What's new
By:
Mopar Insiders Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Triplets are coming?

@mopar22 Mercedes A-class was never a B-segment car. The 1997 original was just 3.7 m long, but that was mainly because it lacked a front "hood". Its wheelbase was at the short end of the segment (2.42 m when everyone else was around 2.5 m), but because of the "sandwich" construction and underfloor engine, that choice didn't affect interior room. I owned one of these, and it was much more spacious than the VW Golf or Ford Focus of the period. (It was also poorly trimmed inside and very unreliable, but that's not a problem of the packaging)
Part of the reason for the short wheelbase is that Mercedes management were concerned that if they built the very well packaged A-class at the segment-standard 2.5 m wheelbase, it would make its "bigger" C-class look cramped by comparison. As it happened, the cheapening of the A-class before and after launch put enough distance between it and the C for this not to matter, so the "A-Class LWB" model that later became the "B-Class" arrived in 2000.

@AlfaCuda: If anyone can make a good FWD car, it's Alfa. The Sud, 156 and GIulietta were all excellent handlers. I don't think RWD is of much advantage below the D-segment, especially in exchange for the amount of space it steals. Everyone in C-segment is now FWD - BMW tried, and failed, to make RWD a unique selling point. Plus, PHEV assist to the rear wheels will allow Tonale the same lack of torque-steer you get in a RWD, but keep the better packaging and more predictable skid behaviour you get from FWD.
 
Heresy …. god intended that all well handling cars have rear wheel drive bias.
 
TripleT said:
Heresy …. god intended that all well handling cars have rear wheel drive bias.
Click to expand...

Hmh... Fiat knew how to make excellent AWD cars (English subs available):

Unfortunately it never came out but basically it was based around AWD system as was used on Lancia Delta.
 
Bili said:
Smaller than 500X may be too small for Alfa. As we know MiTo was a slower seller than Giulietta. It seems that people are not in love with (too) small Alfas.

B+ sized SUV may be the smallest acceptable size for most Alfa customers even in Europe.
Click to expand...
Well, the Mito was Alfa's first B sized model, while the Giulietta is the direct successor of the 147. So they had to conquer more new customers. And the Mito was 3 door only, while customer demand moved to 5 door hatchbacks in the last 10 years. Too bad they skipped the planned 5 door Mito in 2012!

There's rumor about a B sized Fiat crossover for the "Panda" side of the brand, to be built in Serbia.
 
pumadog said:
Well, the Mito was Alfa's first B sized model, while the Giulietta is the direct successor of the 147. So they had to conquer more new customers. And the Mito was 3 door only, while customer demand moved to 5 door hatchbacks in the last 10 years. Too bad they skipped the planned 5 door Mito in 2012!

There's rumor about a B sized Fiat crossover for the "Panda" side of the brand, to be built in Serbia.
Click to expand...

MiTo 2012 would be late same as Giulietta SW... Those are missed oportunisti but both would come too late.

500L replacement yes. Similar size as 500L if it's green lighted. Hopefully with lesser height.
 
500L is my least favorite Fiat model... Having spent a week with one, The packaging is great the ill behaving transmission is not. Then the turning radius quite awful for the tight roads of Europe. So replacement would be welcome......

For package reason B segment vehicle with have the FWD based with the wrong wheels being bias and the engine turned the wrong way. But lets not pretend that is superior way to make a drivers car..... Can Alfa make one of the best for that layout for sure. And like someone said people in that end of the market tend to expect that compromise.
 
TripleT said:
500L is my least favorite Fiat model... Having spent a week with one, The packaging is great the ill behaving transmission is not. Then the turning radius quite awful for the tight roads of Europe. So replacement would be welcome......

For package reason B segment vehicle with have the FWD based with the wrong wheels being bias and the engine turned the wrong way. But lets not pretend that is superior way to make a drivers car..... Can Alfa make one of the best for that layout for sure. And like someone said people in that end of the market tend to expect that compromise.
Click to expand...

Let's say that for FWD based Alfa, and this includes Tonale, I'm hoping for an AWD system which will not be on demand as on FWD based Jeeps and 500X. AWD system with rear Torque Vectoring differential would be nice and is available and is in use on some competing products.
GKN’s Twinster provides intelligent all-wheel drive torque vectoring for new Opel Insignia
 
For sure if they go AWD it should have a clear RWD bias... Can't fix the rotational inertia issues other that to isolate them as much as possible.
 
I got the impression that the rear wheels will only get electric power in some upcoming small SUVs. No prop shaft. Can the mild hybrids offer this?

From my experience FWD is worst when accelerating around a corner or on a slippy street. Rather short moments when electric support should do.
 
loss of traction creates a push condition instead of lose rear end. Less predictable. Understeer instead of oversteer,
 
TripleT said:
Heresy …. god intended that all well handling cars have rear wheel drive bias.
Click to expand...

And than arrived the heretic Lancia Delta Integrale :)

Transversal mounted engine and transaxle gearbox, but when managers allow to spend a little bit of money... Permanent 4wd with equal length front half axles, epicyclical central differential with viscous coupler, rear TorSen (torque sensing) differential. The Torsen differential not very often used in production cars since more expensive.
First versions FWD / RWD torque distribution was 56/44 % than 47/53 % for 16v model and Evo.

Lancia Delta Integrale - History and technical infos
Lancia all wheel drive explained

It always depends on how much engineers are allowed to spent on suspension, transmissions, ... and how much in other components of vehciles.
Nowdays for most vehicles is more about appearance than substance, it should be "great" on paper, few will appreciate good handling.
 
MJAB said:
It always depends on how much engineers are allowed to spent on suspension, transmissions, ... and how much in other components of vehciles.
Nowdays for most vehicles is more about appearance than substance, it should be "great" on paper, few will appreciate good handling.
Click to expand...

Well that true ….. not going to say where but I heard people say the Caravan drives better than a Pacifica. Your inter-ear is numb and rear must of have died decades ago to link those vehicles are in the same realm...….

Given Alfa position handling is critical.... just the claim the engine running the wrong way and with FWD bias is close to feeling even in the best application as when the proper RWD is silly.
 
156 GTA had beaten BMW E46 in ETCC. It can be done.
 
I would will FCA stick a new model in-between the Renegade and Compass like how GM is doing with the "Trailblazer"/Trax-Tracker.
 
Interesting idea. I've always thought a small SUV would be so close to Giulietta in size that it wouldn't matter. Giulietta itself was significantly taller than 147.

(What's the top-left vehicle?.. I don't recognise it)
 
@KrisW

Top left is a new version of Kia Ceed. Actually they call it Kia Xceed.

The question is it is a Small Wide v2.0 based car or something smaller with around 4 meters in length.
For the former it could end up on around 2.6 meters wheelbase, 4.30 meters in lent and 1.55 meters in height.
Actually it could be a good replacement for Giulietta.

But I would like to see Giulietta IV. Maybe as a sedan looking cat with a hatch. Why not? So that it can be sold outside of Europe.
 
Is this an FCA image? Odd to see Kia and Audi together in any kind of a presentation.

That Audi Q2 is pretty close to Giulietta in size: 4cm shorter wheelbase, just 6mm narrower track, and 4cm higher roofline.

I'd like to see Giulietta IV too, but I'm not so sure about a sedan (I expect the Audi A3 sedan will be killed in Audi's rationalisation plans - it never sold well). I could see a short, low SUV to replace Giulietta, with Tonale serving as its Sportwagon variant.
 
KrisW said:
Is this an FCA image? Odd to see Kia and Audi together in any kind of a presentation.
Click to expand...

There is a watermark. FedeGTA made it based on some description of an upcoming model. Size description, nothing about style itself which is his fiction. But IMO if yize description is correct that his vision can be used to show proportions of an upcoming model.


Germans and rationalisation plans? They are saying it for at least half of the last decade yet they didn't have balls to kill products. I think it's wait and see in similar fashion with what FCA did with sedans. Everyone is scared to be first.

Bu here I've said that I would like to see sedan like Giulietta IV but with rear hatch. In that case no need for a classic hatchback.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top