"italian qc and quite a range of structural stiffness"

[JHertzman@xxxxxxx]

The overcooked-pasta Milano saga goes on, even as it winds down- with owners
of stiff Milani outnumbering the flxible flyrs considerably, but not enough to
make doug's car unique. He writes "but, after hearing from other milano
owners, it's also quite possible that italian qc was (is?) such that there may
be quite a range of structural stiffness from one milano to the next."

I have a copy of the quarterly "style auto - architettura della carrozzeria"
(the lower-case typography their choice) from the second quarter, 1973
containing an extensive article on the Alfetta Berlina, (thirty-one pages,
seventy-six illustrations) going from preliminary studies through static and
dynamic structural tests, crash tests both at Balocco and at MIRA in England,
aerodynamic tests both at Turin Polytechic and at the Stuttgart
Forschungsinstitut fur Kraftfahrwessen und Fahrzeugmotoren, to an extensive
section on presswork and the progression of pressings down several converging
lines of automated jigs and multiwelders before going on to painting, (also
highly automated) trimming, glassing, and eventual addition of mechanical
parts. It is VERY hard to see, in all of this, where the inebriated newly-
hired gypsy with an unfamiliar welding-torch could affect the quality-control
of the car structure.

Granted, the 1973 Alfetta is not a 1988 Milano Verde, but it is a direct
ancestor and I believe the technical competence in both engineering and
production would not have gone downhill in fifteen years.

Doug's car was four years old when he got it, and he discovered little things
which lead him to believe that its 1st 40k miles may have been a little harder
than its original owner let on. Right. Chase-scenes in San Francisco?

There is an interesting section on windshield and backlight bonding to the
body, including discussions of three quite different bonding products. The
early Alfettas, the subject of this article, were bonded; the '78-79 (in the
US) were gasketed, but with a notably different gasket material and
application than the old soft-rubber (popsickle-popout) gaskets; and the
Milano was again bonded. In this Alfetta the glass was definitely structural,
contributing approximately 10% to the torsional rigidity. The Milano glass is
presumably equally structural, and subject to critical stress if the rest of
the structure had been compromised in some way. It is conceivable also that on
windshield replacement a lesser bonding product might compromise the
windshield's contribution to torsional rigidity.

Switching victims, I must disagree slightly with Tony Brucia who has a very
rigid '88 Verde but adds "Feels about the same as my GTV6 as far as that's
concerned.  Don't forget that with 4 doors it would be harder for the Milano
to have the same rigidity." The B-pillar of the coupe is much lighter than
that of the Milano, and the path of structural loadings from the roof to the
bulkhead connecting the wheelarches and rear suspension is far more indirect
and insubstantial on the coupe than on the Milano, particularly with the
bonded rear window of the Milano against the hinged hatch of the coupe. As
with the Giulietta Berlina vs. Giulietta Sprint and the Giulia berlinas vs.
the Sprint GT and later coupes, the 116 sedans were engineered for production
and long-term integrity, while the 116 coupes were styled for pizzazz and
productionized afterwards, suffering in structure as a consequence. 

It is unfortunate that a few people apparently do have Milanos which are not
now as structurally sound as most, but I don't think the blame can be put
fairly on Quality Control in manufacture.

John H. 
Raleigh, N.C.

------------------------------

End of alfa-digest V7 #493
**************************