RE: Abarth 124 Spider: UK Review
Discussion
Asking "why Fiat doesn't leave the sportier versions to Mazda" is like asking why VW would make a Golf GTI when there's already a Focus ST....
Having said that, I'd definatly pick any 124, Abarth or Fiat, over the latest MX-5 which I rate as the ugliest yet.
I just wished they had bigger budget to be able to fix the package and so the front overhang. And a new interior.
I suppose the cash was spent on the Alfa Spider they had to cancel.
Having said that, I'd definatly pick any 124, Abarth or Fiat, over the latest MX-5 which I rate as the ugliest yet.
I just wished they had bigger budget to be able to fix the package and so the front overhang. And a new interior.
I suppose the cash was spent on the Alfa Spider they had to cancel.
Edited by Pereldh on Friday 9th June 15:28
RBH58 said:
george123 said:
Good call by Alfa not to go ahead with this as the new Spider as originally intended. Would have been a disaster along side the great reviews for the Guilia, Stelvio and 4C... reading between the lines on the last one ...
Actually, the 4C isn't that good.george123 said:
Why not ?
Unassisted steering should be good but it isn't. The steering wheel itself is horrible. The car tramlines horribly. The front/rear grip balance feels wrong. The brakes are brilliantly powerful but inert for feel, The gearbox is,...well...it's a DCT. The engine doesn't feel special. I've spent hours behind the wheel of 3 different 4Cs and I just can't gel with it. And I was crushed that I didn't like it. I wanted one. simonrockman said:
I drove the 124 Abarth and the MX-5 RF back to back at Milbrook. The Abarth is a better car, it was the best drive I had in a day when I took 20 cars around the course, and the only one where I got the back out.
But it's not that much better than the Mazda, indeed the whole thing is one of diminishing returns, a 131bhp MX-5 is so much fun, paying an extra £4k for a 160bhp one is dubious, paying an extra £12k over the basic MX-5 for the Abarth isn't something you can defend.
Simon
You weren't trying hard enoughBut it's not that much better than the Mazda, indeed the whole thing is one of diminishing returns, a 131bhp MX-5 is so much fun, paying an extra £4k for a 160bhp one is dubious, paying an extra £12k over the basic MX-5 for the Abarth isn't something you can defend.
Simon
The car only weighs one tonne for heaven's sake - a remarkable achievement for a 'mainstream' sports car in this day and age. So this lightness probably contributes to the tad of scuttle shake found on British roads - most convertibles seem to be similarly afflicted.
185 lbs of torque at about 2,500 rpm from a turbine smooth unit is great for everyday driving all wrapped in a cool, well built car with a luxurious interior.
Unnecessarily downbeat review IMO, others really like it and I can see why.
Hasn't this piece been edited anyway - I could have sworn when I flicked through it a while back, it said something like 'it's been set up by someone who knows what they're doing' or similar.
185 lbs of torque at about 2,500 rpm from a turbine smooth unit is great for everyday driving all wrapped in a cool, well built car with a luxurious interior.
Unnecessarily downbeat review IMO, others really like it and I can see why.
Hasn't this piece been edited anyway - I could have sworn when I flicked through it a while back, it said something like 'it's been set up by someone who knows what they're doing' or similar.
A couple of salient points.
If you pay £30k your mad, there are lots about with ex demo mileage for £25k ish
How can you compare a new car with a modified one, and everyone is doing it, and yet on any other thread it would be poo poo'd but yet its covered in the test article here!
Pointless.
If you pay £30k your mad, there are lots about with ex demo mileage for £25k ish
How can you compare a new car with a modified one, and everyone is doing it, and yet on any other thread it would be poo poo'd but yet its covered in the test article here!
Pointless.
Oddball RS said:
How can you compare a new car with a modified one, and everyone is doing it, and yet on any other thread it would be poo poo'd but yet its covered in the test article here!
If it's comparing new with new, and you get can get a warranty on the modification then I think it's a fair comparison, The 124 could be viewed as a heavily modified MX-5!fido said:
Oddball RS said:
How can you compare a new car with a modified one, and everyone is doing it, and yet on any other thread it would be poo poo'd but yet its covered in the test article here!
If it's comparing new with new, and you get can get a warranty on the modification then I think it's a fair comparison, The 124 could be viewed as a heavily modified MX-5!Oddball RS said:
Really? that's how you view the 124? to support your argument of used vs new, which has NEVER really had any traction, its a view point yes even if I agree, but hardly valid on a new car thread is it?
I meant a new car with new modifications - a company (e.g. Alpina) takes a new car (e.g. BMW) and tweaks it. Agree, comparing used with new doesn't hold traction - not mention running costs and reliability (IMS .. cough) etc.Edited by fido on Tuesday 13th June 09:56
What a strange review! The only other one I've seen like this was the Top Gear TV one where they drove the US-spec one which is different to the UK/EU spec that people like Richard Hammond have raved about.
I test drove one at Silverstone and bought it, getting rid of my RX-8 R3 to do so. We also had a 2014 MX5 2.0 roadster we'd taken to Switzerland and had decided we wanted more drama. The new MX5 drove better, but to me looked a bit pants. We thought about the RF but reviews have said it's very buffetty at motorway speeds.
One track test was enough for me to place an order and I picked mine up in September. I love driving it: I'm 6' and 14st and fit in it just fine. It's a hoot to drive and very antisocial but has better looks than the MX5 to back it up. Wider wheels would have been nice for aesthetics.
The four pipes are required for the design of the Monza exhaust with two going through the silencer and two that don't...
Boot space is surprisingly good.
Noise and buffeting are absolutely fine at motorways speeds and I am happy enough with the roof down at 100, a speed it gets to very easily. And yes, it's easy and relatively inexpensive to get it to 200bhp with a new box if you want to.
I absolutely love mine!
I test drove one at Silverstone and bought it, getting rid of my RX-8 R3 to do so. We also had a 2014 MX5 2.0 roadster we'd taken to Switzerland and had decided we wanted more drama. The new MX5 drove better, but to me looked a bit pants. We thought about the RF but reviews have said it's very buffetty at motorway speeds.
One track test was enough for me to place an order and I picked mine up in September. I love driving it: I'm 6' and 14st and fit in it just fine. It's a hoot to drive and very antisocial but has better looks than the MX5 to back it up. Wider wheels would have been nice for aesthetics.
The four pipes are required for the design of the Monza exhaust with two going through the silencer and two that don't...
Boot space is surprisingly good.
Noise and buffeting are absolutely fine at motorways speeds and I am happy enough with the roof down at 100, a speed it gets to very easily. And yes, it's easy and relatively inexpensive to get it to 200bhp with a new box if you want to.
I absolutely love mine!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff