What’s Veeky Forums‘s opinion on the Alfa 4c? There’s lots of low mileage used ones for sale...

What’s Veeky Forums‘s opinion on the Alfa 4c? There’s lots of low mileage used ones for sale. Are they shit or just too small for my fellow Amerifats?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=aJ0W-Cq7wHI
avl.com/-/avl-hyper-200-concept-engine
vimeo.com/58259204
youtube.com/watch?v=irPZ5_WdCas
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Overpriced autotragic unreliable italitrash

If it was manual, it would be great. It totally defeats the purpose of buying a super light, super impractical roadster.

Honestly, an S2 Lotus Elise/Exige would be a much better buy.

*Meant to say that because it is automatic, it defeats the purpose of it.

I personally think they'll be people sperging over them in 10 years. Currently, I feel it's overshadowed by its price. I'm really hoping the Giulia works out better for Alfa sales wise.

No one hardly even knows what an Alfa is, much less know where a dealer is.

ask yourself

>why are lost of low mileage used ones for sale

You got your answer.

Low grade carbon, small displacement, hefty price tag competing with the big dogs but no pedigree, no power and no status; cheaper comparable cars do the job better.

in b4 the muh alfa passion tards

They need to be manual

Over9kpreludegoy has one.
I'd have bought one if they were available in manual transmission.

They would be an instant classic appreciating sports car if they had manual.
They're going to be rare as shit in 10 years and will probably still hold a fair value, but nothing like they would if they were manny.

Damn shame Europoors are so fucking stupid.
>hurr durr automatic for expensive cars!

If they did any bit of market research they'd know that wealthy Americans buy sports cars in manual before they're even produced.
Just because becky wants an automatic escalade doesn't mean dr shecklestein wants an automatic track toy.

>automatic

>opened the hood
>the hood is actually welded shut from the factory

it would have been an astronomical buy if it had a manual but because it just had to have an automatic transmission zero enthusiasts would actually buy them

>implying 4c isn’t short for Veeky Forums

Alfa is literally /our brand/

>If it was manual
They don't come with standard?
You've got to be fucking kidding me. What a waste.

he probably meant the engine hatch

He's actually talking about the giulia quadrifoglio but alfas are all the same cheaply built overpriced automatic only shit

Like most Italian products:
I love the design
I know it will fall apart

I think it's my ideal successor to my MR-Spyder, but it's also a mistake waiting to happen and bite me in the butt when I could get a cayman for the same money.

There's an Alfa dealer just down the street from my house. It's across the street from a Burger King.

I see a couple driving around once in a while - people doing test drives and such.

no manual no care

>Low grade carbon

It's made from a company which produces aerospacial grade carbon fiber parts, parts that go to space.

>small displacement

Yet is as fast as some supercars on the burgerring

>hefty price tag competing with the big dogs

Low production model, nothing strange here since the Alpine A110 costs the same

>no pedigree, no power and no status

Imagine being this butthurt and ignorant at the same time

>Damn shame Europoors are so fucking stupid.
>I know better than FCA

If they made that car manual is because they knew the biggest part of every lot of 4C sold would've been automatic.

Since they don't have a valid manual gearbox in house they didn't want to buy one from, let's say Getrag, because the homologation costs and engineering costs would've been impossible to cover with the projected sales of this hypotetical manual model.

You have to realize that, as usual, the Usa =/= the world and nobody gives a fuck if everything in your country goes backwards (everyone drives an automatic and doesn't even know how to use a manual but for some reason when it's a sports model everybody wants a manual)...Alfa Romeo DOESN'T HAVE MONEY to make a manual 4C for your market. Get in your fuckin heads, they're not idiots like you picture them.

It's a ton of car for the money, and more fun to drive than anything else in the price range. You definitely need to own something else more practical if you plan on transporting anything bigger than a backpack, but I'm about 6' and fit just fine. You can't be America-tier heavy though, the car has a weight cap of 333lbs for occupants + cargo.

>No one hardly even knows what an Alfa is, much less know where a dealer is.
I have a 4C. Pic related, plus >Low grade carbon
It's quality stuff and the car is actually hand-built. Don't take my word for it either, watch one being built: youtube.com/watch?v=aJ0W-Cq7wHI
>small displacement
Lightweight turbo, it's the design.
>hefty price tag competing with the big dogs but no pedigree
Alfa has plenty of pedigree, but no one in America remembers them anymore.
>no power and no status; cheaper comparable cars do the job better.
Faster than comparable cars (ex. Cayman), and you don't belong on Veeky Forums if you buy for the badge alone.

>weight cap of 333lbs for occupants + cargo.

Fugg, my little Honda NX caps at 300lbs

>not having an Alfa Romeo custom guitar

> more fun to drive than anything else in the price range
Corvette
Corvette Z51
Corvette Grand Sport.

Until the oil stays in the engine

He he. That was 4 yrs ago in the first months run of a 100% new model. Are you seriously going to take the position that an Italian made limited run car is more reliable than a mass produced American car? I'll dumb it down-- do you think an Italian car is more reliable than anyone's car?

>everything is less reliable than a GM product

Is this the opposites day?

I'm 170 lbs, but combined with another tall skinny guy that would be over 333 lbs. Where'd you get that weight figure from? Also, would that start to affect the ground clearance?

Something else to mention is that reliability is not that important to me seeing how I live next door to work. I don't commute, and there's a grocery store within walking distance. I'm only really driving less than 8K miles per year.

Just buy it. If you like it, buy it. People will argue for automagic transmissions being shit for this kind of car (and I agree). But it is your life and only your opinion matter in the end.

Ferrari for people who can't afford a Ferrari

What's the retail like on one of those?

>Where'd you get that weight figure from?
Sticker in the door. I remembered incorrectly though, it's 344lbs, with the trunk being 33lbs. Pic related.
>Also, would that start to affect the ground clearance?
That I'm not sure about. I've had an adult passenger and cargo in the car at the same time without issue though.

I can't speak to long-term reliability yet, but I drove mine 650 miles home the day I bought it without any problems.

Starts at 55K. Tops out at 80K.

Nothing wrong with that.

>as fast as supercars on the Ring
Lmao its time is 8:04 that is 14 seconds slower than the 2001 bmw m3 e46.

Rear suspension is fucking god awful because they didn't properly engineer a good one to fit in the narrow wheel wells allowed due to how much space the engine takes between them.

And it's full of cheap ass parts bin shit for the interior. Awful stitching.
Should have been like a $20k kit car at most with how poor the quality and engineering is.
But besides that, it's an okay car and very pretty.

It's slower than a base model corvette in every test and costs $20k more

>They haven't made a TTV6 version with 503hp yet

>b-but it's faster than supercars on the Ring
>b-but muh passion

The E46 does 8:21

I love alfa but there american game is so fucking weak its pathetic
>EVERYTHING is automatic because Alfa is retarded and doesn't know that people can drive manual here in America
>cars are so overpriced that its just stupid to buy one
>3 fucking cars in their line up and the only cars moving forward are SUVs
like I said I love alfa and have always wanted one but I hope they die and never return because this is just a huge slap in the face. Also the 4c is just a fucking waste dont even bother

Wrong
Btw this time was set by a journalist who drove the car at 90% of its potential

>championing a car that can carry less than a motorcycle
>champions italian car reliability
>champions 4 cylinder auto
>claims all gm is shit all the time

dipshitposter

GVWR is generally pretty conservative because lawyers, and exceeding it by a couple hundred pounds isn't going to cause any problems unless there's a weak spot in the chassis, axles, or suspension.

It should have been the swan song for the Busso.

It should have been a manual.

It should have been the car that brought Alfa Romeo into a rebirth, shaping the entire timeline of the company into either before, or after the 4C. As is, it was a pretty good research project that brought them automatics, heavy turbocharging, carbon fibre goodies, and RWD chassis dynamics. Most of that can be seen in the Giulia, which is a light, nimble, RWD car with lots of carbon fibre goodies.

>If they made that car manual it's because they wanted to experiment with the chassis dynamics of an automatic sportscar
FTFY.

>Since they don't have a valid manual gearbox in house
But they do. The 1.75T in the 4C comes straight from the Giulietta QV, which is available in both manual and DCT. Funny enough, the manual model is cheaper here, so quit your bullshit that Alfa doesn't have the money or the gearbox to make a manual 4C. It was a design choice from day 1.

Its too bad that Alfa is the equivalent of a fucking boomer saying "I know what I got" and seriously overpricing their whole line up when there are better cars that have more power, cost much less, and have a fucking manual option. Its just sad and a major Fuck up by Alfa and their sales are reflective of that

any of those vettes wpuld assblast a 4c while carrying the gf, 2 sets of clubs and weekend bags while getting 20mpg

Let's look at the Giulia QV for example.

>there are better cars that have more power
The QV makes every bit as much power as it's competitors:
>M3: 425hp
>M3 CP: 444hp
>RS4: 450hp
>ATS-V: 464hp
>C63: 469hp
>C63S: 503hp
>Giulia QV: 505hp
Unless you start comparing with 2 door, dedicated sportscar, that's hard to beat.

>cost much less
Let's look at that list again, including hp/1000$:
>M3 CP: 71K (6.3 hp/k$)
>RS4: 70K (6.4 hp/k$)*
>M3: 66K (6.48 hp/1000$)
>C63S: 74K (6.8hp/k$)
>Giulia QV: 74K (6.8hp/k$)
>C63: 66K (7.1hp/k$)
>ATS-V: 64K (7.25hp/k$)
I used the 70 Car and Driver quoted for the new RS5, there's no info on the new RS4 yet. Note that the Giulia QV is in the upper half in terms of hp/$, despite being the most powerful in it's category. That's called good value, especially if you consider the fact that it's heavily awrded for it's driving characteristics, just like the Alpha chassis ATS, and the C63. You can't go wrong with any of those, really.

>have a fucking manual
Note that nobody but BMW and Cadillac offer a manual in their performance sedans. Alfa does offer one in Europe, but the market is just too tight in the US, apparently. Guess which two brands are most keen on distinguishing themselves as driver's cars: BMW and Cadillac.

Alfa's sales are reflective of the fact that they aren't making enough SUV's and CUV's, because those are popular.

>look at me I know how to google shit

Do you realise that the Giulietta has a transverse front engine and FWD and the 4C has a mid engine with RWD traction?

Shit has to be reingenereed to be adapted to the new layout, and this is very expensive you mong.

Also, the Giulietta with the last evolution of the 1750 tbi is only sold with the TCT dual clutch gearbox, so you're wrong again.

>Busso

The Busso has been discontinued only because it was so archaic and because of (((emissions))). Too expensive to develop it to respect new Euro X normatives and too old and thirsty to compete with modern engines.

Low mileage used sports car means it was beat to shit in that short time before the engine was broken in.

You do realise that the Giulietta uses a transverse FWD engine, and the 4C uses the exact same transverse engine and DCT gearbox, but then planted on the rear wheels? This is the classic recipe that Toyota for example used for the MR2: take a transverse FWD shitbox engine (Corolla), place it in the rear, bam, great handling roadster.
Even the part number for the DCT is identical, and the Giulietta's manual bolts right up to both the 4C subframe and the 1.75T engine. Exactly nothing has to be reengineered to put it there, save for some ECU changes.

The Giulietta Veloce/QV/whatever it's called where you live originally only came with a manual, then also got a DCT just after the 4C released, and now it's DCT only. It's still the same basic chassis though, which explains why the 1.75T bolts right up to both the DCT and manual gearbox, and both gearboxes fit perfectly in the 4C and Giulietta subframes. It's because FCA has a manual with exactly the same packaging as the DCT.

If we're talking about expensively adapting the 1.75T to a place where it should never had belonged, and FCA never having the funds to do so: how come they put it in that new 124 Spider rallycar anyways? Talk about a niche market...

A man can dream, user.

Cadillac CTS V costs $87k and has 640hp and a manual gearbox

The CTS-V is a mid-sized executive car (E-segment), designed to compete against the E63, RS6, and M5.
The Giulia is a compact exectuvie car (D-segment), designed to compete against the C63, RS4 and M3.

Also, the CTS-V does not come with a manual anymore. They also dropped the wagon form, which turns it from patrician-tier into just good value-tier.

you got me user and I applaud you. The only thing i don't understand is that Alfa wants to establish itself as a prestige driver's car like BMW and Caddy but doesnt even offer a manual in its sport roadster or its performance sedan. I mean I know the market is tight but still they couldve shipped over a few hundred manuals instead of just shutting us out. Not bashing the auto im sure its amazing but i just prefer manual

>If we're talking about expensively adapting the 1.75T to a place where it should never had belonged, and FCA never having the funds to do so: how come they put it in that new 124 Spider rallycar anyways?
Isn't it pretty much the same engine as the 1.4T that's already in there?

My guess is that road homolofation is just too expensive, and FCA has a peculiar view on automatic vs. manual in the US market. They've got all the pieces to give you a manual Charger, up to Hellcat level, but they won't because it will require expensive homologation. Combine that with a very, very small niche market, and it's obvious that Alfa doesn't want to sell manual QV's here, because it's simply too expensive to be worthwhile.

They should just pull a Porsche: sell manuals for a 50K premium, that'll fix the pricing.

how expensive would it be to just order a tranny and get it swapped in?

exactly just let us have something, besides they act like they are fucking poor but Fiat makes a metric Fuck ton of money a year, so they are just being stingey

No. The 1.4T is a descendant of the FIRE engine, but with Multiair and a turbo on it. The FIRE can only go up to a 72mm bore while the 1.75T in the 4C and Giulietta QV is a 83mm stroke. It's a completely different block, but with very similar packaging.

Done by an Alfa dealer? Impossible, they'll just refuse.
You could go to the aftermarket, though. A second hand transmission is only 2K, but instalation will be the pain in the ass here. The gearbox itself is straightforward and should bolt right up, but the shifter mechanism and ECU throwing a shitfit is what will bite you. Then you'll have to hack up the interior, to place the shift levers and such. It's anybody's guess how much a dedicated shop would ask for that, nevermind how reliable the swap would be, because I'd be expecting the ECU to bitch 100% of the time.

Not that it can't be done:
avl.com/-/avl-hyper-200-concept-engine
>twincharged
>turbo
>electric supercharger
>474hp
>manual
HNNNNNNNG.

In such a position you can literally buy anything that's not an old shitbox and not worry about reliability.

I say, if you have the money, go for it.

>The CTS-V is a mid-sized executive car (E-segment)
>The Giulia is a compact exectuvie car (D-segment)

>Cognitive Dissonance kicking in...
Working hard to justify the Alfa, I see

>switches from 4C to Giulia when things gets tough

bullshit, I'm in MA and I've identified at least 7 different Giulias on my daily drive

I've owned a couple without any issues and my most unreliable car was a Mazda so I consigned it to Internet meme status personally.

Toyota literally lifted that recipe from FIAT.

Are you in the Ann Arbor area?

More than you can afford pal

a worse lotus elise/exige

What on earth makes you say that?

>tfw Giuseppe Busso, the father of the engine carrying his name (also many successful Alfa Romeo models), has died 3 days after the production of the V6 Busso was shut down.

If this isn't soul & passion...

I strongly suggest to read his book "Nel Cuore dell'Alfa", it's an heartwarming autobiography and history of his work in Alfa Romeo since his first day.

>book related

vimeo.com/58259204

Also when he died many Alfisti spontaneously radunated outside the church at his funeral and revved up their V6 Busso engines while the coffin was passing by them.

After that, they took the coffin to Arese for the very last tour, through the ruins and the remainings of the Alfa Romeo historic plant (after the Portello of course).

>radunated

I meant reunited kek

I disagree.
355 prices are not doing well.
Supposedly because it (and the 348) are stuck in a no-man's land of Ferraris. Too new to interest those who want classics like a 308/328, but too old to do engine in service (like a 360 or 430), which terrifies owners.

Tbh I never even knew people called it the Busso till this decade via the net, always been known as an Arese where I live, like a Windsor, Cleveland or Kent and I've owned two.

youtube.com/watch?v=irPZ5_WdCas

Buy at the bottom of thew depreciation curve/start of the next financial crisis whichever happens first and then sell when everyone from the ages of 10-15 now will be in their mid 30s

>vimeo.com/58259204

Jesus christ I have tears to my eyes.

My grandfather worked at Alfa Romeo in Arese.

>be Alfa Romeo some years ago
>only sell Giulietta and Mito (rebadged Punto)
>suddenly out of blue a 4C pops out
>it's a phenomenal car
>do the same thing with the Giulia
>what they achieved it's even more astonishing

HOW DO ALFA ROMEO DO THIS?

By hiring several ferrari engineers.

>several

They only worked on the engine, in conjunction with Alfa Romeo engineers, the rest is all up to Alfa Romeo.

/Thread

>Comparing apples to oranges
Why not compare the CTS-V to something more similar, like the E63S or new M5? That's more of it's playing field.

Note that the CTS-V is at least 13K more expensive in it's home market than the most expensive performance sedan in the D segment (C63S). The entire performance D segment only ranges 10K (64 to 74K), so the CTS-V is definitely beyond what the Giulia is aimed for. If youc an't discern between automotive classes, I have a full-sized Tesla luxury car to sell you.

Fuck I completely forgot the X1/9.

You know what, the 4C is a whole load mroe tolerable as a X1/9 successor, than it is as a disappointing miniature supercar.

The 4C was phenomenal is some aspects, but sucks in a whole lot of others. It's a kind of silly fourth car, so that doesn't matter though. Alfa then used all the knowledge gained from the 4C to make the Giulia so damn good. The Giulia has it's flaws, though, but you're willing to overlook those because it's finally a good Alfa.

This, basically.

Overall the 4C was pretty shit, and didn't have the engineering and manufacturing budget to be actually good.
But it was a stepping stone to making the actually good Giulia.