Alfa Romeo 4C specs

This car looks good and is light. Give me one

Im reminiscing all the cars ive driven before and the 4c is a surprising car - im 6’3 and fit comfortably in it and that 4cyl is absolutely bonkers would love to have the chance to drive one again

The 4c engine in details:
http://4c-forums.com/16-engine-technical/22130-vvt-explanation-tuning.html
http://4c-forums.com/16-engine-technical/25169-4c-engine-s-bottom-end.html
http://4c-forums.com/16-engine-technical/31426-4c-s-turbocharging-system.html

Toronto motorsports park
Alfa 4cwith 255-260bhp stock tires: 1:23.2
Lotus exige with 330bhp yokohama semis: 1:22.2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acsm6bXzwlk
1.53.58 at Red Bull Ring (with passenger), stock car with 18/19 ARR

i just did 7:52 in Nurburgring with Alfa Romeo 4C

Can we add this track?
Circuit de La Ferté Gaucher.
A lot of times there by pro Soheil Ayari.
http://m.caradisiac.com/Caradisiac-chrono-quelle-sportive-domine-notre-tableau-des-temps-88867.htm

150kg extra??? damn,
I guess euro conversations would be quite popular among american owners

So it seems the denizens of the US now get the 4C, At a price of $53,900, WHich is realllly good for a high performance Alfa Romeo, $70,000 for the first 500 which includes a few features.

On the down side....The US version....Gains....350Lbs...THREE.. HUNDRED..FIFTY...POUNDS....!!...-_-158Kg!

That is just crazy, STill though, Extra safety bracing, Sound dedening, Bumper and rear end fixations, ALL that equals to 158Kg?...Seems a bit heavy. WHatever i guess.

But hey, Atleast they dont come with those AWFUL Spider headlights(Which they never should have)

Still, At that price, Id uch rather have a Stingray or Cayman S.

Things that hurt this car the most:
-bad weight balance despite mid engine layout
-no power steering
-no 6 cylinder engine
-not good rear suspension used beceause of the lack of space and weight obsession
-bar ride quality, too much track oriented

ALfa, please fix this and this car will be great.

Alfa 4C - 1:24.91 at Circuit de Nevers Magny-Cours Club by MotorSport magazine.

Damn good times, Its nice to see(If any) a good old fashioned(Kinda) lightweight small car in todays world instead of big hunking heavy weighter litted with super electronic gizmos

I would love a hardcore version of this car with the engine tuned to 400hp. It would kill anything on the track.Alfa should make one.

Alfa 4C test by Quattroruote.

Acceleration, launch control:
0-100 km/h 4.2 s,
0-200 km/h 16.9 s,
400 m - 12.5 s @ 178.7 km/h,
1000 m - 23.2 s @ 219.6 km/h.

Acceleration without launch control:
0-100 km/h 4.5 s
0-200 km/h 17.7 s
400 m - 12.8 s @ 176.9 km/h
1000 m - 23.5 s @ 219.0 km/h.

Top speed 252.3 km/h @ 6500 rpm in fifth gear.

Tested curb weight with full fuel tank
1019 kg, 39% front / 61% rear.

@BR2+ yep, that is why I look to see what Car and Driver says the real weight is since they always put the car on scales before testing. Some manufacturers are way off, and some actually do meet their target weight exactly. It is easier for them when a car comes with very few options, and thus is sold in only one trim level. My 1995 Plymouth Neon ACR came in with a weight of 2475 lbs exactly on the scales, and then after taking everything out legally for Solo II D stock competition I had it down to only 2363 lbs. Just enough gas for 4 runs without fuel starvation at 1.03 g (measured on a skidpad), no windshield washer fluid, no spare tire, or jack, or floor mats, lighter wheels (stock size), lighter tires (R compound of course), etc... Not too shabby at weight management. I was kinda competitive back in the day. :)

@Viking

I agree on it being a good deal heavier then advertised, Whether its dry weight or curb weight, How many cars that are weighed even come within 50kg of its claimed dry/curb weight? Practically none.

@Piorun

I wouldn't change anything about Koenigseggs..(Except the huge price tags)

But I agree on the 4C being good, Even great, but not awesome. But the rest is ney..

4C is one of those cars that are good but not avesome. Its not a shame. Also is one of those cars that look excelent on paper, but in reality doesnt do as well as it seems like they could. Similar to koenigsegg's.

Its propably part of calibration, little details in driving dynamics. Traction controll, etc.

Remember that 4C is Alfa first small sports car since very long time. Maybe guys from Ferrari should have work more on it.

It simply will not go faster, i wait for "Face Lift" that will upgrade the car, beceause it have great potential, unfortunately its limited now by propably couple of little issues that affects its on-limit performance.

As im fan of Alfa Romeo and 4C, this need some work to be great car.

@saxy; Hayes; Super8; BR2+ I think the biggest variable that needs to be taken into account is that the Alfa Romeo 4C is quite a bit heavier in actuality than was initially advertised. I might be wrong, but I suspect the Euro version weighs circa 2300 lbs curb weight (full fluids, no driver), and the U.S. version 2600 lbs curb weight. Not much lighter than the "R" version NSX models.

Damn near all the cars of that time from Japan where underated, But even these model NSXs pushed no more then 300Bhp maximum, EVen in the Tpe R form, The NSX-R of 2002 had a maximum real output of 320Bhp and 250Lb Ft, 2002 R34 Ms had 320Bhp and 295Lb Ft(Mine tested) instead of the advertised 280bhp 290Lb Ft, R33s 305Bhp 280Lb ft etc etc Theres a lot that had more then claimed, But not as much as some people seem to think. Not like GNXs or Audis of today.

As for the Lap, We have to factor in the driver and how much time was given, An NSX-R of the 90s is not going to beat a 4C in anything other then top speed and possibly high end acceleration.

@ saxy: NSX-R was underrated. True output is 325 hp.

@saxy the nsx is much more powerful than claimed

it's almost 800lbs lighter than the NSX-R, nearly has as much power, but more torque. As well it has 18 years advantage of technology, and it's still slower on the 'Ring wow.

Baloco time : 2:54.43
0-100km/h in 4.2s
0-180km/h in 13,36s
From Auto Italian Magazine

this car is an italian exige! astonishing lap times

Small cars are fun. According to Car and Driver the dimensions:

Wheelbase: 93.7"
Length: 157.0"
Width: 73.4"
Height: 46.6"

0-50 kph: 1,8 s
0-100 kph: 4,5 s
400 m: 12,9 s

I do get it, But it doesn't matter if he used the R as a base and piled his own stuff on it, the fact is, Wheels aside, it NO LONGER resembles an Agera.

All those concepts except for the Tuettottonta(Retarded Name) look ugly as sin, The Bella wasn't TOO bad, Some of there 60-70s concepts were pretty nice, If not Bold as hell. To think, a company that makes SUCH GOOD concept cars, Doesn't really build anything exciting as much, if ever, In the last 13 years whats been exciting in Alfa?...The 8C and the 4C(Possibly the Brera-_- in 13years?....a damned shame.

@BR2
You still didn't get it. The designer of the IED Alfa rendering just took the official Koenigsegg's image and made his own body. He didn't even bother in changing wheels.

Indeed, Alfa makes some of the coolest concept cars, like this 2uettottanta, which I believe would be a basis for the upcoming Spider.

And classic Alfa concept are simply iconic, as this gorgeous '69 Tipo33/2 Coupe Speciale.

However, some of their I consider to be failed. For example, '03 Kamal;
'99 "Bella"

;

'97 Sportut

(this is where Aztec's roots come from...);

'10 Pandion; their B.A.T.s; and Gloria...

..Besides the wheels and the backround, theres No same thing, Where are you people lookin?..

I also don't mind the Schigerheraera, (Stupid name) but not bad, interior was pretty nice, Alfa Romeo makes one of the BEST Concept cars of ANY manufacture, Top 5.

Gloria(Very Sexy)

Diva(Horrid Headlights, Disgusting)

Bat 11(One Word, Awesome)

Remember this?

Cool-old Scighera concept. Some find it disgusting, but personally I have an unreasonable love for this car. Nostalgic... :)