|
|
Alfa Romeo 4C
|
|
|
|
Debut: 2013
Maker: Alfa Romeo
Predecessor:
No
|
|
|
|
Published
on 30
Oct 2013
|
All rights reserved.
|
|
The introduction of
Alfa 4C caught many people a surprise. You know, in recent years Alfa
Romeo has been downgrading from a full-range manufacturer to a company
that sells only 2 hatchbacks, i.e. MiTo and Giulietta. There are no
more mid-size 159, executive-class 166 as well as the niche GT and
Brera. Production volume slid from 200,000 units a decade ago to just
over 100,000 units last year. It talked about returning to America time
after time but the plan has never materialized. Meanwhile, rumors about
the possible takeover by Volkswagen group never die. But then you
remember the 8C, a Maserati that happened to wear the Alfa badge. It
was a hand-built, very exclusive model that Alfa Romeo needed the
least. Somehow, Marchionne liked the idea of 8C because it kept fans
happy and their faith on the historic marque alive. At least, it fooled
people that Fiat was still committing to Alfa Romeo.
The smaller 4C has the same mission. Being sold at £45,000, this
little mid-engined sports car is more expensive than the base Porsche
Boxster or Cayman. As a result, it is expected to sell only 3500 cars a
year, and production is carried out again by Maserati at Modena like
the 8C. Obviously, profitability is not a concern. It might earn a
profit
or it might make a loss, but either way, that will be too slim to
bother Fiat. The big money lies on Chrysler. If Marchionne manages to
get Chrysler floating on stock market, he can get the cash to invest
into the rest of the group. Then the proposed 3 and 5-series fighters
and a couple of SUVs can be developed for Alfa. Unfortunately, this
won't happen soon enough.
Alfa needs time, so it buys time with the 4C.
It goes without saying that the 4C is a "halo car". It has to look sexy
yet dramatic. Moreover, being an Italian
sports car, it has to capture your heart from the first sight – unlike
many German cars that take a long time to grow on you. Given the
glorious track records of Alfa Romeo Centro Stile, we won't doubt its
ability to pen such a design. To most extent, the final product doesn't
disappoint. This car is short (just shy of 4 meters) but
it is incredibly wide (1864 mm) and low (1183 mm). Painted in red, many
motoring journalists described it as a baby Ferrari – didn't we hear
the same for Fiat X1/9 and Toyota MR2? If Ferrari
built a four-cylinder model, it would probably look like this one.
However,
in my eyes it is even closer to Lotus Elise/Exige/Evora. Those heavily
curved fenders, crisped crease lines, taut middle section as well as
the glasshouse profile owe more to the British classic than anything
ever designed in Italy. That hurts its individuality a little. On the
contrary, the combination of triangular grille and V-shape bonnet are
purely Alfa. They worked well on all kinds of Alfa since the 156, but
on the mid-engined sports car they look even more stylish! A lot less
satisfying are the odd "Spider" headlights,
which consist of exposed halogen/LED lamps and a black plastic
surrounding panel.
They
saved Alfa a few million euros to engineer bespoke headlights
though.
With obvious diffusers and a pronounced boot spoiler, the 4C is one of
the few of its class to produce positive downforce without resorting to
active aerodynamic aids. Meanwhile, the Cd of 0.34 is not bad.
Let's turn to the technical side. The most special about the 4C is that
it is built around a carbon-fiber tub. Until recently, carbon-fiber
chassis is still regarded to be exclusive to top supercars like Pagani,
Bugatti or Koenigsegg. More recently, McLaren MP4-12C lowered the entry
price point to the region of £170,000. Now at £45,000, Alfa
4C is clearly the first affordable application of this exotic
technology. Its carbon-fiber tub was designed by Dallara, which also
built the carbon tub of KTM X-bow, and produced by Italian supplier
Adler Plastic using a new
low cost process. It weighs only 65 kg and provides a rigidity that I
suspect should be far superior to the extruded aluminum chassis of
Lotus
Elise. Bolted fore and aft of the tub are aluminum subframes – the rear
one
supports the engine, gearbox and rear suspensions, while the front is
purely crash structure (front suspensions are mounted directly to the
tub). There is also an aluminum roll cage mounted behind the seats to
protect the occupants as well as to reinforce the roof. Outside, the
body shell is made of sheet moulding compound like Lotus, or in our
words, simply glass-fiber. This explains why the panel gaps are rather
large and inconsistent, failing to deliver the high quality feel of
Porsche.
The front suspensions are bespoke double-wishbones with coaxial springs
and dampers. The rear ones are MacPherson struts, transplanted from
Giulietta Cloverleaf together with the transversely mounted 1750
engine. This seems inferior to the all-wishbones layout of Lotus, but
Porsche Boxster/Cayman has been using struts at all corners for years
without any complaints.
Unsurprisingly, the 4C is a lightweight. Alfa quotes a dry weight of
just 895 kg or a wet weight of 925 kg – the small difference can be
explained by the tiny, 40-liter fuel tank. In other words, it weighs
the same as a supercharged Elise S. This, in addition to the
40:60 weight distribution, means it doesn't need any kinds of power
assistance to corrupt the steering feel. The lightweight also means the
dual-cast Brembo brakes (305 mm front and 280 mm rear) provide
sensational stopping performance.
As expected, getting into the cockpit takes some skill, because you
have to overcome the carbon-fiber sill and the small door aperture.
Once inside, however, the space is surprisingly good. There is plenty
of head and legroom for a regular size driver. The seats are thin and
mounted right on the bare carbon-fiber floor (which looks great), but
they are adequately supportive. The dashboard has little style to speak
of and the plastic is poorer than a £20K hot hatch. Materials and
build quality are no match for Porsche, of course. It might be less
spartan than Lotus Elise, but it shows the dark side of Italian
workmanship in the way of rough finishes – after all, the cost spent to
the expensive chassis has to be recouped elsewhere. Creature comfort
stands between Porsche and Lotus. It offers a configurable TFT
instrument reading, a few storage spaces, a DNA switch (which alters
the gearshift speed, throttle response,
stability control etc. to suit your mood) while air-con, radio and
electric mirrors are optional (which adds weight though), so it won't
be as tiresome
to drive as the Lotus.
Well, provided you wear earplugs. Fire the 1750 engine, you will be
overwhelmed by plenty of noises – fuel injector noise, valve-gear
noise, turbo wastegate whoosh and gearchange noise, not to mention the
raucous exhaust bark. This car has no mufflers, and the soundproofing
is thin to save weight. All contribute to a hardcore aural appeal. Is
it exciting? Yes. It is also purposeful and special. Some even said it
sounds like a 1.6 turbo WRC rally car when you drive hard. Is it
beautiful? Not quite. The four-cylinder turbo soundtrack has no hope to
match a Porsche 6-cylinder boxer or the late Alfa V6.
Neither does its power delivery. This engine is a bit different from
that of the Giulietta Cloverleaf. It has the cast iron block replaced
with a new aluminum unit to save 22 kg, and the ECU has been tweaked to
deliver slightly more peak power and torque, now at 240 hp and 258 lbft
respectively. For a motor displacing only 1742 cc, it is amazingly
strong. As in Giulietta, it has direct injection and its dual-VVT
utilizes scavenging effect to reduce turbo lag. To a car as light as
the 4C, 240 horsepower is more than adequte and the mid-range torque is
even sensational – some 74 lbft more than the supercharged Elise S!
This make the performance claims of 160 mph and 0-60 in 4.3 seconds
credible. In straight line for up to 150 mph, it is about as quick as a
Cayman S. Nevertheless, the 1750 engine just doesn't shine. Why?
Because its output is heavily concentrated to the mid-range. It reaches
the peak at around 5500 rpm, from then to the 6500 rpm cut-out there is
little reward. As a result, you tend to use its mid-range torque to
drive it rather than wind it crazily like you would in a Porsche or you
did with the good old Alfa twin-cam. That doesn't sound right for a
sports car, especially one with an Alfa badge! Besides, the turbo
engine also lacks the instantaneous throttle response of a naturally
aspirated motor.
The TCT 6-speed twin-clutch gearbox is similar. Admittedly, its revised
software makes it a lot better than the Giulietta Cloverleaf or any
other applications in the Fiat group. The gearchange is less jerky and
the speed in Dynamic or Race mode is finally quick enough (just).
However, the Fiat in-house-built unit is still nowhere as good as
Volkswagen DSG, let alone Porsche PDK. After all, its dry-clutch design
is oriented to cheap cars instead of performance cars.
That said, you can't deny that the 4C is a very quick and effective
driving tool, no matter on road or track. Its handling is really good.
Thanks to the stiff chassis, the very wide track and well tuned chassis
balance, it corners beautifully, displaying first class roadholding,
composure and agility. It feels really light and responsive to steer.
In this respect, it feels closer to Elise than Cayman. The 4C corners
with absolute neutrality at normal speed. To push it beyond the limits
of its grippy tires you need to drive it on a race track, by then it
will understeer a bit to make you feel safe. You can provoke it into
oversteer with the strong mid-range torque and quick counter steer, but
even then it won't be difficult to save. The braking – overspecced for
the weight it needs to take care of – is simply mega. As a track tool,
the 4C makes even the Cayman S looks a little civilized. Its true rival
should be Exige S V6.
Meanwhile, the ride quality is good for a mid-engined sports car,
approaching the level of Elise and allowing you to drive fast on
mountain roads without reserve. The unassisted steering might feel
heavy at parking speed, but once in rolling it is beautifully weighted,
and it transfers honest feedback to your hands, including the small
kickbacks and vibrations that you might find missing in a new 911.
Ultimately, due to the mediocre engine and gearbox it fails to beat the
mighty Cayman S. And this is before we consider the 4C's tiny boot
(just 110 liters), near non-existent rear visibility, sub-standard
build quality and lack of comfort/safety equipment. However, it does
look sexier and feels sportier to drive. Some say the 4C bridges the
wide gap between Elise and Cayman S. In my opinion, you had better to
see it as an Elise-plus rather than a Cayman S-minus, because in
essence it is closer to the Lotus.
|
Verdict: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4C
|
2013
|
Mid-engined,
RWD
|
Carbon-fiber tub + aluminum subframes
|
Glass-fiber |
3989 / 1864 / 1183 mm
|
2380 mm |
Inline-4
|
1742 cc |
DOHC 16 valves, DVVT
|
Turbo
|
DI |
240 hp / 6000 rpm
|
258 lbft / 2200-4250 rpm
|
6-speed twin-clutch
|
F: double-wishbone
R: strut
|
-
|
F: 205/40ZR18
R: 235/35ZR19
|
EU: 925 kg (895 kg dry)
US: 1118 kg
|
160 mph (c)
|
4.3 (c) / 4.1*
|
10.7*
|
|
4C Spider
|
2015
|
Mid-engined,
RWD
|
Carbon-fiber tub + aluminum subframes
|
Glass-fiber |
3989 / 1864 / 1185 mm
|
2380 mm |
Inline-4
|
1742 cc |
DOHC 16 valves, DVVT
|
Turbo
|
DI |
240 hp / 6000 rpm
|
258 lbft / 2200-4250 rpm
|
6-speed twin-clutch
|
F: double-wishbone
R: strut
|
-
|
F: 205/40ZR18
R: 235/35ZR19
|
EU: 940 kg
US: 1128 kg (kerb)
|
160 mph (c)
|
4.3 (c) / 4.2*
|
11.1*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance
tested by: *C&D
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright©
1997-2015
by Mark Wan @ AutoZine
|
|