ALFAGTV6.COM

Post by **Zamani** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 7:21 am

Yikes, a 130i.

Jim you need to wear a paperbag over your head when you drive this thing. But don't worry, you have many airbags to save you in a crash.

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 8:28 am

Well,The BMW owners club here have asked the factory to put the disguise back on the 1 series..

It gets my vote for the most un apeasing car in the world...Id rather push an Alfa than drive a 1....Now,an SL500 AMG...Mmmmm

Jim K · Post by **Jim K** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:06 am

Hah! SL what?? Lets hear it for the pimpmobiles Barry!! If you drive one of them, you'd better be wearing a leopard hat, pink shirt, heavy gold neckchain and black/white high heel shoes, heheh!

Ok, so you don't like the 130, I'll buy the old 330CI then and I don't want anyone to say its ugly! If you do, you're plain jealous!!

You see, the point is that all of us are interested in archaeology in some way, while the BMW crowd has a whole bunch of live shit to choose from, and all rwd!! Doesn't this pi$$ you off? You fast with money-M3, you fast with more money and a bigger family-M6, you like roadsters-Z8 etc etc. When did AR ever have a comparable stable available at this level of performance?

Mats, do you really think allthose quotes are drawbacks? Are they so backwards to never use belt drive?? How many times have we read in this forum unfortunate stories of bent everything because of the belts? When I had the 4cyl I used to envy Fiat TC's and other clowns with belts, now its the other way around! Then again, I frequently mention the specific output figure...when has AR excelled in this respect? Ok, there are a few reasons not to like a certain car or make, but with these guys, it can only be looks because technologically, they went to the moon and back (so to speak)while we're sitting here dreaming of even bigger V6's! Engineers are the same everywhere, the means at their disposal are not and above all, the marketing idiots should get off their a$$es and give drivers what they want! End of speech.
I guess I'll have to go to confession now...

Jim K.

Post by **Zamani** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 9:36 am

Jim,

130i is a little ugly. But I have an alternative. How about we move a few letters down the alphabet list and take the 130Y? The Nissan 130Y that is.

I am thinking of getting the new Honda Type-R. Now that's specific power output for you! And Honda reliability to boot!!! But looks like I need to get a minivan or some sort of SUV ( so I can tow the 75 to the track. )

But going back to the original topic, I don't know why Alfa thinks it is necessary to go for super flashy cars. I believe they need a good mid priced RWD with less weight. I like their new cars, but they are all just too heavy. How I wish you could make the 156 GTA a 4WD, I would take that over the E46 330ci anytime. But at the very least Alfa is making some progress. New V6s with chain drive, VVT and UNIAIR coming.... hmmm sounds good.

Maurizio · Post by **Maurizio** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:56 am

had a few weeks ago a 120d for a trip for work. Liked it as a drivers car.
German AC Schnitzer (not schnitzel) did a one series with a M5 engine

Sounds like fun.....

MerrilGordon · Post by **MerrilGordon** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:57 am

I think all the new cars are way too heavy. I'll bet this 8C Competizione is over 3500 lbs no matter what the body material is made of. They need to build this car to a 2700 lb weight target.
That could be Alfa Romeo's competitive edge in the market place. V6, RWD, light weight, great handling, and fantastic styling. Sounds good to me.

The V8 is surly competent, but a lighter cheaper car could do well with a V6. Also, a six cylinder sound can be rather refreshing compared to all the V8's out there.

Merril

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:08 pm

Merril,What dictates the heavy mass of modern cars are the safety aspects designed into the shell..This is to comply with international crash worthy standards..

Top Gear had a side by side shootout between a New Pagani Zonda vs an Old Xj 220 Jaguar..
Pagani outgunned the Jag in power,cd,handling,almost everything but weight..
The Jag won by a whole few seconds...

One of the reasons many cars today have serious blind spots round all the pillars..the damn things are so thick dictated by regulation...Ford Focus,Golf5,Opel...Alfa...

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:58 pm

JimGreek wrote: Mats, do you really think allthose quotes are drawbacks? Are they so backwards to never use belt drive??
Jim K.

For a regular end-user? HELL NO!!

For us McGyvers, maybe...

Please find and quote me badmouthing chains, I dare you, I f-ing double dare you M-F!

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 3:08 pm

Barry wrote:Merril,What dictates the heavy mass of modern cars are the safety aspects designed into the shell..This is to comply with international crash worthy standards...

Not true!!
Fact: the new Passat is the strongest body I have ever seen! after a barrier test (side impact to simulate T-bone) the body was virtually untouched, the B-pillar had moved maybe 10-15cm inward (which is just unheard of). This is body in white only. Weight: 302Kg.

It does have a lot of high tensile panels though and boron steel in the b-pillar and cantrail.

Barry wrote: One of the reasons many cars today have serious blind spots round all the pillars..the damn things are so thick dictated by regulation...Ford Focus,Golf5,Opel...Alfa...

This is about to change, there are new laws coming up which dictates how much the pillars can obscure (degrees of the field of view) and believe me, they are a b*atch to match.

the sight demands drive a whole new pillar setup, material spec and new technologies in stuff as the inflatable curtains.

Barry · Post by **Barry** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:37 pm

Mats,I beg to dis agree with you..Crash regulation forced the designers to add bigger more bulky pillars to the car to comply with the regs..This had a resultant knock on effect of bulkier and thicker pillars where it unwittingly obscured vision and added lots of weight to the shell.
Obviously this would be short term as youve indicated.Throw them a curve ball and they all come firing back.
They then look at the poblem and come up with the better mouse trap as VW did.I agree,things are evolutionising..and we might see ubber strong pillars of neglible size in the future...But that is the reason for the over weight bodies at present....

Look at any new or newish car and compare the weight with an older mode..
Alfetta gtv....1100 odd Kg.
Alfa 156 v6...1360 Kg

Race gtv6 here..746Kg
Race 156 here...1090Kg

The parity is there..

Jim K · Post by **Jim K** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:01 am

Hey Barry, I don't have any figures, but I'll bet that the race 156 stiffness is waaaay higher than the race gtv was or that of the race 75's

. Sometimes, a very stiff car will lap a tortuous course faster than one with lower stiffness and more power.
Jim k.

Jim K · Post by **Jim K** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:06 am

Where does Massey-Ferguson fit in here, you turpentine drinking Viking?

Saturday morning hangover??

JK.

Jim K · Post by **Jim K** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:09 am

And coming to think of it, where is MD you guys?

He hasn't been around to insult me in more than a week!

Jim K.

Jim K · Post by **Jim K** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:16 am

Ok guys, enough with bullshit cars, here's something to give all a h..d-on:
http://www.mobile.de/SIDZipK-tJ4VIk8kGn ... 1180677297

Going to the toilet now, heheh

Jim K.

Jim K · Post by **Jim K** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 12:18 am

Faaaaark

Only 2kg/hp!!!!!!!!!!!

Droooooooooooooooooool!!