FA: Alfa Romeo GTV Lusso - Final Hour

[Karl]

http://tinyurl.co.uk/ilsd

Cheers

[AstraVanMan]

> http://tinyurl.co.uk/ilsd
>
> Cheers

"the best possible colour, metallic Proteo Red"

Nope, the best possible colour is Nuvola Blue. Period,

Peter

[SteveH]

AstraVanMan <****Off@WithThanks.com> wrote:

> > http://tinyurl.co.uk/ilsd
> >
> > Cheers
>
> "the best possible colour, metallic Proteo Red"
>
> Nope, the best possible colour is Nuvola Blue.

AFAIK, however, that has never been offered on the GTV.

So, red, by default, is the best colour.

HTH ;-)
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

[AstraVanMan]

> > > http://tinyurl.co.uk/ilsd
> > >
> > > Cheers
> >
> > "the best possible colour, metallic Proteo Red"
> >
> > Nope, the best possible colour is Nuvola Blue.
>
> AFAIK, however, that has never been offered on the GTV.
>
> So, red, by default, is the best colour.
>
> HTH ;-)

You obviously know little then :-)

There's one on Auto Trader at the moment. Do a nationwide search for GTVs,
then type in Nuvola into one of the options boxes, and it comes up with one.

I can't seem to do the links to the pop-up Autotrader ads, and a link to the
search page would be about 28.56 lines long, so I'll leave you to do the
search. Here's the text anyhoo:

2003 ALFA ROMEO GTV 2.0 TS
LUSSO, 2003, 03 reg. 13000 miles, nuvola blue, red leather seats, cd auto
changer, climate control, abs, alloy wheels, alarm/immobiliser, electric
windows, heated mirrors, driver & passenger airbags, 1-owner, 2-year Alfa
warranty, full Alfa service history, immaculate. £13,495 . ono

Gotta admit I'm not all that keep on red leather seats, but especially in
that colour, it does seem a reasonable deal. Seems to be around the going
rate for that age/mileage, not a grand or two more due to the colour. In
fact, keeping on looking through GTVs <2 years old, it actually looks to be
quite cheap. I'm almost tempted. <phones up enquiring> Still, very very
tempted (still for sale).

A few questions about GTVs in general - are they RWD? Are they good? Any
problems I might expect with one? What sort of economy could I expect from
the 2.0TS 16v engine (it's the manual, not the horrible selespeed) ? Would
that size engine feel underpowered in a GTV, or would it be the one of
choice due to weight/front/rear balance? How heavy is a GTV anyway?

Peter

[SteveH]

AstraVanMan <****Off@WithThanks.com> wrote:

> > > > http://tinyurl.co.uk/ilsd
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > >
> > > "the best possible colour, metallic Proteo Red"
> > >
> > > Nope, the best possible colour is Nuvola Blue.
> >
> > AFAIK, however, that has never been offered on the GTV.
> >
> > So, red, by default, is the best colour.
> >
> > HTH ;-)
>
> You obviously know little then :-)

Must have only been introduced recently-ish, then, as I'm almost certain
older ones never came in it.

> There's one on Auto Trader at the moment. Do a nationwide search for GTVs,
> then type in Nuvola into one of the options boxes, and it comes up with one.

Aye, 2003 model. Still, I've never seen one.

> I can't seem to do the links to the pop-up Autotrader ads, and a link to the
> search page would be about 28.56 lines long, so I'll leave you to do the
> search. Here's the text anyhoo:
>
> 2003 ALFA ROMEO GTV 2.0 TS
> LUSSO, 2003, 03 reg. 13000 miles, nuvola blue, red leather seats, cd auto
> changer, climate control, abs, alloy wheels, alarm/immobiliser, electric
> windows, heated mirrors, driver & passenger airbags, 1-owner, 2-year Alfa
> warranty, full Alfa service history, immaculate. £13,495 . ono
>
> Gotta admit I'm not all that keep on red leather seats, but especially in
> that colour, it does seem a reasonable deal. Seems to be around the going
> rate for that age/mileage, not a grand or two more due to the colour. In
> fact, keeping on looking through GTVs <2 years old, it actually looks to be
> quite cheap. I'm almost tempted. <phones up enquiring> Still, very very
> tempted (still for sale).

I wouldn't be, that's far, far too much money for a car.

> A few questions about GTVs in general - are they RWD? Are they good? Any
> problems I might expect with one? What sort of economy could I expect from
> the 2.0TS 16v engine (it's the manual, not the horrible selespeed) ? Would
> that size engine feel underpowered in a GTV, or would it be the one of
> choice due to weight/front/rear balance? How heavy is a GTV anyway?

They're not RWD, being based on a Tipo / 155 floorpan. Economy in the
mid 30s when 'pressing on', and it's the best balanced of them, but you
do miss out on the wonderful V6 sound.

--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

[AstraVanMan]

> > You obviously know little then :-)
>
> Must have only been introduced recently-ish, then, as I'm almost certain
> older ones never came in it.

Quite possibly.

> > There's one on Auto Trader at the moment. Do a nationwide search for
GTVs,
> > then type in Nuvola into one of the options boxes, and it comes up with
one.
>
> Aye, 2003 model. Still, I've never seen one.

Rare model. That means it'll depreciate slightly less poorly :-)
Mind you, having a quick look at GTV prices on autotrader, they seem to hold
their value reasonably well - 96/97 models at around £4k, 99 models around
£6k. Not terrible, and as far as a low-mileage nearly new car goes, it's a
bloody lovely looking car for the money.

> > Gotta admit I'm not all that keep on red leather seats, but especially
in
> > that colour, it does seem a reasonable deal. Seems to be around the
going
> > rate for that age/mileage, not a grand or two more due to the colour.
In
> > fact, keeping on looking through GTVs <2 years old, it actually looks to
be
> > quite cheap. I'm almost tempted. <phones up enquiring> Still, very
very
> > tempted (still for sale).
>
> I wouldn't be, that's far, far too much money for a car.

That's what I've been trying to tell myself

> > A few questions about GTVs in general - are they RWD? Are they good?
Any
> > problems I might expect with one? What sort of economy could I expect
from
> > the 2.0TS 16v engine (it's the manual, not the horrible selespeed) ?
Would
> > that size engine feel underpowered in a GTV, or would it be the one of
> > choice due to weight/front/rear balance? How heavy is a GTV anyway?
>
> They're not RWD, being based on a Tipo / 155 floorpan. Economy in the
> mid 30s when 'pressing on', and it's the best balanced of them, but you
> do miss out on the wonderful V6 sound.

Could they be considered underpowered? Mind you, anything *could* be
considered underpowered! Even if it wasn't the quickest thing on earth, if
it could do mid 30s mpg in enthusiastic driving, and handled well, then out
and out power wouldn't be my biggest concern.

Is it theoretically possible that the better balance of a TS GTV compared to
a V6 one could mean that a TS model could lose a V6 on a twisty road, or is
that dreaming a bit? :-)

Peter

[SteveH]

AstraVanMan <****Off@WithThanks.com> wrote:

> > They're not RWD, being based on a Tipo / 155 floorpan. Economy in the
> > mid 30s when 'pressing on', and it's the best balanced of them, but you
> > do miss out on the wonderful V6 sound.
>
> Could they be considered underpowered? Mind you, anything *could* be
> considered underpowered! Even if it wasn't the quickest thing on earth, if
> it could do mid 30s mpg in enthusiastic driving, and handled well, then out
> and out power wouldn't be my biggest concern.

I manage fine with 145bhp in the 155 and 150bhp in the 75. 155 is
probably heavier than the GTV by quite a bit (can't be arsed looking it
up....) as it's effectively the same chassis with more doors.

> Is it theoretically possible that the better balance of a TS GTV compared to
> a V6 one could mean that a TS model could lose a V6 on a twisty road, or is
> that dreaming a bit? :-)

I don't know if it would lose it, as the extra grunt of the V6 would
tell powering out of bends, but it would be a very close match.


--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

[AstraVanMan]

> > Could they be considered underpowered? Mind you, anything *could* be
> > considered underpowered! Even if it wasn't the quickest thing on earth,
if
> > it could do mid 30s mpg in enthusiastic driving, and handled well, then
out
> > and out power wouldn't be my biggest concern.
>
> I manage fine with 145bhp in the 155 and 150bhp in the 75. 155 is
> probably heavier than the GTV by quite a bit (can't be arsed looking it
> up....) as it's effectively the same chassis with more doors.

Sounds ok to me then. After all, underpowered is a state of mind. It's
only a problem if it's something severe, like the ludicrous idea that
entered my head (and left very shortly after) of putting a 1.4 K-series in
my A6 :-)

> > Is it theoretically possible that the better balance of a TS GTV
compared to
> > a V6 one could mean that a TS model could lose a V6 on a twisty road, or
is
> > that dreaming a bit? :-)
>
> I don't know if it would lose it, as the extra grunt of the V6 would
> tell powering out of bends, but it would be a very close match.

Stop it, you're really tempting me!!

I'd really like to wait a few years and get something like this cheaper, but
it seems a pretty good price for the year (owner has gone travelling and
left his brother in law to sell it, so potential for a few quid off) and
from what he says, it's literally in showroom condition. And whilst the
Audi's great, I think with the GTV I'd have a stunning looking car that I
would absolutely love to look at, and drive, rather than enjoy quite a bit.
I'd really like to have both, but if I'm spending £13k on something I'd just
have to sell the other to get the money together. Might even take out a
loan - madness I know, but if I was to get a loan I'd get one with high
payments over something like a year, and pay off a significant portion when
I sell the Audi (I'll get a mate to look after it, and spend a couple of
weekends cleaning it and sorting out a few minor bits and pieces). I really
shouldn't be thinking like this - I want to buy a house some time in the
next few years, and shouldn't piss money away like this, but at the same
time I'd absolutely love this car!!!

Peter

[SteveH]

AstraVanMan <****Off@WithThanks.com> wrote:

> > I don't know if it would lose it, as the extra grunt of the V6 would
> > tell powering out of bends, but it would be a very close match.
>
> Stop it, you're really tempting me!!

Heh.

I've looked at GTVs and been really tempted, but, I can buy a 3 year old
166 for less than the price of an 8 year old GTV. Different cars,
obviously, but the GTV just doesn't offer VFM - and values are about to
take a big hit as lots of used GTVs get dumped on the market as the
owners take delivery of new GTs. Remember, waiting list is about 6
months for most GTs, which means the GTV is about to be hit in 4-6
months time.

What I'd do, though, is buy a Fiat Coupe - same chassis, different
style, and with the Fiat Lampredi twin-cam in 16v and 16v Turbo forms.

The 16v Turbo is an absolute stormer of a car. As close to being a FWD
supercar as you're ever going to get. Think of it as a poor man's
Ferrari.
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

[Dan Drake]

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:12:43 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
wrote:

<The 16v Turbo is an absolute stormer...>

>As close to being a FWD
>supercar as you're ever going to get.

Which is *miles* away, IMHFO.

>Think of it as a poor man's
>Ferrari.

Yeah, right. *snork*
--
Dan Drake

[SteveH]

Dan Drake <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:12:43 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
> wrote:
>
> <The 16v Turbo is an absolute stormer...>
>
> >As close to being a FWD
> >supercar as you're ever going to get.
>
> Which is *miles* away, IMHFO.

Do you want to tell that to Lotus?

> >Think of it as a poor man's
> >Ferrari.
>
> Yeah, right. *snork*

Lets put it this way - the Coupe Turbo will outperform an 80s Ferrari
328.
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

[Dan Drake]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:07:11 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
wrote:

>Dan Drake <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:12:43 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
>> wrote:
>>
>> <The 16v Turbo is an absolute stormer...>
>>
>> >As close to being a FWD
>> >supercar as you're ever going to get.
>>
>> Which is *miles* away, IMHFO.
>
>Do you want to tell that to Lotus?

You telling me that you think the FWD Elan is a supercar? *snork*

>> >Think of it as a poor man's
>> >Ferrari.
>>
>> Yeah, right. *snork*
>
>Lets put it this way - the Coupe Turbo will outperform an 80s Ferrari
>328.

Define outperform. Define supercar. Remember, not all Ferraris and
Lotuses are supercars.

Keep digging the hole. You're doing well so far.
--
Dan Drake

[SteveH]

Dan Drake <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:

> Keep digging the hole. You're doing well so far.

You're being a prize twat.

The Fiat Coupe is well respected for being astonishingly quick point to
point, and has, on many occasions, been reffered to as a 'budget
supercar' / 'junior supercar' by the motoring press.
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

[Dan Drake]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:22:01 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
wrote:

>Dan Drake <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:
>
>> Keep digging the hole. You're doing well so far.
>
>You're being a prize twat.

Ah! Insults! The refuge of someone who lost the argument but doesn't
want to shut up.
>
>The Fiat Coupe is well respected for being astonishingly quick point to
>point, and has, on many occasions, been reffered to as a 'budget
>supercar' / 'junior supercar' by the motoring press.

'*Budget* supercar?' '*Junior* supercar?' Your authority is ' the
motoring press?' Define backpedal.

Keep digging. Or try some better insults. My work here is done, I
think.
--
Dan Drake

[SteveH]

Dan Drake <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:

> >The Fiat Coupe is well respected for being astonishingly quick point to
> >point, and has, on many occasions, been reffered to as a 'budget
> >supercar' / 'junior supercar' by the motoring press.
>
> '*Budget* supercar?' '*Junior* supercar?' Your authority is ' the
> motoring press?' Define backpedal.
>
> Keep digging. Or try some better insults. My work here is done, I
> think.

328 was being optimistic.

However, the Coupe Turbo 20v ("fastest production Fiat") will
comprehensively thrash a 308GTBi, and would give a 308GTB Quattrovalvole
a run for it's money.

Or is that not close enough to being a FWD Supercar for you?
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

[Dan Drake]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:43:49 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
wrote:

>However, the Coupe Turbo 20v ("fastest production Fiat") will
>comprehensively thrash a 308GTBi, and would give a 308GTB Quattrovalvole
>a run for it's money.
>
>Or is that not close enough to being a FWD Supercar for you?

I don't believe that *anything* with front wheel drive has ever, by
anything close to a common consensus, been given the label 'supercar.'
The lurkers who support you in e-mail can feel free to post and
contradict me at this point.

If you wish to apply that label to things like the Lotus Elan and the
"fastest production Fiat", then be aware that you can do so only
because you are entitled to your own opinion, and that's all there is
to it. Remember, though - someone out there owns the "fastest
production bicycle." Gee, I'm impressed.

Front wheel drive ultimately sucks for performance cars. That's why
only the mainstream car makers build them, usually out of go-faster
stripes and engine goodies bolted on to their cheap shopping car
platforms. Put them on the track up against contemporary
purpose-built performance cars, and they're toast. Sometimes, the car
maker will build a (gasp!) rear wheel drive high performance version
of his FWD shopping car, like Ford is rumoured to be doing with the
Focus, but that's just cheating, don't you think? If FWD is so
*good*, then why would they do that?

If there actually *are* such things, then my pick for a 'junior
supercar' would be a Caterham Seven Superlight and my pick for a
'budget supercar' would be an NSX. My *personal* pick for a supercar
to die for is the Ferrari F40. Do you really want to put money on
*any* FWD car against those on the track?
--
Dan Drake

[Mike G]

"Dan Drake" <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote in message
news:ncvnh01n5a8ct4md0itvqa4cuqgg4r6bk8@4ax.com...

> Front wheel drive ultimately sucks for performance cars. That's why
> only the mainstream car makers build them, usually out of go-faster
> stripes and engine goodies bolted on to their cheap shopping car
> platforms. Put them on the track up against contemporary
> purpose-built performance cars, and they're toast. Sometimes, the car
> maker will build a (gasp!) rear wheel drive high performance version
> of his FWD shopping car, like Ford is rumoured to be doing with the
> Focus, but that's just cheating, don't you think? If FWD is so
> *good*, then why would they do that?
>
> If there actually *are* such things, then my pick for a 'junior
> supercar' would be a Caterham Seven Superlight and my pick for a
> 'budget supercar' would be an NSX. My *personal* pick for a supercar
> to die for is the Ferrari F40. Do you really want to put money on
> *any* FWD car against those on the track?

You're right. It's got to be RWD.
You only have to look back to when BMW were racing in the BTCC.
Even with the resources that all manufacturers had, they could not beat the
BMW's on even terms.
RWD was considered such an advantage, that to compensate, they imposed
weight penalties on RWD cars, that in effect, forced BMW out of the BTCC.
It became pointless for them to continue, as more weight was added every
time they improved their cars and started to win races again. For them,
literally a no-win situation.
Mike.

[SteveH]

AstraVanMan <****Off@WithThanks.com> wrote:

> > I don't know if it would lose it, as the extra grunt of the V6 would
> > tell powering out of bends, but it would be a very close match.
>
> Stop it, you're really tempting me!!

Heh.

I've looked at GTVs and been really tempted, but, I can buy a 3 year old
166 for less than the price of an 8 year old GTV. Different cars,
obviously, but the GTV just doesn't offer VFM - and values are about to
take a big hit as lots of used GTVs get dumped on the market as the
owners take delivery of new GTs. Remember, waiting list is about 6
months for most GTs, which means the GTV is about to be hit in 4-6
months time.

What I'd do, though, is buy a Fiat Coupe - same chassis, different
style, and with the Fiat Lampredi twin-cam in 16v and 16v Turbo forms.

The 16v Turbo is an absolute stormer of a car. As close to being a FWD
supercar as you're ever going to get. Think of it as a poor man's
Ferrari.
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

[Dan Drake]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:07:11 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
wrote:

>Dan Drake <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:12:43 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
>> wrote:
>>
>> <The 16v Turbo is an absolute stormer...>
>>
>> >As close to being a FWD
>> >supercar as you're ever going to get.
>>
>> Which is *miles* away, IMHFO.
>
>Do you want to tell that to Lotus?

You telling me that you think the FWD Elan is a supercar? *snork*

>> >Think of it as a poor man's
>> >Ferrari.
>>
>> Yeah, right. *snork*
>
>Lets put it this way - the Coupe Turbo will outperform an 80s Ferrari
>328.

Define outperform. Define supercar. Remember, not all Ferraris and
Lotuses are supercars.

Keep digging the hole. You're doing well so far.
--
Dan Drake

[SteveH]

Dan Drake <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:

> >The Fiat Coupe is well respected for being astonishingly quick point to
> >point, and has, on many occasions, been reffered to as a 'budget
> >supercar' / 'junior supercar' by the motoring press.
>
> '*Budget* supercar?' '*Junior* supercar?' Your authority is ' the
> motoring press?' Define backpedal.
>
> Keep digging. Or try some better insults. My work here is done, I
> think.

328 was being optimistic.

However, the Coupe Turbo 20v ("fastest production Fiat") will
comprehensively thrash a 308GTBi, and would give a 308GTB Quattrovalvole
a run for it's money.

Or is that not close enough to being a FWD Supercar for you?
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

[Dan Drake]

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:12:43 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
wrote:

<The 16v Turbo is an absolute stormer...>

>As close to being a FWD
>supercar as you're ever going to get.

Which is *miles* away, IMHFO.

>Think of it as a poor man's
>Ferrari.

Yeah, right. *snork*
--
Dan Drake

[Dan Drake]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:43:49 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
wrote:

>However, the Coupe Turbo 20v ("fastest production Fiat") will
>comprehensively thrash a 308GTBi, and would give a 308GTB Quattrovalvole
>a run for it's money.
>
>Or is that not close enough to being a FWD Supercar for you?

I don't believe that *anything* with front wheel drive has ever, by
anything close to a common consensus, been given the label 'supercar.'
The lurkers who support you in e-mail can feel free to post and
contradict me at this point.

If you wish to apply that label to things like the Lotus Elan and the
"fastest production Fiat", then be aware that you can do so only
because you are entitled to your own opinion, and that's all there is
to it. Remember, though - someone out there owns the "fastest
production bicycle." Gee, I'm impressed.

Front wheel drive ultimately sucks for performance cars. That's why
only the mainstream car makers build them, usually out of go-faster
stripes and engine goodies bolted on to their cheap shopping car
platforms. Put them on the track up against contemporary
purpose-built performance cars, and they're toast. Sometimes, the car
maker will build a (gasp!) rear wheel drive high performance version
of his FWD shopping car, like Ford is rumoured to be doing with the
Focus, but that's just cheating, don't you think? If FWD is so
*good*, then why would they do that?

If there actually *are* such things, then my pick for a 'junior
supercar' would be a Caterham Seven Superlight and my pick for a
'budget supercar' would be an NSX. My *personal* pick for a supercar
to die for is the Ferrari F40. Do you really want to put money on
*any* FWD car against those on the track?
--
Dan Drake

[Dan Drake]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:22:01 +0100, steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH)
wrote:

>Dan Drake <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote:
>
>> Keep digging the hole. You're doing well so far.
>
>You're being a prize twat.

Ah! Insults! The refuge of someone who lost the argument but doesn't
want to shut up.
>
>The Fiat Coupe is well respected for being astonishingly quick point to
>point, and has, on many occasions, been reffered to as a 'budget
>supercar' / 'junior supercar' by the motoring press.

'*Budget* supercar?' '*Junior* supercar?' Your authority is ' the
motoring press?' Define backpedal.

Keep digging. Or try some better insults. My work here is done, I
think.
--
Dan Drake

[Mike G]

"Dan Drake" <ddrake@comcast.notthis.net> wrote in message
news:ncvnh01n5a8ct4md0itvqa4cuqgg4r6bk8@4ax.com...

> Front wheel drive ultimately sucks for performance cars. That's why
> only the mainstream car makers build them, usually out of go-faster
> stripes and engine goodies bolted on to their cheap shopping car
> platforms. Put them on the track up against contemporary
> purpose-built performance cars, and they're toast. Sometimes, the car
> maker will build a (gasp!) rear wheel drive high performance version
> of his FWD shopping car, like Ford is rumoured to be doing with the
> Focus, but that's just cheating, don't you think? If FWD is so
> *good*, then why would they do that?
>
> If there actually *are* such things, then my pick for a 'junior
> supercar' would be a Caterham Seven Superlight and my pick for a
> 'budget supercar' would be an NSX. My *personal* pick for a supercar
> to die for is the Ferrari F40. Do you really want to put money on
> *any* FWD car against those on the track?

You're right. It's got to be RWD.
You only have to look back to when BMW were racing in the BTCC.
Even with the resources that all manufacturers had, they could not beat the
BMW's on even terms.
RWD was considered such an advantage, that to compensate, they imposed
weight penalties on RWD cars, that in effect, forced BMW out of the BTCC.
It became pointless for them to continue, as more weight was added every
time they improved their cars and started to win races again. For them,
literally a no-win situation.
Mike.