RE: Alfa Romeo SZ: Spotted
Discussion
jamies30 said:
s m said:
Certainly was a grippy thing for its time even though a new GT86 generates the same lateral g on the skid pan now.
Testament to how far tyre performance has come on in the last three decades, as much as anything.Yeah I would be driving this looking at all the people in dull Audis, thinking I wish I had an A4 TDI.
Jeepers have you really just compared this to an Audi A4 TDI, or any modern car, owning this Alfa is about the experience of the car, not keeping up with Mr Dull?
Its like comparing an 8v integrale to a Fiesta ST, oh wait a minute we've had that too.
Do you know more people in the UK applied to go on Love Island, than did to go to Oxford and Cambridge Uni's combined, I think that explains a lot.
Not really, my point is I had always thought these has performance that was decent for its historic age. 5.5 to 60 and so on.
24 years on, it's no quicker than a rep special saloon, and wouldn't see which way a warm-hatch went.
Jeepers have you really just compared this to an Audi A4 TDI, or any modern car, owning this Alfa is about the experience of the car, not keeping up with Mr Dull?
Its like comparing an 8v integrale to a Fiesta ST, oh wait a minute we've had that too.
Do you know more people in the UK applied to go on Love Island, than did to go to Oxford and Cambridge Uni's combined, I think that explains a lot.
Helicopter123 said:
Mr2Mike said:
Helicopter123 said:
Always loved these but had forgotten how slow they were.
That's A4 diesel slow.
New car as fast as 24 year old car shocker! If there were academic qualifications in missing the point, that would be doctorate level at least.That's A4 diesel slow.
24 years on, it's no quicker than a rep special saloon, and wouldn't see which way a warm-hatch went.
sledge68 said:
Yeah I would be driving this looking at all the people in dull Audis, thinking I wish I had an A4 TDI.
Jeepers have you really just compared this to an Audi A4 TDI, or any modern car, owning this Alfa is about the experience of the car, not keeping up with Mr Dull?
Its like comparing an 8v integrale to a Fiesta ST, oh wait a minute we've had that too.
Do you know more people in the UK applied to go on Love Island, than did to go to Oxford and Cambridge Uni's combined, I think that explains a lot.
Not really, my point is I had always thought these has performance that was decent for its historic age. 5.5 to 60 and so on.
24 years on, it's no quicker than a rep special saloon, and wouldn't see which way a warm-hatch went.
I, nor anyone else, is making a case for a repmobile over this.Jeepers have you really just compared this to an Audi A4 TDI, or any modern car, owning this Alfa is about the experience of the car, not keeping up with Mr Dull?
Its like comparing an 8v integrale to a Fiesta ST, oh wait a minute we've had that too.
Do you know more people in the UK applied to go on Love Island, than did to go to Oxford and Cambridge Uni's combined, I think that explains a lot.
Helicopter123 said:
Mr2Mike said:
Helicopter123 said:
Always loved these but had forgotten how slow they were.
That's A4 diesel slow.
New car as fast as 24 year old car shocker! If there were academic qualifications in missing the point, that would be doctorate level at least.That's A4 diesel slow.
24 years on, it's no quicker than a rep special saloon, and wouldn't see which way a warm-hatch went.
The point is it was quite slow in it's day, never mind 2018.
Helicopter123 said:
The point is it was quite slow in it's day, never mind 2018.
David Vivian, a reasonably well-respected journalist who has driven one, said "it was pretty quick ... and made all the right noises too. Plus it went round corners like there was no tomorrow. I remember ... having an absolute riot behind the wheel. Up to that point, I'd never driven a car that attacked twisting roads with so much passion and so little roll"We need to stop fixating on the 0-60 time, there's honestly a lot more to cars than that. But if you define "quite slow" purely by that simplistic measure then I'd totally agree that the SZ isn't your best bet.
jamies30 said:
Helicopter123 said:
The point is it was quite slow in it's day, never mind 2018.
David Vivian, a reasonably well-respected journalist who has driven one, said "it was pretty quick ... and made all the right noises too. Plus it went round corners like there was no tomorrow. I remember ... having an absolute riot behind the wheel. Up to that point, I'd never driven a car that attacked twisting roads with so much passion and so little roll"We need to stop fixating on the 0-60 time, there's honestly a lot more to cars than that. But if you define "quite slow" purely by that simplistic measure then I'd totally agree that the SZ isn't your best bet.
I dare say they could have compromised 10mph top end to improve low-down acceleration ...... But according to the Performance Car test write up it didn't seem to have too much trouble holding station with the similar weight E30 M3 Sport Evo on the move despite giving away 30 bhp and was a smidge quicker than the Merc EVO2 to 60 with 235bhp ( according to makers' figures )
I had a couple of these back in the day. Amazing handling, not much grunt, scary brakes and lights so bad I refused to take it out at night.
I'm quite surprised how modest values have remained, but I do remember one for sale for 110 grand in the back of the Sunday Times when it must've first come out during the previous car bubble.
Running one today must be a little scary in terms of parts. I'd want more power too. A good memory though.
I'm quite surprised how modest values have remained, but I do remember one for sale for 110 grand in the back of the Sunday Times when it must've first come out during the previous car bubble.
Running one today must be a little scary in terms of parts. I'd want more power too. A good memory though.
Gameface said:
I'm sure I saw one with 17 or 18 inch wheels once. They'd taken the standard wheels and somehow made the spilt rim bigger while keeping the original centres. It was also supercharged IIRC.
Was a lovely thing.
There's a few places that do similarWas a lovely thing.
http://www.imagewheels.co.uk/billet-41-alloy-wheel...
s m said:
Just for interest what else could you get in 1990 with similar weight and power that did this kind of acceleration with a 153mph top end? Was it really that far out of touch?
With all the comments on here I was beginning to doubt myself.Sierra Saphire RS Cosworth - 5.8 to 60
944 Turbo - 5.5
Mazda RX7 - 5.1
E36 M3 - 5.4
A610 Turbo - 5.4
Vauxhall Calibra Turbo - 6.2
Corrado VR6 - 6.2
These all went on sale 1988 - 1992.
I've not got top speed or prices but you can see in acceleration terms, it was well off the pace when launched.
I still think the SZ is a lovely car, but it was never really that quick.
Helicopter123 said:
s m said:
Just for interest what else could you get in 1990 with similar weight and power that did this kind of acceleration with a 153mph top end? Was it really that far out of touch?
With all the comments on here I was beginning to doubt myself.Sierra Saphire RS Cosworth - 5.8 to 60
944 Turbo - 5.5
Mazda RX7 - 5.1
E36 M3 - 5.4
A610 Turbo - 5.4
Vauxhall Calibra Turbo - 6.2
Corrado VR6 - 6.2
These all went on sale 1988 - 1992.
I've not got top speed or prices but you can see in acceleration terms, it was well off the pace when launched.
I still think the SZ is a lovely car, but it was never really that quick.
For naturally aspirated cars, I think the contemporary 944S2 is a good close match on top speed, as is the VR6 Corrado that came along a couple of years after, and are both half a second quicker or so to 60 than the SZ claims.
However, the similar weight 220bhp E30 M3 Evolution tested at 6.6 to 60 and the 235bhp Merc 190 Evolution 2 Batmobile was also factory claimed at 6.9
Plus, the RX7 Turbo (944 shape) with 200bhp that was current at time of SZ launch was also similar performance to the SZ claims. ( 6.7 for the 60 sprint )
Shame really that the SZ wasn't put through the Autocar test routine when it came out to see if it was off the pace or not. Either way it did seem to offer Ferrari Mondial QV urge/early Boxster 2.5 pace
Would have made a great twin test at a track type article with something like the 944S2 that was lauded for its handling ......particularly as Performance Car reckoned it could easily hang onto the more powerful E30 M3 Evo Sport on track
Whether it's exotic looks suggested it should have had more than 210bhp is a good point though, would 140 top speed have sufficed with lower down gains......a 3.5 V6 or supercharger would certainly exercise the handling!
s m said:
Helicopter123 said:
s m said:
Just for interest what else could you get in 1990 with similar weight and power that did this kind of acceleration with a 153mph top end? Was it really that far out of touch?
With all the comments on here I was beginning to doubt myself.Sierra Saphire RS Cosworth - 5.8 to 60
944 Turbo - 5.5
Mazda RX7 - 5.1
E36 M3 - 5.4
A610 Turbo - 5.4
Vauxhall Calibra Turbo - 6.2
Corrado VR6 - 6.2
These all went on sale 1988 - 1992.
I've not got top speed or prices but you can see in acceleration terms, it was well off the pace when launched.
I still think the SZ is a lovely car, but it was never really that quick.
For naturally aspirated cars, I think the contemporary 944S2 is a good close match on top speed, as is the VR6 Corrado that came along a couple of years after, and are both half a second quicker or so to 60 than the SZ claims.
However, the similar weight 220bhp E30 M3 Evolution tested at 6.6 to 60 and the 235bhp Merc 190 Evolution 2 Batmobile was also factory claimed at 6.9
Plus, the RX7 Turbo (944 shape) with 200bhp that was current at time of SZ launch was also similar performance to the SZ claims. ( 6.7 for the 60 sprint )
Shame really that the SZ wasn't put through the Autocar test routine when it came out to see if it was off the pace or not. Either way it did seem to offer Ferrari Mondial QV urge/early Boxster 2.5 pace
Would have made a great twin test at a track type article with something like the 944S2 that was lauded for its handling ......particularly as Performance Car reckoned it could easily hang onto the more powerful E30 M3 Evo Sport on track
Whether it's exotic looks suggested it should have had more than 210bhp is a good point though, would 140 top speed have sufficed with lower down gains......a 3.5 V6 or supercharger would certainly exercise the handling!
Pommy said:
s m said:
Helicopter123 said:
s m said:
Just for interest what else could you get in 1990 with similar weight and power that did this kind of acceleration with a 153mph top end? Was it really that far out of touch?
With all the comments on here I was beginning to doubt myself.Sierra Saphire RS Cosworth - 5.8 to 60
944 Turbo - 5.5
Mazda RX7 - 5.1
E36 M3 - 5.4
A610 Turbo - 5.4
Vauxhall Calibra Turbo - 6.2
Corrado VR6 - 6.2
These all went on sale 1988 - 1992.
I've not got top speed or prices but you can see in acceleration terms, it was well off the pace when launched.
I still think the SZ is a lovely car, but it was never really that quick.
For naturally aspirated cars, I think the contemporary 944S2 is a good close match on top speed, as is the VR6 Corrado that came along a couple of years after, and are both half a second quicker or so to 60 than the SZ claims.
However, the similar weight 220bhp E30 M3 Evolution tested at 6.6 to 60 and the 235bhp Merc 190 Evolution 2 Batmobile was also factory claimed at 6.9
Plus, the RX7 Turbo (944 shape) with 200bhp that was current at time of SZ launch was also similar performance to the SZ claims. ( 6.7 for the 60 sprint )
Shame really that the SZ wasn't put through the Autocar test routine when it came out to see if it was off the pace or not. Either way it did seem to offer Ferrari Mondial QV urge/early Boxster 2.5 pace
Would have made a great twin test at a track type article with something like the 944S2 that was lauded for its handling ......particularly as Performance Car reckoned it could easily hang onto the more powerful E30 M3 Evo Sport on track
Whether it's exotic looks suggested it should have had more than 210bhp is a good point though, would 140 top speed have sufficed with lower down gains......a 3.5 V6 or supercharger would certainly exercise the handling!
I remember seeing it at the launch Motorshow and it was stunning and when it was performance tested it was surprising how slow-ish is was but that really wasn’t the point. It was based on a 75 so was never get set the world on fire for speed but by god look at it. One day it’ll be a curio that fetches the ridiculous money.
It will never lose a penny and likely double or triple in the next 15 years as there’ll never be another like it
It will never lose a penny and likely double or triple in the next 15 years as there’ll never be another like it
Pommy said:
Getting hung up over the acceleration of the SZ is like getting hung up over the acting abilities of Margot Robbie.
I don't think people are getting hung up on it, it's more a case that one or more people expressed surprise that it wasn't more accelerative, were slapped down for saying so, and quite reasonably pointed out that even when new and compared against its contemporaries, the SZ didn't really measure up in that department. One can argue that the car isn't about that, but it doesn't alter the above.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff