Alfa Romeo Forums banner

181 - 200 of 217 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,652 Posts
The combined company will have sales of around 9 million units, not too far behind Toyota.

Many US customers do not realize that most Jeeps are now built on FIAT or Alfa Romeo platforms. Ironic that FCA tried to build a Dodge badged as a Lancia, now that was boneheaded stuff.

There should be no difficulty rationalizing platforms and powertrains while preserving the different Marques being brought under the same corporate umbrella.
Surely cheaper to drop a few and just let them go. Do they make them in the same factories, overheads, extra design work?. Even if they have to stamp slightly different panels, that is more cost than making more of the same model. Anyway, modern cars are loosing their uniqueness as it does not sell as easily, so just drop them.

Example: If I went to a FIAT and an Alfa Romeo dealership and test drove 2 cars with all badges removed, and I had never seen them before, would I be able to work out which was the Alfa and which was the FIAT. I bet not any more ... and Joe Bloggs really does NOT care. Just make the FIAT but stick Alfa Romeo badges on it, or make the Peugeot and stick a Citroen badge on it, etc.

All those brands (14) selling less volume than ONE brand in Toyota ... imagine the cost differences for components. Toyota will of course share some parts across their models, so the cost savings are enormous, meaning more profit => more R&D budget => next model keeps getting better than a FCA design.

The marketing campaign could be fantastic: "Instead of churning out the same old regurgitated stuff, we have pooled all our vast experience together from all our 14 brands and come up with 3 brands for the modern automotive market, that will produce the very best cars for all kinds of drivers"
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,743 Posts
Audi A3 and VW Golf are the same car. It's easy to discern the differences in the way they drive. I prefer the Golf versions myself.

Ditto the Peugeot and Citroen lineups. Same cars but they drive quite differently. I prefer the Citroen versions myself.

Back in the day the SAAB 9000 drove quite differently to the Alfa Romeo 164 for similar reasons. I cannot say I preferred one over the other, interestingly.

It takes money to make the differences but then when differences are real total sales increase.

It may be true that modern manufacturing tends to reduce differences to achieve economies of scale but there are limits to the effectiveness of that process. Branding is still an important factor in consumer decisions as long as the brands remain true to consumer perceptions. North American manufacturers never seem to learn this lesson when they acquire successful brands and then degrade their value.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
771 Posts
Example: If I went to a FIAT and an Alfa Romeo dealership and test drove 2 cars with all badges removed, and I had never seen them before, would I be able to work out which was the Alfa and which was the FIAT. I bet not any more ... and Joe Bloggs really does NOT care. Just make the FIAT but stick Alfa Romeo badges on it, or make the Peugeot and stick a Citroen badge on it, etc.
nowadays you definetly know which car you are driving, Alfa is rwd and Fiat fwd, they used to more similar earlier, but still very different, you notice when you drive Alfa. Fiat isnt suitable as Alfa. Fiat hasnt been making very attractive cars lately, and espaically driving and hadling has took very much drawbacks since 80s and 90s, when they were among the best normal cars to drive. Branding Fiats to Alfas would be the last nail to Alfas coffin, Fiat isnt exaxtly popular in Europe in these days, more like a joke. Alfa should be made with cheaper alternative to Maserati, usińg same platforms. They should use synergie together. If Icould decide I would probably quit Fiat brand in Europe (except Italy) and rise up Lancia.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,652 Posts
The Alfa Mito and Guilietta are FIATs and people love them (but they wasted a lot of $'s making Alfa body panels, etc.). This whole FWD versus RWD thing is over played. We are talking about road cars, if we concentrated on fun to drive instead of ridiculous hp for magazine articles, we would max road cars at 200hp as our 156v6's are. I get a lot of pleasure driving my 156v6, and I used to thoroughly enjoy my Sud too ... was a great car when it had ~105hp.

But yeah, if I was really honest I do wish the 156 was RWD ... and handled like an early BMW 325. Those cars were crazy fun. Just looked at a corner and the thing was sideways ... but I absolutely don't want or need more hp. I can drive and know how to carry corner speed. Excess hp is for poor drivers.
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
771 Posts
Giulietta is not Fiat, its made as Alfa 1st car used that pariticular platform, Mito is only Fiat based Alfa. They might be cars that people love but they dont bring money to company, thats why Fiat also dropping small car from its lineup.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,652 Posts
Giulietta is not Fiat, its made as Alfa 1st car used that pariticular platform, Mito is only Fiat based Alfa. They might be cars that people love but they dont bring money to company, thats why Fiat also dropping small car from its lineup.
Amazing as most of the world is turning to small or electric cars ... shaking my head with amazement.

The 156v6 is the biggest engined car I have ever owned. I honestly don't understand the love many have for big cars. They do EVERYTHING worse than small cars. I would never have been into Alfas if they were large cars.
Pete
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,347 Posts
I took my Giulia to Shreveport today for an oil change and had an interesting conversation with them. They seemed confident a GTV would be on their lot in a couple of months. Who am I to argue with them, I hope they know something I don't. As far as making a coupe from a sedan being a fools errand I'd have to take issue with that. Go no farther than the GTV and Berlina. What would really get my electrons going would be a all wheel drive GTV with a supplemental electric motor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,743 Posts
The 105 series cars were pre crash test dummies. Building a coupe saved 10-15% in curb weight back then. The convertible versions could be even lighter back then as was clear when you drove one, scuttle shake and door squeaks were evident.

The current news suggests the GTV Coupe version of the modern Giulia will not be built.

The current Giulietta platform was the first iteration of a new design subsequently put under various "North American " models such as the Dart, 200, Jeep Cherokee and, horror of horrors, the latest "magic-wagon".

Also, another question:

What is "too much horsepower"?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,025 Posts
The Alfa Mito and Guilietta are FIATs and people love them (but they wasted a lot of $'s making Alfa body panels, etc.). This whole FWD versus RWD thing is over played. We are talking about road cars, if we concentrated on fun to drive instead of ridiculous hp for magazine articles, we would max road cars at 200hp as our 156v6's are. I get a lot of pleasure driving my 156v6, and I used to thoroughly enjoy my Sud too ... was a great car when it had ~105hp.

But yeah, if I was really honest I do wish the 156 was RWD ... and handled like an early BMW 325. Those cars were crazy fun. Just looked at a corner and the thing was sideways ... but I absolutely don't want or need more hp. I can drive and know how to carry corner speed. Excess hp is for poor drivers.
Pete
The funny thing about HP is you acclimate to it. I thought my 300hp daily driver was lightning quick when I bought it. Now, a WOT pull in 2nd seems positively mundane. I'd be awfully bored having to step down to 200hp. Besides, Toyta Camrys have 300hp now. But chassis are far better equipped to handle that sort of power. It used to be a 700hp car would be undriveable- now there are 700hp cars that are very daily driveable even outside the exotic realm (Hellcat, GT500).

In any event, while a car can be overpowered, an arbitrary number doesn't make any sense. Power should be balanced with the other capabilities of the car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,242 Posts
I will be the contrarian and say the PSA merger will help Alfa in the US. PSA has been looking for a way to get their product into the USA, and all of the Fiat/Alfa/Maserati Studios would be ideal to sell some Peugeot's and possibly Citroens. Adding a line of vehicles that don't compete directly with what the Italians are selling will allow Alfa to maintain a US presence and to profitably sell cars in the 10,000 to 15,000 range annually.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,684 Posts
I will be the contrarian and say the PSA merger will help Alfa in the US. PSA has been looking for a way to get their product into the USA, and all of the Fiat/Alfa/Maserati Studios would be ideal to sell some Peugeot's and possibly Citroens. Adding a line of vehicles that don't compete directly with what the Italians are selling will allow Alfa to maintain a US presence and to profitably sell cars in the 10,000 to 15,000 range annually.
I agree.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,347 Posts
What is "too much horsepower"?
The person in the passengers seat is the only one who can answer that:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,652 Posts
What is "too much horsepower"?
The person in the passengers seat is the only one who can answer that<img src="http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Smilie" class="inlineimg" />
To move us happily around, more than 50 kws is wasteful. My Vitz has 49kws I believe, does fine.

So lots of hp is all about fun and bragging rights, but remember we are discussing road cars where just like gearchange speed ... it doesn't really matter.

If you need lots of hp to make driving fun, why the heck do you like Alfas?
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
503 Posts
What are FCA doing with ALfa Romeo?!

They invested in a skunkworks to produce a completely different premium platform for the Giulia (nothing to do with Fiat) and they have used it solely for the Giulia saloon and Stelvio. The costs associated with building that platform I am sure were not small and so the Georgio platform should have a plethora of different vehicles stemming from it. How much more would it have cost Alfa to build a Giulia estate or a Giulia coupe using that platform?
They should be maximising the potential of that platform now!

Sure the new small SUV Tonale is the priority to tap into the ever increasing SUV sales worldwide but Alfa Romeo should not just cease to have a presence in the reasonably priced sports car market which is now primarily owned by the JApanese and GErman and US manufacturers in my humble opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,652 Posts
The Guilia platform should be used by Maserati, and if Lancia had to struggle on, they should use it too.

FCA need to learn how to get their costs down and stop trying to make Alfa Romeo what it was in the 1930s. They failed to make money back then and had a tiny market, its only going to be worse this time round, even if as back in the 30s the cars are awesome.
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,743 Posts
One reason turbo engines are so popular is they deliver far more horsepower than naturally aspirated engines of the same rated horsepower do at peak torque rpm which is far more relevant to daily driving than maximum rated hp.

Street driving rarely justifies using peak horsepower but frequently justifies using peak torque.

Modern turbo engines also tend to have broad fiat peak torque "curves" delivering this superior hp over a wider speed range.
 

·
Out of the office!
Joined
·
11,184 Posts
One reason turbo engines are so popular is they deliver far more horsepower than naturally aspirated engines of the same rated horsepower do at peak torque rpm which is far more relevant to daily driving than maximum rated hp.

Street driving rarely justifies using peak horsepower but frequently justifies using peak torque.

Modern turbo engines also tend to have broad fiat peak torque "curves" delivering this superior hp over a wider speed range.
They are popular because cars with these engines get better gas mileage. Manufacturers put these engines in the cars so they car get the average fleet mileage down as per the US requirements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
771 Posts
blame Manley he doesnt like group Alfa and Maserati togther., PSA/FCA should use same rwd platforms for all premium or luxury brands . like Alfa, Maserati, possbily high end Citroen and Lancia and maybe US brands. That DS brand could be scrapped, I see no idea of that brand, Citroen used to be in that class.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,743 Posts
They are popular because cars with these engines get better gas mileage. Manufacturers put these engines in the cars so they car get the average fleet mileage down as per the US requirements.
I don't think so. If they were popular for that reason the CAFE would not be required.

Supercharged engines do not get better fuel economy than suitably sized naturally aspirated engines unless the driver resists the temptation to use the turbos.

Given the same peak power output turbo engines deliver better fuel economy because they are much smaller displacement AND in normal driving the smaller engine delivers suitable performance. Turbo engines running at high boost pressures and high pressure supercharged engines do not deliver better fuel economy than larger engines delivering the same power, that's just physics. Power comes from fuel burned. Period. And don't bother raising the example of modern F1 engines. They extract more energy from the same amount of fuel using technology so expensive it will never filter down to street engines.

In the early 70's SAAB developed the first turbocharged street engine that was a 2.0 litre four specifically designed to be more fuel efficient than a 3.0 litre V6 or V8 while capable of similar, or as it proved to be, much better performance. SAAB engineers were very clear that this could only work if the driver engaged significant boost for less than 15% of total driving time. Any more use of the turbo pressure destroyed any fuel economy advantage.

About the same time Keith Duckworth (yes, that Keith Duckworth ) proposed a F1 engine rule that limited only total fuel consumption for the race. He predicted that such a rule would deliver large displacement very low pressure turbocharged engines that would then produce the most power for the least fuel consumed. Anything more than a few psi of boost in place of more displacement would produce more power but consume a disproportionately larger amount of fuel.

BMW with their eta engine proved that smaller engines using larger throttle openings delivered better fuel economy for the same performance. This supports Duckworth's idea that pumping losses are the main problem. This in turn led to low pressure turbos for street engines. Only with much more powerful onboard computers and more sophisticated sensors and engine management were the benefits of low pressure turbocharging and high pressure turbocharging available in one engine. Variable compression ratio engines are achieved by three basic methods: supercharging whether mechanical or exhaust turbine driven, actual movement of the crankshaft relative to the head, or variations on the Miller cycle or Atkinson cycle such as used by Mazda and now pretty much perfected in their Skyactiv engines.

These principles apply only to throttled engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
503 Posts
ossodisepia...you are absolutely right.

The main reason for turbocharged engines for mass produced low to medium priced vehicles is for gas mileage so they can get down overall average for all the cars they produce. Again and again and again I have seen tests of turbocharged small cars with small 4 cylinder turbo engines have incredibly good on paper gas mileage and this "only" occurs if the engine is off boost. In real world tests by auto magazines they constantly find, again and again and again. that they need the turbo boost to have any kind of performance and that if using boost is used continually then the gas mileage is way worse than an equivalent normally aspirated engine.

Also in street driving I in my opinion even with all these latest generation turbos they are still not as incisive in response as naturally aspirated engines when off boost and that they come on boost maybe at 1500rpm, when in street driving where I live I am very often below 1500rpm and what matters is 0-1500rpm and in this range normally aspirated engines are much better! Of course this pertains to combustion engines since electric engines are a whole different argument.
 
181 - 200 of 217 Posts
Top