RE: Alfa Romeo SZ: Spotted
Discussion
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.
Back in the day, the Ferrari 348 was only around 5.5 secs to 60, and I would consider anything sub-7 pretty rapid back then. Just goes to show how performance levels have gone a bit silly across the board now I suppose!
Strugs said:
Ah, so you mean you thought it was quicker "in period", you mean? As oppose to comparing to a modern car?
Back in the day, the Ferrari 348 was only around 5.5 secs to 60, and I would consider anything sub-7 pretty rapid back then. Just goes to show how performance levels have gone a bit silly across the board now I suppose!
but at what cost? driver feel and engagement? what with a gadzillion driver aids in cars now, the NSX was hardly lightning fast either back then but it also is an iconic car to have.Back in the day, the Ferrari 348 was only around 5.5 secs to 60, and I would consider anything sub-7 pretty rapid back then. Just goes to show how performance levels have gone a bit silly across the board now I suppose!
ericmcn said:
Strugs said:
Ah, so you mean you thought it was quicker "in period", you mean? As oppose to comparing to a modern car?
Back in the day, the Ferrari 348 was only around 5.5 secs to 60, and I would consider anything sub-7 pretty rapid back then. Just goes to show how performance levels have gone a bit silly across the board now I suppose!
but at what cost? driver feel and engagement? what with a gadzillion driver aids in cars now, the NSX was hardly lightning fast either back then but it also is an iconic car to have.Back in the day, the Ferrari 348 was only around 5.5 secs to 60, and I would consider anything sub-7 pretty rapid back then. Just goes to show how performance levels have gone a bit silly across the board now I suppose!
Frankly if you dont ‘get’ the SZ you can hand in your PH membership card, if you don't know, do some research, its a proper exotic with an operatic induction roar like tearing silk, no fake popping or banging. And as the stats were terrific for the time. These will be Ferrari money in the future, not Porsche.
That said I dont like the RZ, its a mad car, and the RZ isn’t mad enough....
That said I dont like the RZ, its a mad car, and the RZ isn’t mad enough....
Helicopter123 said:
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.
And once again you seem surprised that a 24 year old car is not as fast as a current diesel engined car making similar power.24 years on, it's no quicker than a rep special saloon, and wouldn't see which way a warm-hatch went.
Perhaps you have somehow missed all the threads on PH that have made the same point regarding e.g. relatively modern hot hatches such as the Civic Type R? Modern diesel repmobiles are surprisingly quick, and more to the point very easy for the average dullard to extract the performance from compared to a high revving petrol engine.
davebem said:
I love these, glad Alfa had the guts to make it, Im trying to think what everyone was driving on the road that year to compare to, I guess Mk2 Fiestas, Mk4 Escorts, Cavaliers, didnt the MX5 come out around the same time as this..
The Corrado VR6 came out in 1992 and ended production in late 1995 (although mine was registered in 1996) and had a 0-60 of 6.4s. I remember at the time thinking that the SZ was awesome, but that its 0-60 time was rather disappointing and that I certainly didn't expect it to be slower than my Corrado to 60.
Edit: Also, 1996 would have seen the first of the Prodrive Imprezas and also the Escort Cosworth would have been in production for several years, both of which would out-accelerate the SZ. So I think it is fair comment to express surprise that the SZ isn't more accelerative.
Edited by Clockwork Cupcake on Sunday 10th June 22:00
Struggling a bit that people are judging the 1989 SZ based on the 0-60 time. That hopelessly one-dimensional number was never what the car was about and completely masks what makes it such a good drive - even now, almost 30 years later. It’s not a Top Trumps sort of car, thank goodness.
jamies30 said:
Struggling a bit that people are judging the 1989 SZ based on the 0-60 time. That hopelessly one-dimensional number was never what the car was about and completely masks what makes it such a good drive - even now, almost 30 years later. It’s not a Top Trumps sort of car, thank goodness.
Oh, I totally agree. I certainly wasn't judging it - I love the car - I was just observing that eyebrows were raised about its acceleration even when it was new, so it's not overly surprising that they are being raised now too. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff