RE: Alfa 4C Spider - Detroit 2015
Discussion
Malachimon said:
Now THIS is what proper alfa should be. It puts me in mind of my smart Roadstrr somewhat
When I had my smart roadster I thought if only they made something with a bit more power, faster gearbox and maybe some carbon use rather than plastic, still being lightweight, possibly one more pot in the engine. Alfa pretty much answered what I wanted.
Cannot justify getting one yet though.
otolith said:
Alfa's future, like pretty much everything else below the level of exotics - is turbocharged four pots. I don't like it, but it's the truth. The 4C is meant to be forward looking. A V6, sadly, would be looking backwards.
Shame Alfa didn't have the balls to go the whole hog and make it electric. 
365daytonafan said:
andyps said:
Looks like they have put the nicer lights in it - will they also be used in the closed version?
US versions of the 4C always had those headlights. Hopefully they will be on the UK cars going forward though.W124 said:
I had a very brief go in one of the coupes last year. I utterly loved it. Splendid cars. Damn thing actually cut through the jaded cynicsm I carry with me and made me feel alive, made me smile.
This /\ is probably why I would seriously consider buying one. Everyone is different and will have their priorities. Despite wanting to like Lotus, I could not bring myself to buy one in the end because, well, its a kit car-manufactured. The Cayman is definitely tempting too, but if I am to drive a sports car swiftly, I want to feel alive and have a smile on my face. The old GTV did it as does the Integrale, and having read the numerous reviews of the 4C, I am confident that would too.Oh, and albeit subjective, I think the 4C looks so much more attractive than either an EliseExige or a Cayman. This counts too.
otolith said:
Cool - how much cheaper are they in kit form?
Ha! :-) Essentially, the vehicle gives the impression it was manufactured in some small shed. This is the problem with the brand IMO. Neither the style (which is 15 years old) nor the quality of the materials used (not to mention the lack of equipment) justifies £43-53k. Combine this with an engine from Toyota, well, you may get my gist. It just doesn't cut it for me. IMO Lotus needs an Esprit with its own homegrown/heavily modified engine, but hey, this is another discussion well trodden. kambites said:
I suppose that's a fair point. The Lotus is a car you buy to drive, not to look at or to cuddle. The Alfa may not drive as well as the Lotus but it does the cuddly thing better.
Its not so much to do with cuddling, more an admiration of and respect for engineering and design flair, which are equally important for a lot of people, hence Lotus' laborious and arguably failed attempts to climb out of the ditch. Yeah, I agree. Lotus have been labouring under the misapprehension for years that they can sell cars purely on how they drive. Alfa appear to have avoided falling into the same trap, which is a shame if you like really driver focussed cars but probably a good thing if you like Alfa. 
In some ways the car that the 4C reminds me of most is the MINI and that's certainly done pretty well for BMW. I've always been rather baffled by the love for that one, too.
I rahter disagree about the engineering integrity point though. Both companies have put an enormous amount of effort into engineering the cars, it's just that Lotus have put it into the suspension and controls whereas Alfa have more put it into the bits you can see and feel. For me, the former is much more important but again, I fully understand that for most buyers the latter is what matters most.
In some ways the car that the 4C reminds me of most is the MINI and that's certainly done pretty well for BMW. I've always been rather baffled by the love for that one, too.
I rahter disagree about the engineering integrity point though. Both companies have put an enormous amount of effort into engineering the cars, it's just that Lotus have put it into the suspension and controls whereas Alfa have more put it into the bits you can see and feel. For me, the former is much more important but again, I fully understand that for most buyers the latter is what matters most.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 13th January 14:55
chelme said:
Ha! :-) Essentially, the vehicle gives the impression it was manufactured in some small shed. This is the problem with the brand IMO. Neither the style (which is 15 years old) nor the quality of the materials used (not to mention the lack of equipment) justifies £43-53k. Combine this with an engine from Toyota, well, you may get my gist. It just doesn't cut it for me. IMO Lotus needs an Esprit with its own homegrown/heavily modified engine, but hey, this is another discussion well trodden.
I think ultimately you pays yer money and takes yer choice. For a low volume manufacturer, a tried and tested engine from a mass market manufacturer makes a lot of sense. Even with Porsche volumes there is a history of chocolate engines, and TVR's excursion into engine manufacture was not entirely successful. I'd rather the money was spent elsewhere, really. The interior materials are functional if not pretty. It's not something that really bothers me, being ultimately very superficial, but it does seem to be something Lotus could win sales by changing. The construction materials I'm fine with - I'd rather have the 4C's fibreglass body on carbon tub construction than the Lotus's fibreglass on aluminium, and I'd rather either to a steel monocoque, but it wouldn't be a major factor in choosing.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff