Royal 8C Competitizione spotted in Amsterdam...

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:42:10 GMT, Catman
> wrote:

>Or they just don't care......

You'd think they might with the extended paintwork warranties you get
these days (3 years even for an Alfa).

--
Z
Scotland
Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather
'Oil' be seeing you..
(Email without 'Alfa' in subject will be auto-deleted..sorry!)

Zathras wrote:

> Apparently, the 500 suffers from a fidgety, bouncy ride with the car
> being pushed about on uneven road surfaces. The softer suspended
> 'Lounge' is quite acceptable for this (in its class) but the sport is

There is some confusion with the trim levels. The Popular, Lounge &
Sport have identical suspension setups, the designations are simply trim.

The 1.4 models have uprated suspension and with 16" wheels will have the
hardest ride. The Lounge has exactly the same as the Sport. Believe me
having driven a 1.4 on 16s it doesn't feel hard compared with an Audi A3
and not too dissimilar from a 147 albeit the little car has more bounce.
I wouldn't want it any softer but that is personal opinion based on
having fairly stiffly spring cars (I found a 159 too soft compared with
a 156 Veloce).

In Fiat parlance "Sport" is no more than trim level (you can have a
Punto Grande 1.2 Active Sport which just has different trim, no sporting
pretensions. The "Sporting" variant is the quicker versions (confused?)

Sport is meant to appeal to the younger driver but many think it is a
sportier drive.

> As a girlie *town* car, the 500 Lounge and panoramic roof will excel
> but trying to make it something different will take it into areas it
> simply isn't competent in right now. 'Sport' mode with the current
> slow engine range, performance and handling doesn't sound like a
> particularly good fit.

Like I said Sport doesn't mean sporting, the Abarth versions will
provide that.

The Sport button is a bit of a gimmick, you could turn it around and
have it set to Sport as standard and have a City button to lighten
things up. Although it may appeal to a his and hers mentality where a
car is shared.

As for slow, well the 1.4 is the 100hp unit and feels as quick as the
147. It is only about 1 sec off the 147 to 60 and being a more frenetic
ride feels reasonably quick.

To be honest with its cutesy looks nippiness seems the right quality
rather than hot hatch performance and it revs nicely like a little
Italian car should.

In my view the 147 2.0 doesn't meet the expectations of a 150bhp warm
hatch whereas the 500 exceeds the expectations of a little city car.

> I'll be waiting for the Abarth for a, hopefully, useful attempt at a
> 'sport' button.

Certainly the current 500 range is only Mini One performance and to be
honest its appeal is different to the Mini that it doesn't matter that
the Mini is ultimately more sporting, just as choosing an Alfa over a
rear drive BMW which would win on the track.

The Abarth will move it into Cooper territory and be a true "Sporting"
model.

I wish Fiat would rename the "Sport" trim level as it only deceives.

Cheers
Tony

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 19:49:21 GMT, Tony R
> wrote:

>Zathras wrote:
>
>> Apparently, the 500 suffers from a fidgety, bouncy ride with the car
>> being pushed about on uneven road surfaces. The softer suspended
>> 'Lounge' is quite acceptable for this (in its class) but the sport is
>
>There is some confusion with the trim levels. The Popular, Lounge &
>Sport have identical suspension setups, the designations are simply trim.

...and wheels. The Pop has 14 inch wheels as standard except in the 1.4
which has the 15 inch wheels..according to my 'You are. We Car'
brochure.

>The 1.4 models have uprated suspension and with 16" wheels will have the
>hardest ride. The Lounge has exactly the same as the Sport.

Yes, you are completely correct. I was misled by reviews of the 1.4
16v Sport with the biggest wheels (i.e test cars with extra options
pretending to be just the standard Sport car) compared to Lounge cars
with more 'comfortable' options (smaller wheels). However the
journalists reporting this may also have been confused by the harder
seats in the Sport spec.

>As for slow, well the 1.4 is the 100hp unit and feels as quick as the
>147. It is only about 1 sec off the 147 to 60 and being a more frenetic
>ride feels reasonably quick.

I've never been impressed with any 147 I've driven - all should have
been quicker with tighter suspension IMHO.

>In my view the 147 2.0 doesn't meet the expectations of a 150bhp warm
>hatch whereas the 500 exceeds the expectations of a little city car.

Indeed.

--
Z
Scotland
Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather
'Oil' be seeing you..
(Email without 'Alfa' in subject will be auto-deleted..sorry!)

Zathras wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:42:10 GMT, Catman
> > wrote:
>
>> Or they just don't care......
>
> You'd think they might with the extended paintwork warranties you get
> these days (3 years even for an Alfa).

Ah, but you try claiming on a paintwork problem!

(mate's GT has flaking red paint on it's rear bumper and nearside wing, Alfa
told him he's had an accident and had the car resprayed..... which was news
to him, the insurance company and the lease company!)

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:47:16 -0000, " cupra"
>, wrote:

>Zathras wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:42:10 GMT, Catman
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Or they just don't care......
>>
>> You'd think they might with the extended paintwork warranties you get
>> these days (3 years even for an Alfa).
>
>Ah, but you try claiming on a paintwork problem!
>
>(mate's GT has flaking red paint on it's rear bumper and nearside wing, Alfa
>told him he's had an accident and had the car resprayed..... which was news
>to him, the insurance company and the lease company!)
>
Is he certain that the car did not get a scratch during
shipping/unloading and was painted before he bought it?

Is he certain that the car did not get scratched at the
dealership and was quietly sprayed by them before sale?

Is he certain that the car did not suffer a scratch at dealers
after sale to him but before collection and was sprayed on the QT?

These all have and do happen :-(

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:35:05 +0000, > wrote:

>Is he certain that the car did not get a scratch during
>shipping/unloading and was painted before he bought it?
>
>Is he certain that the car did not get scratched at the
>dealership and was quietly sprayed by them before sale?
>
>Is he certain that the car did not suffer a scratch at dealers
>after sale to him but before collection and was sprayed on the QT?
>
>These all have and do happen :-(

...especially on Alfas..IME! :-(

--
Z
Scotland
Alfa Romeo 156 2.4JTD Veloce Leather
'Oil' be seeing you..
(Email without 'Alfa' in subject will be auto-deleted..sorry!)

Pete wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 20:47:16 -0000, " cupra"
> >, wrote:
>
>> Zathras wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:42:10 GMT, Catman
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Or they just don't care......
>>>
>>> You'd think they might with the extended paintwork warranties you
>>> get these days (3 years even for an Alfa).
>>
>> Ah, but you try claiming on a paintwork problem!
>>
>> (mate's GT has flaking red paint on it's rear bumper and nearside
>> wing, Alfa told him he's had an accident and had the car
>> resprayed..... which was news to him, the insurance company and the
>> lease company!)
>>
> Is he certain that the car did not get a scratch during
> shipping/unloading and was painted before he bought it?
>
> Is he certain that the car did not get scratched at the
> dealership and was quietly sprayed by them before sale?
>
> Is he certain that the car did not suffer a scratch at dealers
> after sale to him but before collection and was sprayed on the QT?
>
> These all have and do happen :-(

Yeah - he's considered all of those..... it's peeling from two distinct and
different areas so if it did happen they must have run it through a gorse
bush or something!

The annoying thing (for him) is he's got a really cheap buy back price from
the lease company (who were unaware of the problem at the time) which
*would* have made him a couple of grand selling it on straight away!