- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 25,219
- Points
- 3,671
Yes the handling on modern fiat hatchbacks is a bit of a joke, completely disconnected feeling.
Fiat's are SLOW
- Thread starter fenton_jd
- Start date
Currently reading:
Fiat's are SLOW
Handling is how a car "feels" so cannot be measured or quantified as it is entirely subjective.
Grip on the other hand can be measured, it would be interesting to see comparisons of how different cars grip but there would have to be some kind of "industry standard" regarding how this acheived as there would be so many variables to consider such as road surface, temperature, humidity, tyre pressures etc
Grip would be easy to measure. Find big area of tarmac, have cars drive round in constant radius circles at ever increasing speed. First one to fall off looses. You could even do it by remote, to eradicate the possibility of super subtle driver input.
Handling, if you like, is the ability to recover the car when it falls off.
Strangely, cars with poor grip and poor recoverability are often the most fun to drive..............
Handling, if you like, is the ability to recover the car when it falls off.
Strangely, cars with poor grip and poor recoverability are often the most fun to drive..............
I love the handling on my Bravo, I find it really attacks corners. I have no Traction control or nothing like that, and its amazing, I can outcorner lots of other cars. Not to mention with the large amount of torque I have for a pertol, my straight line speed is pretty impressive too.
Thing I love about my Fiat is that they seem to have so much more to give than standard, if you want it faster, make it faster. they are usually cheap enough that you can spend the differnce on improving the vehicle to your own style to make it as good as you want, from comparing a GP/GPE to a Fiesta ST or a Coupe to bigger enginer cars like an Focus ST.
I would be confident that I can out do a Civic Type R in 1/4 mile in my Bravo and the new Civic Type R handles like an oil tanker.
Thing I love about my Fiat is that they seem to have so much more to give than standard, if you want it faster, make it faster. they are usually cheap enough that you can spend the differnce on improving the vehicle to your own style to make it as good as you want, from comparing a GP/GPE to a Fiesta ST or a Coupe to bigger enginer cars like an Focus ST.
I would be confident that I can out do a Civic Type R in 1/4 mile in my Bravo and the new Civic Type R handles like an oil tanker.
Absolutely, but if you are wanting accurate comparisons you'd need to use the same tarmac for all the vehicles being compared
Yep. And have some way of measing degradation of the tarmac and rubbering in, etc. MIRA?
Although you could quantify roadholding by recording g. figures as an example, you can't quantify handling in the same way because it's very subjective. This could be why two F1 drivers in the same team set their otherwise identical cars up differently. This could also be why the much vaunted Stig on Top Gear advises his celebrities to take a different line from the one all the F1 drivers seem to take.
Prime example: If we go back to the mid '90s, I had one of the last Rover 100 1.4s which I ran from new for about 18,000 miles which was followed immediately by a new Fiesta 1.25 Ghia. The Rover ran on 165 tyres, the Fiesta also. The Rover had a much sharper turn-in than the Ford but slightly lower levels of roadholding. When the next Fiesta arrived 18,000 miles later it had 175 tyres which raised the levels of grip, and the next one, 18,000 miles later had 185s which were a size too far. The turn in was dulled and it showed a few unpleasant handling traits which included "tramlining" over longtitudinal road blemishes and in tight turns, especially in damp conditions, it would actually push on against the tread of the tyres.
If I had to choose from that group of cars, the Rover would have been my choice as although its overall grip levels were lower than the Fiesta's, you could alter the course through a bend with the accelerator, in other words, steering on the throttle. If you were running a bit wide, coming off the gas a little would tighten your line. Conversely, accelerating would make you run wide. They are examples of handling and as such you can't quantify it.
The Delta in question dates from (if memory serves me) around 1980 and first came out in 1.5 litre petrol form. It was based on (either) the Tipo/Tempra (or their own floor pan). A 1.3 was added followed by the 1.5 being replaced by the 1.6 twin cam 8 valve four from FIAT first in carburettor form followed by the HF Turbo model. All the engines later got (i.e.) fuel injection. The 2 litre four with Turbo arrived which put out about 185 bhp and this was followed by a 16 valve model which gave from around 205 bhp to 220 (ish). It was the naturally aspirated and turbo versions of these engines that first went into the Coupe.
They were then replaced by the 5 cylinder models. The Delta was probably quicker because of its 4WD system and Torsen centre diff.
Later versions of the Delta with the newer body shell were based on the Bravo but as far as I can remember was never offered with 4WD but used a Torsen diff again to give it reasonable traction.
The current Lancia (Chrysler) Delta is based on a stretched version of the current Bravo (I hope).
No, because I quoted before I read your post.Is there an echo in here
thanks for the info, i didnt know the 1500 was the first delta out, if im correct i think the first 2 litre lancia delta was the hf 4wd?, which was pretty much an integrale. I didnt know they were connected to the fiats at all
However i meant that i dint know how the new lancia, erm sorry 'chrysler' delta was rated better handling than the 'nuova' bravo when apart from the shell, is, as far as im aware, all fiat bravo.
I felt quite slow today in the bravo, when joining the A1, a ford c max, and a seat alahambra were right behind racing, and I couldn't even stay on them :s
Last edited:
Lancia came under the FIAT umbrella a lot earlier than Alfa with, I think, the Beta being the first Lancia to use FIAT power plants those being the 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 litre twin cam 8 valve units.
Before that they used either flat 4 or V 4 units of their own design and manufacture. I can understand why the flat 4 motors disappeared as they can only really be mounted ahead of the front axle which makes the car nose heavy or behind which would make it too long. In fact I can only remember one car with a front mounted flat 4 that was successful and that was the Alfasud.
The V4 though should have had a lot going for it as it is as short as a flat 4 and could be used longtitudinally or across the body like a front drive V6 such as the Alfa 166. One of the problems a modern V engine has though is duplication. A traditional American V8 for example, many of which haven't really changed in 50 or 60 years have 2 valves per cylinder but only 1 camshaft which sits down in the V. An engine such as the Alfa (Holden) V6 has 24 valves and 4 camshafts so a modern day Lancia V4 would have 4 cams, 2 sets of cambelts and would almost certainly cost quite a lot more to build than an in line motor.
Hang on, where the hell was I before going off at a tangent? Oh yes I remember. The FIAT 1.5 and 1.3 units, also seen in the Strada/Ritmo were modern inline 4s with SOHC and put them up with Vauxhall/Opel's family 1 and 2 engines and Ford's Zetec (?). The twin cams had been around for a while and the 1.6 put out about 105bhp in carburettor form and 108 with injection and the 1.6HF Turbo going from 130 with a carb and 140 with injection. I ran a 1.6HFie for a while and it must rank as my most favourite car I've ever had.
The first of the 4WD cars was the HF 4WD and I don't think it had the Integrale moniker. That had 165 bhp which was the same as the Thema 8v Turbo which went up to 185 then after gaining a 16v head went past 200bhp.
The 8v Turbo also featured in the first generation of the Croma. From there the 16v motors appeared in the Coupe and the rest, as they say, is history.
Before that they used either flat 4 or V 4 units of their own design and manufacture. I can understand why the flat 4 motors disappeared as they can only really be mounted ahead of the front axle which makes the car nose heavy or behind which would make it too long. In fact I can only remember one car with a front mounted flat 4 that was successful and that was the Alfasud.
The V4 though should have had a lot going for it as it is as short as a flat 4 and could be used longtitudinally or across the body like a front drive V6 such as the Alfa 166. One of the problems a modern V engine has though is duplication. A traditional American V8 for example, many of which haven't really changed in 50 or 60 years have 2 valves per cylinder but only 1 camshaft which sits down in the V. An engine such as the Alfa (Holden) V6 has 24 valves and 4 camshafts so a modern day Lancia V4 would have 4 cams, 2 sets of cambelts and would almost certainly cost quite a lot more to build than an in line motor.
Hang on, where the hell was I before going off at a tangent? Oh yes I remember. The FIAT 1.5 and 1.3 units, also seen in the Strada/Ritmo were modern inline 4s with SOHC and put them up with Vauxhall/Opel's family 1 and 2 engines and Ford's Zetec (?). The twin cams had been around for a while and the 1.6 put out about 105bhp in carburettor form and 108 with injection and the 1.6HF Turbo going from 130 with a carb and 140 with injection. I ran a 1.6HFie for a while and it must rank as my most favourite car I've ever had.
The first of the 4WD cars was the HF 4WD and I don't think it had the Integrale moniker. That had 165 bhp which was the same as the Thema 8v Turbo which went up to 185 then after gaining a 16v head went past 200bhp.
The 8v Turbo also featured in the first generation of the Croma. From there the 16v motors appeared in the Coupe and the rest, as they say, is history.
Has he gone?
I damn well hope so.
Is it safe to come out now?
Looks like it.
I though he'd never sod off.
Hang on, he's coming back, what do we do?
Run away, run away!!!
No, it's alright he's just come in to shut the computer dow............______________________________________________
I damn well hope so.
Is it safe to come out now?
Looks like it.
I though he'd never sod off.
Hang on, he's coming back, what do we do?
Run away, run away!!!
No, it's alright he's just come in to shut the computer dow............______________________________________________
And V6s. The flat 4 fitted much the same space as the V4, so, by your own logic.........
I'm told that the Flavia was one of the best handling cars of its period. The Fulvia certainly was.
If course, the other successful front mounted V4s were/are Subarus............
As a matter of fact, the V 4 in the Lancia Fulvia was DOHC but used only two camshafts. Clever, huh? Still managed to be way more expensive to produce than the FIAT twin cam, though........
