Alfa 4C - "Without The Heart We Would Be Mere Machines"

I really don't understand why journalists keep comparing with the Cayman. The 2 cars have NOTHING particular in common apart from similar power and that they are mid-engined. They are built and meant to be very different cars.
In terms of driving thrills some journos love and it others think it's not perfect and needs to be made better.... I usually like to see for myself and experience these things first hand. Journos in the UK want top notch steering feel like no others and they also love cars that drift.
Journos in Italy, France and most other European countries focus more on the general experience and the speed.

No matter what anyone says the 4C has beaten (or in 1 case got the same time) as the Cayman...so it can't be much worse can it? ;-)

 

Seriously. If they ran the Corvette C7 against the Cayman it would squash it like a bug. Yet they are about the same price and both 2 seat sports cars.

What would the Porsche people say: "Well, its comparing apples to oranges".

People buy what they like. That involves many different aspects of what makes a car interesting to them.

If you want a Porsche.. buy the Cayman. No biggie. Go down and buy one off the lot today. You can choose probably 5 at least from any dealer right now.

If you're like the 3000 of us who want something different, then let us enjoy ourselves.

And... unfortunately... wait and wait and wait and wait.

 

they are similarily priced, sporty mid-engined cars. Though, I agree, a better comparison would be with the similarily priced Exige S V6, but rarely would anyone favor the 4C in that company, especially in the UK.

 

I know quite a lot of people in the UK and other European countries who have an Exige, a Cayman or have bought a 4C. From all of their comments (including mine) which car you buy has 90% to do with the use you intend to do with the car. If you want a car that you can have fun with on track but also drive it everyday to work (and tell people you own a Porsche i.e. status), you buy a Cayman.
If you want a car that looks gorgeous, that feels very special but is mostly a w-end / track day car, then you go for the 4C.
If you then want a car that is probably the best around a track then you go for the Exige.

This is from speaking to at least 50 different people who have bought one of the 3 cars.

Then you have people who a little "particular" like me....who has bought the 4C to have fun on track, go around the countryside on weekends but also will use it sometimes to go to work

To each his own, all I would say is see these cars in person, test drive them and then decide which you like best. They are all fantastic cars and we are VERY lucky to be able to enjoy them

 

I didn't list power as an important engine attribute in the post you quoted, Mayor. All the other attributes I listed are far more important to me -- especially in a car like this.

 

Liked you said, it's down to the personal experience. I would think that lap times aren't the priority for people that buy cars like this.

If we look at the Best Drivers Cars evo published a few years ago, most didn't have impressive power, only a few were styling benchmarks, and there was no mention of a lap time anywhere. It was all about feedback, responsiveness, quirks. I just don't think the engine in the 4C, as currently configured, would do it for me. I'm sure others, people with a ton more experience than I have with performance cars, will be perfectly happy with this beauty.

 

Yeah a common crankpin V twin will wlays be limited, I refer to the harley motor as an eaxample of how a little easy to do tuning can transform a motor. Same with my e46 M3.

So far the Alfa motor is being touted as not so great. Maybe some chipping and cams will transform it, maybe it is limited now because they want durability from the tranny with launch control. I dont know, but Alfa made evocative engines that loved to rev, no one claims this motor has either of these attributes, till it does there is question mark over the car, well that and apparently the steering, otherwise yeah its great.

 

I think you are spot on. IUf you want fastest round a track just buy a vette.
Also lots of articles seem to love the Gt86 and Miata, niether one fast.

 

100%
Pretty much spot on for me. Lets se ewhat it all looks like in 2015 or 16. The caterham will be interesting and maybe by then the Alfa will be a more fully baked pie.

 

I find it hard to believe Italy has made an unfun engine. If they have surely this will be the first!

Heck I remember driving a FIAT 128 many years ago that was a customers car of my parents car repair/service garage and it was great fun. I've driven Suds, 33's, 75's, GTV6's, 164's, my own worn out 1750Gtv, Belina converted into a ute, and lastly a bogged FIAT 124 and all had personalities on the fun side due to their engines.

The press are always hard on Alfas, and let's face it if car purchasing was not an emotive process for some of us, we would all buy the Porsche.

I suspect this is a case of the chassis being too good, like the Toyota 86, and it is so sure footed with the current engine that the road testers are finding it a little undemanding. Surely similar issues were found with Lotus's, but expected?
Pete

 

Boxerman,

You said "Alfa made evocative engines that loved to rev." Which ones--the 1300s? I've owned six Alfas and they've all sounded rather strained at high rpms. In fact, the redlines of the 1600, 1750, and 2000 engines in the '60s and '70s 105/115-type cars were all set at or below 6000 rpm. Fact is these little engines have relatively long strokes and make good torque lower down the rpm range. Even the magnificent 3-liter V6 (as found in the Milano) redlines at 6200, if I remember correctly. So I am not disappointed to learn the 4C's little turbocharged engine will redline at 6500.

Cheers, Mark

 

Yes I am thinking of the 1300's and 1600'ss. The 2,0s on the cars I have driven were basicaly dogs. The 3.0 V6 was a sonourous sweet sounding engine. The Alfas in general reved for their time, 50's and 60's, after that they were getting long in tooth. Now we have a different era. It does not sound from what i have read that the 4c motor is what you would call sonourous.

As to the motor in an elige, yes its a long stroke, it puts out power but really is a bit vibratey and sounds like a bucket of bolts at times. Its saving garce is an ability to rev abd rev, like a inline four japanese bike engine. While it comes from tyaota its actualy designed and made by yamaha.

If the Alfa was superlative the press would be singing its praises. To me it sounds like the motor is similar to the VW turbo 1.8, somethign that puts out the power but does not inspire. I think you will find similar criticism of the KTM very much relating to the motor.

 

3 litre Alfa engines were 6,500 redline....a beautiful engine to redline all day long.

 

I am a major fan of the fully developed 3.0 24V ALFA V6 engine. The redline is 7,000. I have a lifetime supply of these engines. Three of my cars use the ALFA V6 24V engine, with one spare.

 

I'm curious about the criticism of the "vague" handling described. He also mentions that the car was pushing. It sounds to me that the 4C could improve with better setup. Better shocks and/or sway bar settings could improve these issues drastically.

The 4C looked super planted with hardly any body roll at all. There is something about a CF tub and direct steering that makes a car feel absolutely stuck on the road. I notice this in my CGT as compared to my 16M and even my Exige.

I agree with boxer man that the shortfallings of the engine will be improved with aftermarket tuning. This is what happened to the Elise - weak 1.8 Toyota motor with base 190 hp at crank. Then 1st gen supercharger pushes it to 220 hp. Now there is a kit pushing it to near 400 hp crank.

A lot can and will be done to the 4C to make it a track beast or a canyon carver.
It has the proper DNA to begin with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

If I had my choice, that would have been the engine I would have put in it.

Awesome engine -- but I think they were worried about packaging and weight.

 

The Busso 2.5 was the highest revving version. They even made a 2.8 kit for the 2.5 that would have the short 2.5 stroke and bigger 3.0 pistons. That thing could really scream and sounded like an old F1 car.

 

Nice pictures from Holland I think

Alfa 4C Jungkeit - a set on Flickr

 

One of the pictures (they're from Germany, not Holland) shows a sticker specifying various Petronas fluids, including power steering fluid. I thought the steering was unassisted.

 

The 2.5 and 3.0 Busso engines have a different bore and stroke, with a similar B/S ratio of 1.29 and 1.28, respectively. They should rev about the same. Of course, the 24V versions can really breath and rev.

Another version of the engine is the 2.0 V6 turbo. I mated a 2.0 crank with a 3.0 block and now have a 2.7 turbo. The 2.7 B/S ratio is 1.40, slightly better than the 2.8 B/S ratio, 1.36. My 2.7 turbo was a low budget, proof of concept. Currently going back through the engine, without the short cuts.

 

the car has no power steering.

 

A dead standard Sud motor will rev to 8,000 rpm ... I know I did this on the road test of the car I ended up buying, plus once I classic raced it used to use that many revs all the time.
Pete

 

They do love to rev, but by that we mean they like to work their way happily up the rev counter, not that they rev very high, ie. the engines accelerate fairly well. Of course modern engines now do it better ...

The redline to me is not as important as how "keen" to accelerate the engines are.
Pete

 

That sounds like a cool project. The only problem is it's a turbo and the V6 turbo does not sound nearly as good unless you left the turbo off(we had a 2.0 V6 Spider in the area).


Back to the 4C....

 

I hoped to drive the car during suppliers convention in Modena but thanks to cloud burst I had only a short (slow) tour with a plant testing driver ...
Seems more usable than my Elise Mk1
Very short clip to listen engine sound into the cokpit.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GO65ryY7Ls]4C - YouTube[/ame]