When did Alfa Romeo die?
Discussion
robemcdonald said:
So just to be sure is a lotus Elise a lotus?
Norwegian chassis, Japanese running gear, Swedish suspension, etc...
The people in Hethel, raised and educated in the ways of Chapman, engineered several different parts and made a Lotus. With all the features typical of a Lotus. It then got fine tuned by them and is assembled by them. Therefore it is a Lotus even although it is an assembly of non-Lotus parts.Norwegian chassis, Japanese running gear, Swedish suspension, etc...
Imagine Lotus is bought by a bank. Hethel is closed, all employees are fired. None of the feel, methods or tribal knowledge retained. Fresh new and cheaper engineers are hired and now the cars are designed and built in Aberdeen. Budgets are cut so no more choice parts. The bank also owns Suzuki, so from now only Suzuki parts and chassis. Only hatchback models allowed. No performance versions and no racing.
That's what happened to Alfa. There is no Alfa left. All that is there now are other companies that need to try put the Alfa feel back into the cars. They managed it with the 4C and I hope they will with new models but the signs are not good : the company that owns the mark is still run by the same morons that mismanaged it into destruction in the first place.
trashbat said:
hat I mean is it's all in your head. You admit you like the product but complain about what, the name on the door? So they can be turning out competent product, used only in Alfas, and you still won't be happy because it's part of a group.
Honestly, what would you have them do or what would you prefer? A different group or what? Independence means bankruptcy.
And the Dart and 200 use a different version than the Giulietta, being wider. The C-Evo platform does share two flat panels in the entire floorpan with the Bravo, shown here in green...Honestly, what would you have them do or what would you prefer? A different group or what? Independence means bankruptcy.
robemcdonald said:
We're actually in agreement (sort of).
I really don't understand why alfas are such a topic of conversation on here. Especially by people who have never owned one and have no intention of doing so.
I the last week alone someone has claimed that Jeremy clarkson is the only reason they are still in business, and that Alfa are best known for their large capacity engines.
It seems like its a marque that everyone has an opinion about whether they know anything about it or not.
As a serial Alfa owner I sometimes get wound up about the ignorance and sometimes so much so I post a reply and frequently regret doing so.
It's a strange thing being passionate about a car brand. I've owned a fair variety of cars over the years (never of practically high value mind you) and in the few times I haven't had an Alfa in the garage I've always felt like something's missing.
The closest thing I can compare it with is music. In as much as you can love a band all your mates hate. The more they give you a hard time. The more stubbornly loyal you are. Then as time moves on the quality of the music dips, but you keep buying the albums until you realise you'd rather listen to the first two or three records than any of the new material.
Alfa are a bit like that. 4c accepted they haven't produced a car I would be interested in for 10 years or so, including the 8c.
I think we are as well I really don't understand why alfas are such a topic of conversation on here. Especially by people who have never owned one and have no intention of doing so.
I the last week alone someone has claimed that Jeremy clarkson is the only reason they are still in business, and that Alfa are best known for their large capacity engines.
It seems like its a marque that everyone has an opinion about whether they know anything about it or not.
As a serial Alfa owner I sometimes get wound up about the ignorance and sometimes so much so I post a reply and frequently regret doing so.
It's a strange thing being passionate about a car brand. I've owned a fair variety of cars over the years (never of practically high value mind you) and in the few times I haven't had an Alfa in the garage I've always felt like something's missing.
The closest thing I can compare it with is music. In as much as you can love a band all your mates hate. The more they give you a hard time. The more stubbornly loyal you are. Then as time moves on the quality of the music dips, but you keep buying the albums until you realise you'd rather listen to the first two or three records than any of the new material.
Alfa are a bit like that. 4c accepted they haven't produced a car I would be interested in for 10 years or so, including the 8c.
I haven't owned an Alfa, I'm a young un, so haven't had much time to accumulate a big history of cars, yet!
I wanted my first car to be a 147, I read that they were a sporty alternative to the usual hatchbacks, with a nice engine and looked far sexier than other hatchbacks. I didn't have the funds for a good one, and needed the cash for uni fees, so in the end I just stuck with the family hack until I got my MR2.
However despite my age, I have a rather big passion for older Alfa Romeos, pre war and post, I have a rather big crush on all things Autodelta. I spend alot of time reading up on that era. And I feel I 'know' Alfa Romeo and can have an opinion on them, albeit a more 'academic one' (although if you find any PH members with a Tipo 33 stradale, 6c Gransport or TZ2 I'd like to ask them for a ride...) I don't think Alfas are about a Clarksonesque 'character', they are about brilliant handling, lightness, feel and performance. That is what made the great Alfas great and put them in the cannon of amazing cars. Alfas didn't win Le mans, Formula 1, World touring car and Sports car championships with character. They one it with amazing engineering and attention to detail. Alfas were amazing cars, their bhp/litre was always astonishing, as were their chassis and innovations.
That is why the 4c is very Alfa. Yes it's had an uneasy start, but its a brilliant sign that someone at FIAT knows what Alfas should be. Light and sports focussed.
P.S post some pics of your Sud in the 'Great Italian car thread' they would be very welcome!
errek72 said:
...That's what happened to Alfa. There is no Alfa left. All that is there now are other companies that need to try put the Alfa feel back into the cars. They managed it with the 4C and I hope they will with new models but the signs are not good : the company that owns the mark is still run by the same morons that mismanaged it into destruction in the first place.
I agree entirely. Although surely the 4c shows a sign that the same morons have got their act together (or someone has had influence that they didn't have before)?
Fantuzzi said:
I agree entirely.
Although surely the 4c shows a sign that the same morons have got their act together (or someone has had influence that they didn't have before)?
The 4C by all accounts seems to have been engineered by Dallara (not unlike an Italian Lotus if you think about it), styled by the office in Turin by an ex-pininfarina team and possibly honed by people from Ferrari, then assembled by Maserati.Although surely the 4c shows a sign that the same morons have got their act together (or someone has had influence that they didn't have before)?
All in all some of the most notable Alfa's were designed and built by semi-outside racing/engineering firms (Scuderia Ferrari and Autodelta come to mind) and styled by one of the notable styling houses. So it is as close to the old recipe as possible today after Fiat having destroyed all other roots.
The car seems meant as a relatively cheap halo car project that avoids getting into the Ferrari firing range. If it were to be a big seller other materials, pricing and maybe layout would have been chosen I would think.
So the question now is : is it a base for a resurgence where Alfa starts making light-weight kick-ass carbon tub cars with Ferrari-for-the masses engines and gorgeous styling - or is it another cynical attempt by the Marchionne gang to charge BMW money for rebodied Fiats or Chryslers.
Thinking about what they did to Lancia and in particular how they rebadged the 300C into a Thema, the scale tips firmly towards the cynical.
During the discussion I re-read the 2010 press pack and lo and behold what was promised 4 years ago was ... a range of 8 new cars. Sounds familiar? Meanwhile sales are dipping under those of the seventies. Even if there will be new cars and they will be kick-ass, perhaps it is already too late anyway.
errek72 said:
Fantuzzi said:
I agree entirely.
Although surely the 4c shows a sign that the same morons have got their act together (or someone has had influence that they didn't have before)?
The 4C by all accounts seems to have been engineered by Dallara (not unlike an Italian Lotus if you think about it), styled by the office in Turin by an ex-pininfarina team and possibly honed by people from Ferrari, then assembled by Maserati.Although surely the 4c shows a sign that the same morons have got their act together (or someone has had influence that they didn't have before)?
All in all some of the most notable Alfa's were designed and built by semi-outside racing/engineering firms (Scuderia Ferrari and Autodelta come to mind) and styled by one of the notable styling houses. So it is as close to the old recipe as possible today after Fiat having destroyed all other roots.
I've often hoped that Lancia and Alfa would be sold off in a time of financial strain, bought by some wealthy enthusiast. Even if the line up was small and the cars in low volume, and even if the prices were high at least we might get Alfas and Lancias made with some passion and enthusiasm they deserve, rather than continuing to tarnish their reputations.
I hope the new Giulia models will be kick ass as you put it, I think petrolheads have been owed a great mainstream Alfa Romeo for sometime now, people wanted to love the 159 but it didn't cut it with the top rivals, hopefully given FIATs attack with Maserati on the German rivals some of that fire has gone into the Alfa range.
Fantuzzi said:
That's a very good point, although I'm not sure if Scuderia Ferrari designed and built Alfas, I always thought they just used Alfa's customer cars?
I've often hoped that Lancia and Alfa would be sold off in a time of financial strain, bought by some wealthy enthusiast. Even if the line up was small and the cars in low volume, and even if the prices were high at least we might get Alfas and Lancias made with some passion and enthusiasm they deserve, rather than continuing to tarnish their reputations.
I hope the new Giulia models will be kick ass as you put it, I think petrolheads have been owed a great mainstream Alfa Romeo for sometime now, people wanted to love the 159 but it didn't cut it with the top rivals, hopefully given FIATs attack with Maserati on the German rivals some of that fire has gone into the Alfa range.
I believe the Scuderia started out with re-building Alfa racers to their own specifications, which evolved to their own constructions under Alfa name, such as the 1935 Bimotore. At least that's my take on it.I've often hoped that Lancia and Alfa would be sold off in a time of financial strain, bought by some wealthy enthusiast. Even if the line up was small and the cars in low volume, and even if the prices were high at least we might get Alfas and Lancias made with some passion and enthusiasm they deserve, rather than continuing to tarnish their reputations.
I hope the new Giulia models will be kick ass as you put it, I think petrolheads have been owed a great mainstream Alfa Romeo for sometime now, people wanted to love the 159 but it didn't cut it with the top rivals, hopefully given FIATs attack with Maserati on the German rivals some of that fire has gone into the Alfa range.
With Maserati, if I was in the market for a berlina of that range, I would not think twice and choose one over a German competitor. Even although it may be a Chrysler derivative the sound of that engine alone would seal the deal.
From marketing perspective however I am not seeing them outperform the German competition. There is no flagship version of each model line that puts the hammer down. This reminds me of the 159. Looking at contemporary test in German car mags, I do not think much was wrong with it other than it should have had rwd and should have had more power than competitors.
I am not seeing the resolve that we do see with Ferrari. There the Italians refuse to take second place. Why not with the other brands?
Does this matter? If Mercedes, BMW and Audi are throwing money at a halo top model each of their frequent model changes, you can bet the farm it does. They are not shovelling that cash to develop ludicrously high powered engines for the hell of it. They may sell less than one percent of total sales but they are the reason so many of the lowly versions are being sold. People want to buy the dream.
I agree with your last post if applied to Alfa, but I don't quite get what you want from Maserati. You seem to want a niche manufacturer to produce a niche of a niche. Where does a super-hot Maserati fit into the market or its brand values (ick)? Why not just get the main product right? (PS: the Chrysler dig is another unfair one, IMO)
Comparison wise, the Ghibli isn't a halo car as such, but seems to compare reasonably well on paper with rivals like the M5. I don't know quite what you can compare the GT or QP to. Again, what do they even do with a halo flagship?
Part of the reason the brands don't extend further is the group politics - historically it seems to have been important that there was no Alfa that was faster or more expensive than the cheapest Maserati. Likewise Maserati impinging on Ferrari territory. Some of that makes sense - it's product placement and brand values - but some of it seems unnecessary and self-defeatist. It seems to have reduced, or at least the gaps are closer together, but I don't think it'll ever go away.
You hint that BMW sell the 316d or whatever because of the M3. Well, maybe, but the M3 wouldn't exist without the 316d, at least anywhere outside of a one-man shed on the edge of bankruptcy. When volume manufacturing cars, you have to prop up the interesting bit with a whole load of boring. FCA might have boring but until recently, not enough of it to prop up making fast or large or expensive cars (or variants thereof). Unless you retreat to dangerously low volumes, 4C style, unfortunately petrolheads and people who like Alfas aren't a proper market, and you need to cater first and foremost to the rest of the people that'll buy the cars.
That leaves you with the chicken & egg problem; if you make boring, incompetent cars at the low end then you still don't have a platform to operate from at the high end, not least because no-one buys them, but if you're not operating at all at the high end, it's hard to liven up a boring car. As one example, BMW seem to have this right - even their cheapest cars are dynamically good.
Comparison wise, the Ghibli isn't a halo car as such, but seems to compare reasonably well on paper with rivals like the M5. I don't know quite what you can compare the GT or QP to. Again, what do they even do with a halo flagship?
Part of the reason the brands don't extend further is the group politics - historically it seems to have been important that there was no Alfa that was faster or more expensive than the cheapest Maserati. Likewise Maserati impinging on Ferrari territory. Some of that makes sense - it's product placement and brand values - but some of it seems unnecessary and self-defeatist. It seems to have reduced, or at least the gaps are closer together, but I don't think it'll ever go away.
You hint that BMW sell the 316d or whatever because of the M3. Well, maybe, but the M3 wouldn't exist without the 316d, at least anywhere outside of a one-man shed on the edge of bankruptcy. When volume manufacturing cars, you have to prop up the interesting bit with a whole load of boring. FCA might have boring but until recently, not enough of it to prop up making fast or large or expensive cars (or variants thereof). Unless you retreat to dangerously low volumes, 4C style, unfortunately petrolheads and people who like Alfas aren't a proper market, and you need to cater first and foremost to the rest of the people that'll buy the cars.
That leaves you with the chicken & egg problem; if you make boring, incompetent cars at the low end then you still don't have a platform to operate from at the high end, not least because no-one buys them, but if you're not operating at all at the high end, it's hard to liven up a boring car. As one example, BMW seem to have this right - even their cheapest cars are dynamically good.
That's probably true, although he doesn't need to say very much when they make a load of money to start with. That affords them plenty of autonomy and product development niceties as a result.
Maserati are emerging from being a bit of a basket case to almost being a serious volume manufacturer. In fact they might even start to dictate the fortunes of the European operation. I suppose that the stuff you're looking for mostly comes later, once the volume is established and we know what it's capable of.
I especially agree that the group is out in the wilderness when it comes to PR. No apparent racing involvement anywhere for instance (Alfa's meaningless sponsorship of SBK excluded) and very little active marketing.
However in terms of actual business, I certainly think the Maser plan is a bellwether for Alfa's future, and so far it's a positive one.
Maserati are emerging from being a bit of a basket case to almost being a serious volume manufacturer. In fact they might even start to dictate the fortunes of the European operation. I suppose that the stuff you're looking for mostly comes later, once the volume is established and we know what it's capable of.
I especially agree that the group is out in the wilderness when it comes to PR. No apparent racing involvement anywhere for instance (Alfa's meaningless sponsorship of SBK excluded) and very little active marketing.
However in terms of actual business, I certainly think the Maser plan is a bellwether for Alfa's future, and so far it's a positive one.
errek72 said:
I don't disagree. I just wonder why Ferrari can do all that, running an entire F1 team on top of it, and the rest of the same company is out in the wilderness.
The answer is likely : management. Ferrari is the one brand Marchionne has nothing to say over.
They do sell an awful lot of hats, jackets and keyrings though.The answer is likely : management. Ferrari is the one brand Marchionne has nothing to say over.
Platform sharing has been around for ages and, as has been pointed out, not sourcing parts elsewhere sometimes will likely mean your marque dies. I couldn't give a t*ss if Alfa uses all VW and FIAT parts, as long as it looks like an Alfa, drives like and Alfa and FEELS like an Alfa. Now, have to admit, the most recent range I have driven is the original 147/156, but I thought they were really great. I think the Mito and Giulietta look really nice, but can't comment about the drive. Some say disappointing, but others seem to disagree.
I grew up in Alfas, Suds, sprints, Berties, Giulias, Alfettas etc. so I love them. I still think the 105 Berties are one of the most beautiful cars ever designed.
My last Alfa was 147 Selespeed (yes, I owned a Selespeed and I've admitted it!) and I loved it passionately. I miss it awfully. Would be interested to see how the Mito and Giulietta compare.
I grew up in Alfas, Suds, sprints, Berties, Giulias, Alfettas etc. so I love them. I still think the 105 Berties are one of the most beautiful cars ever designed.
My last Alfa was 147 Selespeed (yes, I owned a Selespeed and I've admitted it!) and I loved it passionately. I miss it awfully. Would be interested to see how the Mito and Giulietta compare.
Gassing Station | Alfa Romeo, Fiat & Lancia | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff