Alfa 4c

isso é porque não tens 40 panelas entre os colectores e a ponteira, mas é certo e sabido que qualquer motor turbo é bem mais silencioso que o equivalente na
 
Alfa Romeo 4C Teste Autocar no Reino Unido

_P__1766.jpg


What is it?

This is the first time we’ve had the chance to drive Alfa Romeo’s 4C coupé in the UK. When we drove it overseas we liked it a great deal, reckoning it would breathe some valuable life back into an Alfa Romeobrand which, today, is otherwise limited to just the Mito and Giulietta. Even Ferrari has a bigger line-up than Alfa.
So if there’s a car to spark Alfa’s renaissance, the 4C could be it. What better way than a mid-engined coupé with a carbonfibre tub, to be built by the thousand rather than the hundred? Punters seem to think so, too: the UK’s allocation of cars for 2014 is sold out, as are the launch-edition cars like our test car – a white, left-hooker with a few choice options that lift the price to around £54,000.
The mechanical spec of all variants is the same, though. A 1750cc turbocharged engine, transversely mounted behind the cabin, drives the rear wheels through a six-speed, twin-clutch gearbox, and Alfa’s ‘electronic Q2’ differential (an extension of the stability control that brakes a spinning inside wheel to mimic a mechanical limited-slip diff).

_P__1789.jpg


What is it like?

Good, all told. Loud, certainly. The claimed weight (empty, rather than an official European Directive EC figure) is only 895kg.
Road-ready, the 4C will be more than that when we put it on our scales, but clearly few of those kilos are sound insulation. The noise is all whooshes and fizzes from the heavily turbocharged motor – which produces 237bhp from its 1.75 litres – and it echoes throughout the stiff tub and the relatively spartan cabin. The launch edition cars have an optional sports exhaust, which doesn’t hinder (or help, depending on your outlook).
The cockpit isn’t as bare as a Lotus Elise’s or Exige’s (because of the similar layout, inevitably we’ll perceive those Lotuses as this car’s main rival), and it feels of higher material grade, but neither is it quite so driver focused. The seats lack lateral and under-thigh support, and the steering wheel’s too flat-bottomed and thick of rim, but the paddles for the gearshift are good and the digital instruments sweet.

_P__3825.jpg


The steering is unassisted, and lighter than an Exige’s when manoeuvring, but as you add speed it’s less intuitive than the Lotus’s. Perhaps not surprising. This is Alfa’s first crack and Lotus is pretty good at tuning steering. There’s a little kickback over rough surfaces if you’re cornering at the same time, too, and the ride is firm. Not uncomfortable, really, just firm, connected.
Our UK drive took us up the M1 (boomy, increasingly so the faster you go) and onto damp roads around the Peak District, where the 4C gave us its best. On twisting roads it’s agile, planted, and easy and engaging to thread through corners. It tugs and weaves a little over bad cambers and surfaces, but by no more than you’d expect. It’s an enjoyable ride.
Then we headed to a circuit, cold but dry, where the 4C displayed handling biased towards understeer, to about the same extent as an Elise. Which is fine.
It won’t simply power through that phase – the turbocharged engine doesn’t respond rapidly or powerfully enough, and in a way the 4C then behaves like a McLaren 12C: giving understeer that extra throttle only exacerbates. Instead, then, you need to lift on the way into a bend, get the nose planted, and then ask for a lot of power.

_P__3868.jpg


That way the 4C will indulge you, tightening its line (or more), though with less precision than you’d hope because of the boosty throttle repsonse. For our money, a supercharged Elise is a more rewarding, better steering, more linearly responsive drive, and by a margin. Meanwhile, at the other end of the scale a Porsche Cayman is more complete and comfortable. But the Alfa gives a different proposition to both of those. And that the 4C is as good as it is gives us cause for celebration.

_P__3921.jpg


Should I buy one?

Certainly. And not just look at it, or to listen to (the volume is truly extraordinary; and the more I heard, the more I thought it was more Lancia 037 than hotted Fiesta RS Turbo). To drive too it is rewarding and pleasurable – so long as you don’t expect the last word in finesse.
It’s a great flagship for the range, but let’s hope it goes on to represent something more than that. If all Alfas were like this, the company would have no dramas at all.

_P__3913_0.jpg


Alfa Romeo 4C

Pirce £45,000 (around £54,000 as tested); 0-62mph 4.5 sec; Top speed160mph; Economy 41.5mpg (combined); CO2 157g/km; Kerb weight895kg; Engine 4-cylinder, 1742cc, turbocharged, petrol; Installation Mid, transverse, RWD; Power 237bhp at 6000rpm; Torque 258lb ft at 2200-4250rpm; Gearbox 6-spd dual-clutch auto
Clique para expandir...
 
Mais um teste da Top Gear, desta vez no UK

Driven: Alfa Romeo 4C in Britain - BBC Top Gear

So, the 4C on UK roads for the first time. How was it? Devastatingly pretty. So sublime to look at that I didn’t even notice the headlights. Everyone loved it. It’s beyond eye-catching, a slice of real exotica, so pert and neat and stunningly well executed. It brightened up the dankness of a January weekday. In short, the sun shines out of its pert...

Stop. I can't help but think you're skirting the issue here...
You're right, I am. So... how to put this? The 4C wasn't very good. OK, that's harsh, and I'm measuring it against some very high expectations. So let's instead qualify that by saying it wasn't as good as we hoped. But a car that looks like this and is made up of such a tempting cocktail of components and statistics - carbon fibre tub, mid-mounted engine, 895kg kerbweight, unassisted steering, rear-wheel drive - should drive better than the 4C does.

Let me guess: it's a bit rowdy on motorways?
More than that, though it's a fair place to start. If you gave yourself a sliding scale of civility and habitability, with the Porsche Cayman at one end and the Lotus Exige at the other, then, before driving the 4C, I would have placed it somewhere in the middle. Wrong. It's right down the Lotus end. Possibly beyond it, in fact. Put it this way. If you drive along at 70mph and put the windows down, the only difference you notice is a bit of extra breeze. The noise levels stay pretty much the same.

So the 4C compromised, more so than I expected. Yes, it has some boot space behind the engine, and the cabin is more ‘designed' than that of a Lotus, but it's still a bare place to spend time, short on toys and equipped with an entertainment system of genuine complexity and a set of speakers that struggle to make themselves heard. I think owners, many of whom I guess are buying it as their only car, will be quite surprised at the compromises the 4C forces on them.

Is it comfortable to sit in?
Not really. The seat lacks under-thigh support and are as thinly padded as the rest of the cabin. And with a foot-wide sill, small door aperture and low roofline to negotiate, dignity could be an issue. I also have issues with the steering wheel, which simply has too much going on: flat bottom, sloping indents that don't hold your thumbs in place, thickness changes around the rim. It could be that I was a bit grumpy at the 4C, but it made me feel like that. When I went down to the car park with the keys in my hand, I was so excited at the prospect of finally driving it. That wore off too quickly.

The gearbox was criticised in the early drives. That the problem?
Actually no. The double clutch gearbox isn't the best of its breed, but it's decent enough - I've got a feeling it's come in for some last minute fettling, as the paddles operate quickly and accurately. Nor did I have any issue with the ride quality - in fact I was surprised how poised it felt over the sharp-edged speedbumps outside our office. The ride is certainly firm with little body movement, but it's not harsh or crashy - Alfa has done a decent job. It doesn't have the stunning resolve, control and professionalism of a Lotus, but it's a long way from awful. The firmness and lack of roll does give the 4C snappy reactions. I had bigger issues with the brakes, which didn't feel that great underfoot, and, more importantly, the steering.
First drive: the Alfa Romeo 4C in Italy

Really? Isn't the steering unassisted and wonderful?
No. The hefty manoeuvring weight is fine and to be expected given the absence of power assistance, but it's what happens as speeds rise that I have issues with. The weight disappears, and so too, does some of the feedback. It was fine at high speeds, where the chassis lightness and accuracy gave me confidence, but on tighter medium-speed corners I wasn't quite sure of the 4C, which didn't accurately communicate how much grip it had left. Now, if I'd been on a smooth track maybe it would have been better. But I wasn't. I was on regular back roads and, to be honest, the 4C was acting rather distracted.

In what way?
Sniffing out every camber and bump and then chasing them down, tugging at the steering and weaving about. It makes the 4C not only hard to place accurately on the road, but feel wider than it actually is and far more tiring to drive than it ought to be. You have to give yourself space and work with the knowledge that this Alfa won't hold a perfect line on an average B-road - or motorway for that matter. I went the long way home and when I parked up I just felt a bit flat. The fizz was missing.

But at least it's fast, right?
It's plenty quick enough. Alfa's official 0-62mph time of 4.5 seconds is easily believable, plus the trip computer hinted at 35-37mpg which isn't to be sniffed at. And although the 1.7-litre engine is turbocharged and whipped from a Giulietta, it does have some character - enough that you could be persuaded into thinking a hint of Group B has crept in. There may not be a spine-tingling crescendo to either the noise or the power delivery, but the raucous whistles from the turbo certainly keep you entertained - if not relaxed. And yeah, it does get a proper shift on - the engine responds fast, picks up well and gives the chassis plenty to think about.

Doesn't sound so terrible to me.
Understand where you're coming from, but I did an office straw poll of those who have driven the 4C, and asked whether they'd have the Alfa or the Porsche Cayman. All seven people would have the Cayman.

Don't get me wrong, I wanted the 4C to be a stunner, not least because Alfa deserves a break, and a car that looks this good and has such a wonderful on-paper spec deserves to drive every bit as sublimely. And it really is a special car - it looks and feels special, and you're not going to have a dull moment while driving it. Nor a peaceful one. But it ought to be equally special to drive. And the annoying thing is that it's not far from greatness.

What's missing is the polish that would move the 4C into the magic realm - because make no mistake, I really think that with a final bit of polish the 4C could be great. Most of the faults it has are very rectifiable.

How?
Give it to Lotus Engineering. I reckon a month of damper tuning at Hethel could not only sort out the fidget and weave, but bring consistency and feel back into the steering. This type of car is not one Alfa has any previous experience of, and to me it seems as though the firm has been too proud to ask for outside assistance. I also think they've misjudged the positioning of the 4C and its potential audience. Where does it fit exactly? It's as far distant from a Mito as the 8C, and arguably even more specialist.

That said, the ideals that are contained within the 4C are very, very encouraging - the focus on light weight, carbon technology, efficient turbo engines. This is all brilliant stuff and Alfa deserves a pat on the back for it. Let's just hope the firm is able to carry the flame further in the future.

Final verdict?
Being generous: 7 out of 10. Look, if you're tempted by a 4C (and who isn't?) and you've never owned a small, lightweight sports car before, then you may know no better and be perfectly content, believing this is how all mid-engined coupes behave. Indeed, even if you have read this, you still might not mind. But I do mind. I mind that you might not mind. I mind that Alfa Romeo thinks the 4C is the best it can be.


Maybe my expectations were too high, but I wanted to see 4Cs everywhere, facing off against Caymans and TTs, a dazzling alternative that may demand compromise (just maybe not this much compromise), but boy, would the payoff be worth it. I can't see that happening. Considering its ambitious technological approach, this could, should have been a new beginning. Instead it feels like an Alfa of old - slightly miscast and not as fabulous as we'd hoped.
Clique para expandir...
 
para mim o melhor som é o do cayman, seguido do elise, 4c e no fim o RCZ R.

O RCZ R tem um som muito muito fraquinho, não parece nada o som de um desportivo.
 
Então este não é o mais rápido que o Veyron?[:D][:D][:D]

Este carro foi alvo do hype que alguns fãs da Alfa criaram.
O 4C é muito bom mas acaba por ser uma ligeira desilusão porque com tanto hype estava tudo à espera de um carro perfeito.
 
Curiosamente aconteceu um fenómeno parecido com o Lotus Évora que atingiu a plenitude em 2009 e depois esmoreceu.

Depois da *usa do mijo vieram as abordagens com menos carga emotiva e mais objetividade.

Curiosamente do Évora inicial uma das criticas era a questão do motor que merecia mais (além da caixa). Saiu o S para responder ao repto e, se bem me lembro, não ganhou nada!

Espero que, com este modelo, quando sair um versão mais vitaminada e com outras pequenas afinações (o chassis merece), esta passe a ser a referencia.
 
pmv6 disse:
Curiosamente aconteceu um fenómeno parecido com o Lotus Évora que atingiu a plenitude em 2009 e depois esmoreceu.

Depois da *usa do mijo vieram as abordagens com menos carga emotiva e mais objetividade.

Curiosamente do Évora inicial uma das criticas era a questão do motor que merecia mais (além da caixa). Saiu o S para responder ao repto e, se bem me lembro, não ganhou nada!

Espero que, com este modelo, quando sair um versão mais vitaminada e com outras pequenas afinações (o chassis merece), esta passe a ser a referencia.
Clique para expandir...

O único problema do Evora S é o preço, de resto, se fores ler críticas entre este e o Cayman S, o que favorece o Cayman S é o preço porque performance é ela por ela mas no feeling e divertimento, o Lotus ganha praticamente sempre, mesmo que marginalmente, tal como o Cayman o faz em qualidade de montagem e preço/valor em pelo menos quase todos os testes que vi.
 
Deve fazer início de sessão ou registar-se para responder aqui.
Voltar
Superior