that is their BRAND. The japanese have flirted and still do with sports cars mostly based off bog models (wrex off impressa, evo off lancer, GTR off skyline) but unfortunately have not followed thru on the wonderful rear drive cars of the eighties.
And I do note again given this is an Alfa forum your going to get just a bit of "blind" support for Alfa Romeo, its part of what makes us tick, otherwise we'd be on the japanese r us forum, so don't hold it against anyone who happens to support Alfa.
1750GT
Quote from: 1750GT on April 29, 2012, 09:35:02 PM
Duk there is no need to remind me, what these forum responses don't tell you is that I am of the more mature persuasian and some of the lovely cars you mention and which i hinted at in my response I have actually driven and rallyed when a more younger guy. My son is also currently looking at preparing one for drifting purposes so I know great cars! and i wouldnt mind having a Nissan GTR or wrex or evo in my garage in amoungst my other cars. As I said great cars and some ahead of their time.
And I do note again given this is an Alfa forum your going to get just a bit of "blind" support for Alfa Romeo, its part of what makes us tick, otherwise we'd be on the japanese r us forum, so don't hold it against anyone who happens to support Alfa.
1750GT
My (sort of) bad :-[. Wrong to assume, but twas my interpretation at the time, I doesth knoweth better now.
You actually sound a lot like my uncle.
Personally, I just want a well designed, well priced, rear wheel drive, drivers car. That puts my focus on older Alfa's and slightly less older Japanese cars. My appreciation grew from only believing in FIAT's and Alfa's in my younger years, to a more open minded view when I bothered to look without the blinkers on and then have some real experiences.
I love my Alfa too, but I love my MR2 just as much. Actually, because I've had more fun in it (the Alfa has been in 'project mode' for much more time than it should have been), I love my MR2 more! A shame it's getting tired and need some serious TLC (dead supercharger and generally tired engine :-[). I am really looking forward to dancing the 75 through my favorite piece of road! 8)
Thats the way Duk (although i hope your uncles a nice guy and not toooo old).
We can all rejoice in our Alfa's and I go even further back to the 1750GT, which I love to death and fall in love with again and again after driving my other cars but we can also rejoice in some lovely cars from other makers (and I won't mention the others as I might create another barrage of responses).
Like you I am also of the rear drive persuassion and I think its been said many a time on this and other forums that as Alfa fanatics it would be great for Alfa to return to their heriatage of making fine rear drive cars. its been too long since the last great real world rear driver from Alfa. i think Alfa gets it but within the fiat group (front drive platforms no rear drivers) and after comming close a couple of times (the GM patforms when fiat had an association with GM, rear drive platforms from independants etc. etc.) Alfa just hasn't been able to come back into this market.
The Alfa 75, one of the most underated cars but a nice piece of equipment, hopefully you can get it going soon. I've never owned one but have driven them and mates of mine have owned 75's. I still can't decide which of the two engines - the 2lt (less power but lighter engine up front - really good steer) or the six (heavier shove up front but what lovely shove it is) - are the better package; although i see your super-charging yours? sounds neat.
The MR2, saw an MR2 last time I was at Winton and it was a bit of a weapon, light and nice mid mount poise (many call it the "mini fazza"). What sort of power are you getting out of the screw and the blower?
1750GT