Design conundrum
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
G
Guest
·Why??I think its one of the nicest and slickest designs ever....much better then the 33 or the 75 at least
G
Guest
·For your information it was the I.D.E.A. institute.
May I gently suggest you STOP stirring the pot. :tut: ...most of your recent posts have been unhelpful at best!
wrinx
May I gently suggest you STOP stirring the pot. :tut: ...most of your recent posts have been unhelpful at best!
wrinx
Joined
·
17,179 Posts
Yes come on Alfaguy. Just because you have one of the finest examples of automotive design ever, doesn't mean you need to be all cocky.
Nothing wrong with the design of the 155 unless you wish to be as anonymous as the other "euro blob" in front of you!
The wide body made it look even better, a touch of Integrale when viewed from the front.
P.S. I know where there's a spanking 155 for sale...
The wide body made it look even better, a touch of Integrale when viewed from the front.
P.S. I know where there's a spanking 155 for sale...
G
Guest
·lol nige
G
Guest
·It's a little dated these days but that would constitute as a classic, wouldn't it? the only thing that lets the 155 down is the shocking quality of the Italian metal which is probably re-cycled - as were most of the fiat motor groups cars. They should have used aliminium or galvernised them. Great to drive and easy on the eye, that's what counts with the 155.
As for 33's and 75's there OK but don't cut much mustard in looks. In fact they look half finished and half baked with their crappy vairous shades of red through to pink paint and poor build quality. Their engines make them the icons that they are these days. afterall who wants to drive a very fast, unreliable but vomitus looking beast - with angles that would scare a trigonometry set, but put an alfa badge on it and the enthusiast will tell you are the best thing since linguini's pasta.
They are not your run of the mill Vauxhall Nova with blue neons or souped up toyota corolla driven by Abdule at your local Kabab house, but that's why people choose alfa's BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT - NOT THE BEST BUT FAR FROM BEING THE WORST - anyway Itailans are better at desinging the rear-end of cars beacuse they spent most of the 1000years retreating in some way or another - lazy spaghetti suckers!!! :rant:
As for 33's and 75's there OK but don't cut much mustard in looks. In fact they look half finished and half baked with their crappy vairous shades of red through to pink paint and poor build quality. Their engines make them the icons that they are these days. afterall who wants to drive a very fast, unreliable but vomitus looking beast - with angles that would scare a trigonometry set, but put an alfa badge on it and the enthusiast will tell you are the best thing since linguini's pasta.
They are not your run of the mill Vauxhall Nova with blue neons or souped up toyota corolla driven by Abdule at your local Kabab house, but that's why people choose alfa's BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT - NOT THE BEST BUT FAR FROM BEING THE WORST - anyway Itailans are better at desinging the rear-end of cars beacuse they spent most of the 1000years retreating in some way or another - lazy spaghetti suckers!!! :rant:
G
Guest
·Mmm, that's gonna go down well
btw...155's ARE galvanised
wrinx
btw...155's ARE galvanised
wrinx
And just for chandlers info most Steel is recycled these days it makes more sense to do it than make it from scratch.
G
Guest
·I prefer to think of 155's as the start of Alfa return to successStori said:Obviously a pointless thread
But the 155 was the end of a sad era for Alfa Romeo, luckily the GTV and Spider came along to save to day ........Let the good times roll
...although I think the 75's are where the improvements really started wrinx
If the 75's were where it started to get better, where did it start to get worse before the 75...
Alfetta's perhaps....
Alfetta's perhaps....
Joined
·
11,564 Posts
Personal OpinionIanM said:If the 75's were where it started to get better, where did it start to get worse before the 75...
Alfetta's perhaps....
Except for the poor Gearchange the Alfetta GTV ,for example, was a very nice car to drive. And still looks good today....something the "popular" Datsun 240/260/280/300 Z series is not.
The Alfetta was a little boxy but the Guillietta was rather Ugly.
The 75 was nothing special and the 155 was well something I would never even have considered buying.
It was only with the Spider and GTV, that Alfa started to look interesting again and the 156 made the Alfa sedans look good again
But then again I am not a great fan of sedans
Joined
·
59 Posts
I can't remember which manufacturer it was, but I've read a test done by designers is the 'shop window test' ie do you always look at your motor when passing a plate glass window? or ever? If you do and you like what you see, that's where the designer's cracked it with an emotive style. Another test is when you get a lift in another car while someone else drives yours in front/behind - not something you do by habit - but your car can look great when you see it moving yourself!
I like my 155 and can't help looking back after I park it. I'm happy, especially as it cost me only £800 ('95 TS 16v 2.0 Widebody). Even happier now I've paid cash for my insurance - nothing more to pay for a whole year!!
I like my 155 and can't help looking back after I park it. I'm happy, especially as it cost me only £800 ('95 TS 16v 2.0 Widebody). Even happier now I've paid cash for my insurance - nothing more to pay for a whole year!!
I still can't keep my Eyes off 156's when I see them, especialy Silver Sport Pack ones, like my first love...
Joined
·
93 Posts
I did this last summer when I drove the Junior back from the garage and me dad drove my 155. Never thought about the looks much before but it looks well menacing from a low car through the rear view mirrorwidebody said:
.A few racing versions aside the early 155 has the best/last version of Alfas greatest 4 cylinder engine too.
Joined
·
13,257 Posts
I think the 33 Phase 3 was the first AR to have galvanised panels. Only the main floor and chassis ones (the most rust-prone panel is the back panel and that is not galvanised).
The 155 had more galvanising in more areas but still some bits are not galvanised. I don't think any car is completely galvanised as that'd be rather pointless (some panels never get attacked by salt/damp).
There have been major improvements in the quality of steel that last 40 years, that Chandler seems to be unaware of. Increased carbon-content makes steel far more oxidation resistant. Also paints, coatings and mastic sealing compunds are all more durable than in the stone age (presumably the last time Chandler updated his opinions).
Construction techniques have also moved on.. less hollow cavities and those that exist are filled with a foam material, to keep moisture out, etc.
The "rusty Italian car" saga came about due to the use of cheap imported steel from Russia, that was part of a deal between Fiat and the Soviet government that saw the transplant of Fiat 124/5 production to Russia - i.e. Lada Model No. 1, 2 (a 124 estate) and 4 and 5. Best of the lot is the 1.5 TC Model No. 6, universally beloved of Moscow taxi-drivers, but I'm digressing...
The Russian steel was not as oxidation resistant as German steel, due to how it was processed. The problems particularly affected Fiat and Lancia cars made in the early to mid '70's.
By the time of the Uno and Tipo (early 80's) the problems had been resolved and the two brands were no more or less rusty than anything else on the market.
In fact the Tipo was the first mainstream manufacturer car to offer extensive galvanising in a vain attempt to knock the "rusty Fiat" legacy on the head once and for all. Didn't work, as Neaderthal man is alive and well, and living in Chandler's house... but how many rusty Tipo's do you see? Check out eBay for them.. beat up and abused.. but not rusty.
Alfa never used Russian steel and so any rust problems are mainly due to "poor" (by modern standards) construction methods and finish. Alfa's rust problems were pretty much par for the course for the 70's and even 80's. Certainly they were no worse than British, French or Japanese manufactured cars.
Dunno what he considers a paragon of rust-proof from the period... Hillman Avenger? Austin Princess? Ford Cortina? Talbot Horizon? Renault 5? Datsun 120? Even Jag E-Types are "rust-buckets" by what we're used to now.
Back then it was reckoned that 3 years was the period that it took for a new car to rust (note the due date of your car's first MOT) and life-expectancy was just 6 years.
Chandler and his ilk might make glib comments about Italian cars (dunno why he bothers to drive one, to be honest) but he's just showing himself up to be not only a bigot, but an ignorant one at that.
Ralf S.
and that is not galvanised).The 155 had more galvanising in more areas but still some bits are not galvanised. I don't think any car is completely galvanised as that'd be rather pointless (some panels never get attacked by salt/damp).
There have been major improvements in the quality of steel that last 40 years, that Chandler seems to be unaware of. Increased carbon-content makes steel far more oxidation resistant. Also paints, coatings and mastic sealing compunds are all more durable than in the stone age (presumably the last time Chandler updated his opinions).
Construction techniques have also moved on.. less hollow cavities and those that exist are filled with a foam material, to keep moisture out, etc.
The "rusty Italian car" saga came about due to the use of cheap imported steel from Russia, that was part of a deal between Fiat and the Soviet government that saw the transplant of Fiat 124/5 production to Russia - i.e. Lada Model No. 1, 2 (a 124 estate) and 4 and 5. Best of the lot is the 1.5 TC Model No. 6,
universally beloved of Moscow taxi-drivers, but I'm digressing...The Russian steel was not as oxidation resistant as German steel, due to how it was processed. The problems particularly affected Fiat and Lancia cars made in the early to mid '70's.
By the time of the Uno and Tipo (early 80's) the problems had been resolved and the two brands were no more or less rusty than anything else on the market.
In fact the Tipo was the first mainstream manufacturer car to offer extensive galvanising in a vain attempt to knock the "rusty Fiat" legacy on the head once and for all. Didn't work, as Neaderthal man is alive and well, and living in Chandler's house... but how many rusty Tipo's do you see? Check out eBay for them.. beat up and abused.. but not rusty.
Alfa never used Russian steel and so any rust problems are mainly due to "poor" (by modern standards) construction methods and finish. Alfa's rust problems were pretty much par for the course for the 70's and even 80's. Certainly they were no worse than British, French or Japanese manufactured cars.
Dunno what he considers a paragon of rust-proof from the period... Hillman Avenger? Austin Princess? Ford Cortina? Talbot Horizon? Renault 5? Datsun 120? Even Jag E-Types are "rust-buckets" by what we're used to now.
Back then it was reckoned that 3 years was the period that it took for a new car to rust (note the due date of your car's first MOT) and life-expectancy was just 6 years.
Chandler and his ilk might make glib comments about Italian cars (dunno why he bothers to drive one, to be honest) but he's just showing himself up to be not only a bigot, but an ignorant one at that.
Ralf S.
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
