Re: 4R Zagato

[Paul Bayly <thebaylys@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I did a little 'web-research" on these a while back and found a couple of
obscure references to two different wheelbase versions being available in
the production run of 92 ?  Maybe they weren't all built on the same donor
platform.

Beatle
Oz
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hertzman" <johnhertzman@domain.elided>
To: <alfa@domain.elided>
Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 4:26 AM
Subject: 4R Zagato


> I replied to Tim's question off-digest rather than on, as my opinions are
(as
> often) relatively negative, but on-digest seems required to quibble about
> possibly questionable information.
>
> Tim had written that they "were built on a Giulia floorpan", and George
Graves
> wrote they "were actually built on a Giulia floorpan by the original
> coachbuilder, Zagato and sported a real, fold-down flat windshield."
>
> I question at least the "built on a Giulia floorpan" part; the car has a
> wheelbase of 2600 mm, versus 2250 mm for the 101.23 Giulia Spider (whose
type
> number Russ Neely correctly says they shared), a difference of roughly
> fourteen inches. Other Giulia wheelbases are 2380 mm for the Sprint, 2350
mm
> for the 105 coupes, 2510 mm for the sedans, 2570 for the 1750/2000
Berlinas.
> Even the Milano is 2510; the Alfa Sei was the only Alfa between the 2600
> berlina and the 164 with as long a wheelbase as the 4R.
>
> David E. Davis wrote a road-impressions (but not road test) on the 4R in
Car &
> Driver, August 1966, on the basis of nearly a month spent with a loaner.
He
> wrote, among other things, "We understand that Alfa is involved in the
project
> only as a supplier of engines and running gear, and as a sales outlet",
and I
> have seen nothing elsewhere to suggest otherwise. Davis evidently enjoyed
it
> immensely ("looks like it would be more fun than a bathtub full of
otters"),
> although most of his individual comments would be generally considered
> damning- "predictably unpredictable electrical system", "the car will go
> around corners, it's the steering that doesn't want to", "judge the
accuracy
> of your line on a given corner by whether or not you are still on the road
and
> upright", etcetera.
>
> George wrote "the thing was frightfully expensive, costing about the same
in
> the USA as Jaguar XK-E (almost 6000 1967 dollars If I remember
correctly)";
> the sales flier produced by ARI gave the price as $4950 P.O.E., slightly
more
> that a Sprint Speciale or a 2600 Spider (both $4,886) and far below a 2600
> Sprint.
>
> Russ Neely wrote "As they are light weight, conversion to Veloce specs
makes
> quite a responsive, if non stock car." As built and sold they did have the
92
> hp, single downdraft carb base version of the 1600 engine. I assume this
was
> partly because sidedraft Webers wouldn't fit under the relatively narrow
> replicar-styling hood, but also was consistent with the car's relatively
> modest fun-car intent.
>
> Russ also wrote "Apparently, completed spiders were pulled from the
assembly
> line and sent to Zagato for conversion.  Since the cars were pulled as
Zagato
> ordered them, the serial numbers are all over the range of the 101.23
spider."
> The numbers given in d'Amico & Tabucchi are curiously out of sequence but
not
> all over the range, ten cars had numbers from 393901 to 393910 but all of
the
> rest had numbers between 393001 and 393083. The high number for the 'real'
> (Farina-bodied) 101.23 Spiders given in the same source was 392852, below
the
> start point for the 4R. They indicate also that only the last two Farina
> 101.23 Spiders were built in 1965, and only the first two 4R cars were
built
> in 1965. Trivial details, but curious, and suggest not "pulled from the
> assembly line and sent to Zagato for conversion."
>
> My impression is that most of the 4R cars are at least third car in a
stable,
> after the daily driver and the car the owner REALLY prizes as the most
> desirable Alfa he can afford - and probably many of them are considerably
> farther down the pecking order than that, after one's half-dozen or so
> favorites. For my tastes, it doesn't make it to the tail end of the list;
as a
> car which nobody at Alfa Romeo would have wanted to build, which has no
> connection to Alfa's apparent intentions or aspirations, I would question
> whether it should really be considered an Alfa, although many will feel
> otherwise. Certainly the company never, before or since, built anything
that
> far from its core competences, and I doubt it would have gone along with
this
> were it not for the magazine's very considerable importance.
>
> But all of that is my grump. If you have one, enjoy it, and if you want
one,
> good luck.
>
> John H.
> --
> to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
> or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided
--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided