by "AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
Published 03/02/2017 at 13:19
by "AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
Published 03/02/2017 at 13:19
No Tags
STARS: 8
It’s the first mass-produced car with a 5-speed (1948). It’s got the smallest V4 production car engine (903cc) ever made. It clung to RHD when almost all of Continental Europe drove on the right. It’s the grandfather of the Fulvia and the great-great grandfather of the Delta.
It was made from 1939-53, and it’s a gorgeous little thing. Don’t you think?
"RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht" (ramblininexile)
03/02/2017 at 13:47, STARS: 1
first mass-produced car with a 5-speed
smallest V4 production car engine
I can’t help the inescapable conclusion these two are related.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 13:52, STARS: 0
I’m sure. Especially since that zingy V4 had a 4-speed only until 1947.
"RallyDarkstrike - Fan of 2-cyl FIATs, Eastern Bloc & Kei cars" (rallydarkstrike)
03/02/2017 at 13:53, STARS: 1
Very pretty classics - also, suicide rear doors! And Trafficators embedded in the C-pillars!
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 13:56, STARS: 0
I love all of that! I thought they might be semaphores. Though I wonder how much weather got in with the lack of a B-pillar.
"RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht" (ramblininexile)
03/02/2017 at 14:03, STARS: 0
“Quick! We gotta come up with a solution for this thing driving like a small dog through a pool of gelato! Without jeopardizing the tax advantages of our joke of an engine!”
“Maybe add another gear in the trans? We’ve got room, and it don’t gotta be heavy. That V4 can’t break wind - it’s safe”
“A *five* speed? Antonio, you’re a genius!”
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 14:14, STARS: 0
I dunno if the V4 was a “joke” of an engine. It had higher specific output than Ford’s contemporaneous flathead V8.
But yeah. I’m sure that customers wanted to get to higher speeds and didn’t want to have to rev that little V4 until the valves popped out and danced the jitterbug on the hood.
"RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht" (ramblininexile)
03/02/2017 at 14:28, STARS: 0
High specific output is one thing, but when it requires high Rs with a V4, I can absolutely imagine a degree of Do Not Want. Not least from the mechanic.
"Svend" (svend)
03/02/2017 at 15:23, STARS: 1
It’s beautiful.
The split rear window car looks fantastic.
Also in van form is great too.
basically. Lancias looked so good of this period that should I ever win big on the lottery, my winnings would be depleted in no time at all, but I’d have a full garage of cars.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 15:33, STARS: 0
I dunno. French and Italian small engines tend to run best at high revs. Since Ardeas with these engines were also popular as trucks and panel vans, I’d imagine they weren’t quite so nightmarish.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 15:36, STARS: 1
Me too. I’d have a Lancia from every line from postwar until about now. And only about 1/4 would probably be running at any one time.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 15:45, STARS: 2
I’m just astounded at how much beauty and elegance Italian designers consistently incorporated into even the most mainstream of their cars.
Those twin backlights divided by a subtle roof rib are pure delight. Almost useless to the driver. But you can tell the designers loved this car when they were forming it.
"RallyDarkstrike - Fan of 2-cyl FIATs, Eastern Bloc & Kei cars" (rallydarkstrike)
03/02/2017 at 16:25, STARS: 1
I seem to remember reading that weather sealing wasn’t their strong point. :P
My favorite older ride from around that generation is probably the FIAT Topolino, Citroen 2CV and Citroen Traction Avant. :)
"Svend" (svend)
03/02/2017 at 16:30, STARS: 1
The Lancia b20s and b24s (especially the b24s) look so incredibly beautiful. Your eyes are just drawn around the car, very stopping, never finding an unattractive element that would cause you to look awa.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 16:36, STARS: 0
All 3 of those are absolutely brilliant cars. As European cars go, I love all 3, as well as the SIMCA Aronde, DKW F89/91, and Renault 4CV.
But, to me, the Ardea is the prettiest of them all.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 16:44, STARS: 1
Yes indeed. The B24's are automotive design perfection. As are the B50's.
All of the Aurelias, even the sedans, look good to me in one way or another.
"RallyDarkstrike - Fan of 2-cyl FIATs, Eastern Bloc & Kei cars" (rallydarkstrike)
03/02/2017 at 16:55, STARS: 1
I’ve heard of the Aronde before, but never looked it up! Very cool! Seems almost American in style in its first iteration!
"AuthiCooper1300" (rexrod)
03/02/2017 at 18:33, STARS: 1
All old Lancias are beautiful.
However, you should watch your back if you keep saying that it is the grandfather of the Integrale...
Deltas are definitely part of the Fiat period, even if Lancia still managed sometimes to do things a bit their own way. Remember that even the earlier Lancia 037 was actually an Abarth (read “Fiat”) design.
Lancias kept RHD for quite a while for two reasons: a quirk of early Italian road laws at the time that mandated cars to drive on the left side of the road in town, but on the right side of the road in the mountains (drivers with RHD cars and trucks could then “place” the car better in narrow, treacherous Alpine roads) and the fact that most racetracks turn clockwise - thus having a better side-to-side weight distribution in most of the corners.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 18:50, STARS: 0
I meant it as the precursor to the Delta because: Ardea > Appia > Fulvia > Beta > Delta/Prisma. Even though the Delta/Prisma was based on Fiat mechanicals (with Saab design input), it’s still a car that Lancia could be very proud of. And without Fiat, Lancia would have died in the early ‘70s. No Dino V6 Stratos would have ever been made.
As for the RHD/LHD thing, I have learned something new today. That’s pretty fantastic! Thank you!
"AuthiCooper1300" (rexrod)
03/02/2017 at 19:12, STARS: 1
Well, yes, in that sense you could say they are part of the same family. But old Lancias were so nicely, finely, intricately made compared with Fiats that, you know, its apples and pears.
Deltas were more or less a souped-up Fiat Ritmo/Strada driveline/front suspension layout mated to a rear Beta-style rear suspension. And in the case of the Delta (which, by the way, only later spawned the Prisma) Saab input did not go beyond heating and such (in payment, they were allowed to rebadge and sell some Deltas as Saabs). It was not until the joint Tipo 4 car programme (Saab 9000/Fiat Croma/Lancia Thema/Alfa Romeo 164) when Saab really had a say on things.
True, without Fiat there would have been no Stratos (although they had no qualms in killing it to push their 131 Abarth!). But then for a few decades without Fiat there would have been very little proper car industry in Italy. Beyond the empire there was only Alfa Romeo (barely alive, soon to be gobbled up), Maserati (owned by De Tomaso, see above), Innocenti (did not last, became just a nameplate), Lamborghini (more dead than alive until VAG stepped in) etc.
I love Fiat, and to be honest in the past they did much more for the whole auto industry than they are credited for (and yes, the rallying Lancias of the 80s are part of it). But what happened to Lancia after Fiat bought Alfa Romeo is simply unacceptable. What happened to Alfa Romeo was not wonderful either, but at least things seem to be changing... for now.
I only very recently found out that the Fiat Uno –one of Fiat’s best small cars of recent years– started in fact as a Lancia project. Fiat simply barged in, decided it was going to be the successor to the Fiat 127 and that was that.
I understand that the old “Fiat”, “Lancia” and “Alfa Romeo” engineers were at war behind the scenes for decades. As those guys were being pensioned off, the group became more homogeneous and slightly more profitable, but probably also a lot less interesting.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/02/2017 at 20:14, STARS: 0
You’re completely right about Lancia’s pre-Fiat approach to building cars compared to post-Fiat. It seems as though a happy Mercedes-Benz type medium was needed between Fiat’s post-1969 disposable approach to cars and pre-1970 Lancia’s artisan approach. But that medium was never found.
As for Innocenti, they were owned by De Tomaso along with Maserati. They were never all that big to begin with, having (as I’m sure you know from your handle) mostly licensed BMC/BL vehicles for Italian sale and production (including the Austin Allegro/Innocenti Regent). They hung in there for nearly 2 decades (1974-92) building a fundamentally better, more modern Mini. But alas, the brand just couldn’t expand under De Tomaso’s umbrella. When De Tomaso sold Maserati to Fiat, Innocenti came with it. And Fiat basically used it as a ‘90s version of Dacia, parking a bunch of old-tech stuff they’d licensed to developing countries in the range, before canning it for good in ‘97.
Perhaps you meant Autobianchi? After the founder sold out, Fiat used the brand as a testbed for new designs. It was eventually paired with Lancia until it was phased out in favor of Lancia at the end of the Y10 days. The pairing was so strong by the ‘80s, in fact, that SAAB sold the A112 (which I am in love with) through their dealer network as a SAAB-Lancia A112, much like the rebadged Delta, which they called the SAAB-Lancia 600.
It’s sad to think that the only remaining Lancia currently on sale is a direct descendant of the Autobianchi A112, instead of anything connected to Lancia’s family tree.
And don’t get me started on Moretti.
You seem to be one of the few folks around these parts who has voiced that Lancia’s death spiral began with Fiat’s acquisition of Alfa Romeo in 1987. I don’t think anyone likes the idea that Lancia has been dying so that Alfa might live. But it’s absolutely true. Top Gear’s dedication to Lancia certainly didn’t mention it.
Part of me wishes that the Italian government would have required the breakup of Fiat into 2 different companies after the De Tomaso deal:
1. Fiat - Alfa Romeo - Ferrari
2. Autobianchi/Innocenti - Lancia - Maserati
This would have given Alfa Romeo all the room in the world on the Fiat side to expand, and would have seen a great deal more focus from Fiat.
Had it been financed well enough, this scheme would have also allowed Lancia and Maserati enough breathing room to be what they should have been, while the Autobianchi/Innocenti side could merge to eventually form a volume brand.
But I don’t think the Italian government had anywhere near that level of vision. Certainly Fiat themselves didn’t. Pity.
"AuthiCooper1300" (rexrod)
03/03/2017 at 16:51, STARS: 1
Whoa, so many points you’ve raised here. Yes, I knew De Tomaso was behind both Innocenti and Maserati. But as you say, Innocenti did not last long. Part of the problem was that the mechanicals for the 90/120 range (the Bertone-designed Mini) were coming from Britain (the whole engine/gearbox unit, carbs included. The actual engineering for that car was done by BL too, but for some strange reason never tried to sell it in the UK.) BL was struggling with the Metro project (and a huge economic crisis
and
labour unrest) and did not really like the idea of propping up Innocenti, which also used BL’s dealer network to sell their wares in Europe.
Later DeTomaso had the 90/120 reengineered to fit Daihatsu engines, but the charm of the older cars just was not there.
While it is certain that Alejandro De Tomaso made mistakes with Maserati, I don’t think anybody has ever thanked him for keeping the marque alive (even if he almost killed it in the process). The time of the Maserati Biturbo and its manifold derivatives will come (probably in spite of Fiat’s better efforts to try to forget that period) if only as a sort of curio.
Autobianchi - yeah, forgot to mention them. In the end it became a brand for chic, highish-end city cars, which in many cases ended up being bought by chic, affluent women (so much so that later on they became its main target group).
By the way, if you like the A112 so much find out about Chardonnet’s Group 5 rallying monster with a 1.5 Ritmo engine. Some say it was actually a covert development mule for the Ritmo Gr 2 cars (Chardonnet was Lancia/Autobianchi’s official importer in France and the outfit behind Bernard Darniche’s semi-works Stratos).
The “Lancia family tree” died with the Fulvia (the Stratos was “something else” and probably should be considered a Bertone development - yes, even the HF/Rally version: ask Gandini). To a certain extent, most FWD Fiats (and Fiat-era Lancias) are derivatives of the Autobianchi Primula and the 128.
What happened to Lancia is very simple. The Stratos gave the brand an enormous sporting edge. When Fiat decided to make give the 037, S4, etc Lancia badges they did not imagine they would end up also owning Alfa Romeo! To be honest, once you have Alfa Romeo in your stable that is the sporting brand, at least from an Italian point of view.
It is not that Fiat sacrificed Lancia and favoured Alfa Romeo; Lancia simply did not fit properly the “elegant/luxury” niche, which was the only one left. Alfa was doing that too! Fiat tried, rather unconvincingly, to push Lancia as a sort of faux-bourgeois car, but it did not work. For that you really need a bespoke platform or at least a huge marketing effort (à la Audi in the early 80s). The platform was out of the question, and the marketing effort - which was not that huge either– yes, that went to Alfa.
As much as I love Lancia, in the “myth” stakes they will always lose to Alfa Romeo. Sad but true.
What you say about the Italian government... er, have you ever followed Italian politics? To start with - Fiat was so huge in Italy in the 80s that its power (both
hard
and
soft)
was probably on par with that of the cabinet. Ditto with l’avvocato Agnelli. No Italian government was ever going to impose anything on Fiat: as simple as that. It is the other way round; figuratively speaking, Fiat could get away with murder, if need be, and no one in government was ever going to say anything. Besides, in the 80s political instability in Italy was truly disastrous... on top of the Mafia killing policemen, civil servants and judges almost every week.
They had other things to think about rather than motoring history and branding.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/03/2017 at 18:19, STARS: 0
Oh, I meant no shade to De Tomaso. The fact that he kept Maserati alive (and launched its cornerstone products) for nearly 20 years after Citroen gave up, was commendable, even if the brand was almost irrelevant by the 1993 sellout. And I’ve always rather liked the Biturbo, personally. I just wish it would have been accompanied by a supercar. Instead, after the Khamsin and Kyalami died, Maserati was pretty much exclusively, as the British say, “saloon cars.”
Since you fancy the Authi Mini, I wondered about your perspective on the Bertone-bodied Innocenti Mini. Did the Daihatsu engines really kill the car’s character? Even the De Tomaso version? Because I am truly intrigued by them. More reliable engines, hatchback versatility, a seating position designed for humans, and a 5-speed box seemed just the thing to bring the clever, nippy little Mini into the modern world. I’ve always dreamed of importing one to the US for when I become fabulously rich someday. And I read somewhere that BL imported the Innocenti Mini in 1974-75, but then Ryder Report came out and BL cut ties in the wake of it.
As for Lancia vs. Alfa, I agree with you. It wasn’t so much that Lancia was consciously starved after the Alfa acquisition. It’s that Lancia had no direction left to go, even as they were racking up WRC wins left, right, and center. I got all excited in the late ‘90s-2000s when cars like the Ypsilon, Lybra, Thesis, and Fulvia concept appeared. Those cars seemed like something of a stab at an identity, and I thought each of them was lovely and had character. Character that wasn’t, however, very much in keeping with the performance of the ‘70s-90s and the quality of the pre-Fiat days. Once Fiat hit the skids in 2004, it was clear they couldn’t afford to take the next step with Lancia.
Also, was the Gamma really all that corrupted by Fiat? I know you say the true end of the tree is the Fulvia. But I’d think that the Gamma’s Flavia/2000-derived flat-4, and its lack of a Fiat equivalent would count for something. Maybe I’m missing something.
To me, if I had to choose between Lancia and Alfa Romeo surviving, I’d reluctantly pick Alfa. But 5 years ago, I wouldn’t have been so sure in the era where Alfa killed the 159/Brera and was down to just the MiTo and Giulietta.
I guess I see Lancia as a tale of two incarnations... one lasted until 1969, and the other was announced as terminal with the death of the Thesis and Delta. Both incarnations had their strong and weak points. But I love both for what they were.
As for your comments about Fiat’s influence and the Italian government’s weakness, I’m sure you’re completely right. For me, it isn’t so much about branding as doing what, in retrospect, seemed necessary for the Italian volume car industry to survive. Fiat was vastly over-extended given its financial position, and a break-up of the company into two smaller, more manageable firms might have contributed to the health of the Italian car industry. But who knows?
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/03/2017 at 18:38, STARS: 0
Also, I live for in-depth chats like this, when they are about cars.
"AuthiCooper1300" (rexrod)
03/06/2017 at 19:34, STARS: 0
When I mentioned that De Tomaso does not get the credit he deserves for keeping Maserati alive I did not mean you personally, sorry if I did not phrase it correctly.
I think that the first generations of “Bertone” Innocentis - please note: still with BL’s A-series engine and gearbox, rubber-cone suspension etc – did have a lot more personality than the later versions, and they are still recognisable technically as Minis (same suspension system and layout, although the subframes were wider and rubber cones themselves had a higher rating). The new suspension for the Daihatsu versions had nothing to do with the old BL system either. Cannot say if they were a nice drive, although the Turbo De Tomaso certainly had its followers, I admit.
Incidentally, driving position in the Bertone designed bodyshells (be it the BL-engined ones or the later types with Daihatsu powerplants) was still as lorry-like as in the BMC Mini.
A curious factoid about the early Bertone/BL Innocentis is that the 1275 engine was basically a Mk3 Cooper “S” unit (some versions with twin SU, some with a big single carb though), and the gearbox had also the close-ratio gearset... a long time after they had ceased to be fitted to UK Minis. Probably by mistake some of those gearboxes ended up in just a tiny number of MG Metros, creating lifelong confusion among enthusiasts of the model.
The Gamma was an astonishingly elegant car (still is, particularly the Coupé). The problem may have been the fact that the project was co-developed with Citroën (their side of the deal was the CX). When Lancia and Citroën parted ways many parts had to be redesigned in-house because they were not going to be shared anymore. Maybe that “re-designing” meant that the usual development period to iron out all the bugs was not in fact as long or as thorough as it should have been for the production version: I wonder if all the problems with that engine stem from the troubled gestation of the basic platform. Then, of course, you have the very serious problem of rust that Fiat products suffered from in the 70s... particularly in those markets where they had to succeed to gain credibility.
So to answer your question - no, I don’t think that Fiat actively sabotaged the model at all. Fiat Auto needed a flagship product and that was the niche reserved for the Gamma.
It’s interesting what you say about the two “incarnations” of Lancia. I would be more severe. For me, the cutoff models for the second period would be the Delta/Prisma and the Thema/Kappa. At the time I admired the bravery of Fiat to put cars such as the Lybra or Thesis on the market, but most people just did not understand what they were about, and were confused by this new direction that seemed to deliberately forget about rallying or motorsports.
Similarly... Alfa 159s are lovely to look at (as are the Breras), but they were monstrously heavy. I am ready to understand that it was impossible to “detox” the old V6 but a Holden engine... really??? At least the Mito and the Giulietta do not have to owe anything to anyone. They are simply Alfa-branded, and the Giulietta did look a bit more attractive than other cars in its segment. Regarding the Mito, I just dislike it intensely on purely aesthetic grounds.
I mentioned “branding” because even if your analysis about Fiat being overextended and just too big is correct... they were the only ones that really counted. So the game was “which brand are we going now to use for what”? Remember: no Italian government was ever in such a position so as to be able to tell the Fiat Group (or Agnelli) what to do and what not to do – let alone force them to variously split and merge with others to form two different, healthier industrial groups.
It was (still is) just unthinkable.
"AuthiCooper1300" (rexrod)
03/06/2017 at 19:34, STARS: 0
Thanks, me too - but maybe we are boring others to tears.
"AMC/Renauledge" (n2skylark)
03/06/2017 at 19:47, STARS: 0
Meh, it’s my post.