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

The GT4 has electronic steering vs. manual steering for the 4C so I think steering is already better in the 4C - the Nürburgring 4C was on 17/18" staggered wheels not 18/19" so they paid attention to the compliance issue using production components. Refinement is a virtue more apt for a DD role which the 4C was not designed for. Not sure 350hp is needed given the low weight of the car.

Here's an interesting track review of the 4C done by AUTOCAR.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RG7oCUekM0[/ame]

The 4C also uses a single turbo I4 so its turbo and engine speeds will be compromised if it uses a "stick" - it will accelerate slower with a stick. You cannot shift faster than the TCT with a 6MT.

 

"Its a type of car that no one would build but the Italians".....lol love it!

 

Yep the steering may be better. But then there have been numerous coments in the press that its weird just off centre. Undoubtably it should eb bway ebtetr, but unfiortunatly no one has described it as sublime like say a Lotus elise or the ultimate pragon of steering virtue the R5tubo2.

DCT may be fatser, but its less engaging and fun for many and for some of us a deal breaker. 350hp with a stick would be way more enetrtainign than what is offered now.
The stick is a lrge componant of what makes the Gt4 what it is, not to mention suspension. They still have to doa proper motor for the GT4.

The alsfa, if mistubishi evos can put out 300hp stock and 400 in prodirve form, alfa can and should amp it up. A new Miata is what 200lbs lighter than a 4c, the alfas USP has go to include perfoamnce.

BTW a cayman S is a worthless marketing excecise neither fish nor fowl, hence its lack of sales.

 

I wonder if the off-centre looseness in steering may be in part due to a compromise made to achieve useability when moving the car from stationary. After all, this is still a road car and not a 100% track car. The Elise is lighter, often much lighter than the 4C and has some nasty road habits of its own.

Not sure why you say the GT4 needs a better motor. Porsche needs to maintain a difference in performance between the Cayman and the 911. As for Mitsubishi, I'm not sure they should be in the same discussion. Would you prefer a Mitsubishi over an Alfa Romeo? There's also considerations for driveability, durability... and development cost. I believe the Mitsu engine is a 2 litre unit. Alfa took an existing mundane engine and essentially amped it up for the 4C... to save development costs for a very short run model. You have to maintain a perspective on these matters. At any rate, apparently, AR is also thinking of shipping a 1.8L 300PS version of the 1.7L 4C motor.

As for the 2015 Miata, it's 200 lbs. lighter than the 2014 Miata, not the 4C, and it's also 3" shorter and over 5" narrower, no turbo hardware or complicated exhaust. BTW, please work on your spell checking.

 

Didn't know you had one! I thought you had a 458 spider coming? Went for a 4C instead?

 

It does not "need" 350 HP. And a stick is not doable in this package.

You miss the entire point. The Alfa is fun to drive on city streets without breaking every speed limit in the books. It's wild enough to get your jollies without them taking away our license. You can wind this thing up and let it rip -- something you cannot do on a modern Ferrari or Lambo. Something you could do in a 308 gtb.

This is the big difference. These big 500+ HP monsters are just poser mobiles. You really can't do anything in them of any interest except drive them around town and look sharp.

The Alfa was made for driving, not for posing.

For some reason, you just don't get it. It's not the amount of HP that makes a car fun. It's the car that makes the car fun.

 

More on my comments about the "1.8L 300PS" version of the 1.7L 4C motor, something I got off the Internet, not my salesman... TheMayor also mentioned an aftermarket 300PS "box" from Germany.

I suspect the rumoured "1.8L" is actually a software tweak of the 1.7L engine much like what MAC did with their MP4-12C engine. The 4C engine is actually 1,742 cc it could be called 1.7L, 1.75L or rounded up to 1.8L.

 

+4 ...C!

 

Ok from my perspective.
An Elise is also a road car. An exige S with v6 weighs 2600lbs now and no one complains about the steering or ride.. Dont know what nasty habbits you refer to in an elsie, other than its a mid engined car. Nasty habbits are things like an early 911 or boxer on trx tires..

The GT4 is a special car, but it has the pedestrain porche mtoor. To me part of what always made the Gt3 special, was it motor. Lightweight internals not only last better when tracked, the motor responds way quicker up and down the rev range and is happier, it also feels special. It why for example a 512M motor is so much more thirilling than the Tr motor. To me the missing ingredient in the Gt4 is the motor.

I never understood why marketing felt the 991 had to perform better than the cayman, they are two different products. But at this point a GT4 performs better than a regular 991S so the mold is broken. As a GT4 has a stick even if aGt4 has a Gt3 mtor it would not perform the same(on paper) as a Gt3.

Without dredging up the whole paddle stick debate a 9k rpm motor as in the Gt3 would be ills uited to a stick car anyway. But somethign really revy and sweet with some Gt3 compoanants(crank lighweight rods) and shorter closer gear ratios would complete the package and imo make the most compelling perfomance car one could buy, all things considered almost regardless of price.

Would I prefer a mitsubishi over an Alfa. I used mitsubishi ans an example because like alfa they used a pdestrain econo car motor as the basis and amped it up, its also alumninum. But then why not the amg mtor in the new mercedes you know the 350hp 4cyl one. Point is maybe the 4c motor has an aluminum block but in ervery other way its still just a dodge dart econo car motor, whereas there are plenty of other car companies who start with an econo car mtor and make somethign special out of it.

The new Miata is 200lbs lighter than the 4c maybe more.

We hear 2250lbs for the miata, and the Us spec 4c is over 2500dry. So maybe I am being kind.

Now fiat will have version of the miata, based on spec if the put the same 4c motor in it then it will probably ourperform a 4c. Yeah I get the whole Cf tub special car thing, but hen build the rest of the componanats to make sense of it all.

The 4c is inrtiguing, special viceral great looking, its in theory the best car one could wnat to buy as a DRIVER, its so called faults in terms of size creature conforts etc are virtues to many of us. Its also still half baked as only the italians can do.

The GT4 is not a complete package yet, it will take a gearbox and motor to get there, but its a lot closer to an ideal in terms of what it could be than the 4c in terms of what it could be.

 

Hey I drive a 195hp elise, I get the low weight viceral thing on the street perfectly, its why I think a 458 besides looks is lame as a street car, its boring belw 9/10ths like many moderns, is a car for posing, and the alfa is not for psing, its fun to dive apprently as long as you stay below 9/10ths..

Unlike a really light low powered elise the 4c weighs over 2500lbs, its aimed furtehr up the scale, it sports a cf tub which imples a certain degree of sporting pretension, unless its cf just for pose?

As to a car being too fast, yes even a mini cooper is too fast for policed and trafficked roads. Thats why many of us who buy sprtscars go to the track, and or know some special backroads, that way we can use the cars performance envelope. Thats why we buy these emachines, for driving not commuting, the alfa is just not quite there. It can do enetrtainment at more mdest spepds, thats a big plus compared to otehrs, but it seems to be lacking hwen driven to the limit and it should shine there. The power limits are also low given the rpice, spec and market its aimed at.

So yeah they made a viceral car that you can DD becaise it has paddles/ac and is entertainign at even modest spedds. A miata is also entrtainign at modest speeds, so whats the alfas usp styling and a CF tub? I expedted more based on the whole concept.. The performnce of the 4c is below the promise.

Yep for you its a dino, but the game has moved on.

Based on the looks, the cf tub and weight, the 4c should be able to perform on par with say an exige v6, and its way way way off that mark, both in terms of acclerative performance and definatly nowhere close in terms of ride or handlign dynamics. The motor one can overrlook, the dynamics, well being enetrtaining as a dd is a pretty low bar given the promise.

We all know the 4c can deliver much more, and at 75K for a launch edition, alfa should be delivering the rest.

 

0- 60 in 4.1 isn't enough?

 

Agree.

I wish Boxerman would just admit to himself that he does not like the 4c, and go away and leave this thread to those that want to talk about it. Heck I didn't like the 4c at first, and not really a fan of the looks, but I have become intriged when reading owner reports.

Alfa Romeo has never made cars for everybody. Some like them, some don't and never will.
Pete

 

True, but there is also some truth in what I say.

Its the same at other car companies, in vette land a rental car inetrior is now lauded as the holy grail, and only now is there is admission that the c6 inetrior was truly horrid.

Porche suffered with poor cayman sales for years, because they couldnt for false marketing reasons build it properly.

Its not that complicated to get stuff right, the car companies know how to do it, they mostly dont bother, its like how much can we get away with, and we like certain cars sow emake excuses for it, instead of demanding aproperly built product.. People who like certain barnds feel personaly affronted at any criticism. I think criticsism is good, it leads to better products.

I dont expcect the Alfa to have a great inetrior or phenominal build, thtat would be nice but its not what the 4c is about . Its a performance car as a priority, on that basis there should be no compromises dynamicaly and there are.

 

Its not about 0-60, Is that really the relevant performance mertic for a 4c, not to me. Its not a drag car. I would be far more inetrested in how long and hard it can pull between say 40 and 130.

 

I guess ita all straigh roads in Oz then so 0-60 is your metric. Although I doid once go up some hill to a park in adelaide in a new giulia.

See I like the 4c, Its the type of car i have and buy, so i am dissapointed in its final exection. I also think in time Alfa will fully cook it, or the aftermarket will, then we will read about the "4c in calssic car as it shoudl have been unlike the headline now "briilant depite its flaws" and yes every car has flaws, its a uestion of degree, and type of flaw given a particular vehicles intent. Ifa rolls were noisy and rough riding, it would be flawed, actualy the new 2 door rolls had a crappy ride..

Why not just do the imprtant parts all properly in the first place.

Alfa wants to come back tot eh USA, the best philosophy would be to build abetetr fully thought out car, and then couple thta with italian flair stylign etc to capture market.

See I really loved the 4c concept, wanted to buy one, now I feel like a jilted lover.

 

My GF is not perfect. Living with her 3 years now has shown a lot of things positive and negative I never knew before we started on this journey.

I certainly am not perfect either. She would say the same about me.

I loved the concept. The reality was not as I had imagined.


But I certainly don't feel "jilted" because not everything is what I exactly wanted or dreamed.

 

Well I am married, its mostly good, probably not exactly what either of us had imagined, some bits better soem worse but overall great. the erotic parts statred good showed potential and have spoeadily evolved and improved.

I guess the "erotic" or driving parts of the 4c dont seem compelling enough to me to make a comitment, and I strongly suspect they wont improve with ownersip. Or maybe I already have an elsie so have thta ligh viceral base covered and I dont see an improvement dynamicaly in owning a 4c whereas to me it shoudl be the next step.

But then this is where my car harem has headed.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

that's not a legit number. its all launch control with a spooled up turbo and dct. my gtr did 2.9s with lc but I could only used that few times a year on street. rest of time it had turbo lag with slow downshifts. I imagine 4c is similar (at best)

 

No it isn't my metric ... I replied to the wrong post. Was supposed to have replied to this one: "Someone just likes to argue."
Pete

 

Every point you have made about the 4c indicates you will not at all enjoy a GT40.

They are heavy and if set up like an original handle like a whale, apparently (according to a guy who used to be part of the classic racing scene in NZ and was involved in the originals as a Wyer's team mechanic I think).
Pete

 

First, that's a test by R and T using launch control. I hate to tell you this but when they test the Mac 12c and 458 and Corvette C7 etc, they use launch control too.

Second -- what is your number for the 4c? 4.5 sec?

Is not 0-60 in 4.5 second enough? It is impossible for anyone to feel the difference between 4.1 and 4.5 second 0-60 in a seat.

Impossible.

 

It's alright, Ol' Boxerman just wants something that will equal or beat a 6MT 350PS Exige S V6 as none of the Nordschleife efforts by other Exige models matches the 4C's run.

I think we get the old school creaky English sports car idea but that latest supercharged v6 iteration of a 19-year-old idea is also more expensive than the 4C which to date has only had 1 run at the Nordschleife, in its original product launch configuration, and is not some jazzed up purpose-built model set up for a record run. Hey, give it time, and try not to lose your license test driving on public roads.

 

The latest Lotus Elise S (220ps/250NM) doesn't weigh that much less than an European 4C, 924 kg's vs. 1015 kg's (an Elise Cup 952 kg's, the Exige V6 1176kg's). The Elise doesn't have aircon as standard so you can add 30kg's + it has a smaller/lighter wheel/tire combo which adds at least another 8 kg's. So 924 + 30 + 8= 963 makes a weight diff. of only 52 kg's.

And if you got an Elise than you know how spartan (seats, dash, doors, etc.), small and cramped it is vs. a 4C.

 

Some cars, like gtr, rely heavily on lc. 0-60 goes from 2.9 to about 4 without it. Thats why it doesnt feel that fast in regular street driving in regular mode and auto. My old gt3 felt faster in that scenario. Its only when in race mode or using lc that it becomes a monster. Other cars you mentioned esp ones with stick like z06 or viper might not get ultimate 0-60 like gtr but are much faster in normal.settings

I (incorrectly?) Assumed 4c is like gtr in that it relies heavily on lc like a parlor trick to get good stats. but if im wrong, then good for alfa. i am right in their target demographic.

 

Hmmmmm;

'So why 385hp at 7,400rpm and 420Nm between 4,750 and 6,000rpm, when the same motor in the Carrera S makes 400hp at 7,400rpm, and 440Nm at 5,600rpm? “It is a matter of packaging, and the Cayman’s mid-engine layout simply does not allow it the engine bay height of the 911,” Andreas explained. ... We ... had to design a completely new intake manifold and exhaust system. With its shorter runners the Cayman intake manifold does not have as much ram effect at high speed, although on the positive side, it produces better mid-range torque. The extended side blades around the side intakes also create more ram air effect when the car is moving.” '

If an RS version is built it sounds unlikely that it will get the Powerkit or a GT motor:

'I asked why Porsche did not see fit to use the 430hp Powerkit version of the motor as fitted to the Carrera GTS. “That would have been our ideal scenario,” said Andreas, “However, the bespoke intake manifold on that variant is even larger than the standard one, so there simply was no way it would fit the Cayman.” ... “One thing we did not want to do was create a bespoke engine for what we knew was going to be around 2,000 units,” ... As you can imagine, the first question people ask is “why not use the GT3 motor.” The answer is simple; it will not fit and even if it did it would make the car too expensive to fulfil its role as the entry-level GT model. “We wanted to create an entry-level GT car with the full motorsport DNA, but the cost had to be kept down to around the level of a basic 991 Carrera.” '


Fair enough.