"Light weighting is the final frontier in the automotive industry fight to lower emissions."

[Z4ever]

Ok, with the Alfa 4C one gets great fuel economy for the performance. But, how good is that performance when compared to the 1M?

Well, the easiest way to answer that question is to go to the 'fastestlaps.com' site and compare the lap times of each of those cars for the same tracks where both cars were evaluated (the driver is not always the same for each track):


Track............................. BMW 1M......... Alfa 4C
Contidrom...................... 1:34,56 ......... 1:36,88
Hockenheim Short........... 1:14,10 ......... 1:14,00
Laguna Seca................... 1:43,31 ......... 1:43,78 (US version*)
Magny-Cours Club........... 1:26,50 .......... 1:24,91
Motortrend Figure-8......... 0:24,70 ......... 0:24,30 (US version*)
Nurbrurgring Nordschleife. 8:15,00 ......... 8:04,00
Virginia Intern. Raceway... 3:06,60 ......... 3:08,80 (US version*)

* The Alfa 4C US version is circa 90kg heavier than its european couterpart for safety reasons



So, one can conclude that the Alfa 4C is, if not faster, at least as fast as the BMW 1M and thus belongs undoubtedly to the 'Burn rubber, not fuel' category.

 

[Z4ever]

Another item that benefits both the fuel consumption and performance is the Alfa's DCT gearbox, which is a very efficient way of transmitting power - I can keep my right foot floored all the time while upshifting.

It's my first car with this kind of transmission (never drove a PDK) and for a guy like me used to heel and toe on every downshifts, even in normal driving mood, I don't miss it, not one bit and for what I can tell the 4C's transmission is lightening fast to react to my commands through the paddle-shifters, which have a very nice feeling BTW. It's very amusing and I always feel tempted to change gears. Also, the exhaust noise it makes it's utterly fun!

 

[Z4ever]

I was being overly enthusiastic (new car, you know... I hope you can understand) as the early reported fuel consumption difference, 7.5 l/100 km vs 17.0 l/100 km, does not reflect the real fuel consumption difference between the Alfa 4C and the BMW 1M.

In fact, with the RACE mode engaged and the same agressive driving style, which is now very similar as I become more familiarized with the car each day, the Alfa 4C has managed to deliver a fuel consumption of 13.3 l/100 km w/ 98 RON gasoline!

It's still good and significatively better than the 1M's 17.0 l/100 km, but it's not the HUGE difference I was raving about.

So, I'm sorry if the prior information I gave was misleading somehow!

 

[Z4ever]

With much abuse (RACE mode engaged) it's now safe to say that I won't go beyond the 15 l/100km on fuel consumption with the Alfa 4C on my daily commute.

It can be used as the max. fuel consumption reference for the Alfa 4C with my driving style and on my daily commute. Which means that on the worst case scenario I still manage to surpass my former BMW 1M's average fuel consumption by saving 2 l/100km.

That's good!

However, I'm now fully convinced that with the Peugeot's EP6CDTR engine (RCZ-R, 308 GTI/Hybrid) in the place of the Alfa's 1750 TBi engine I could get even better results, both from a performance (270 hp vs 240 hp) and fuel consumption perspective (lower engine capacity, more compact packaging for greater dethrottling effect - exhaust and intake - due also to the Valvetronic technology).

 

[klier]

From a BMW 1M to an Alfa Romeo 4C; from white to white pearl; from 4 to two seats; from Servotronic power steering to NO power steering; from 3000cc engine displacement to 1750cc; from 340 hp to 240 hp; from a 6-speed manual gearbox to a 6-speed DCT; from 0-100 km in 4.9 sec to 4.5 sec; from a fuel consumption of 14.0 l/km @ 160 km/h to less than 7.5 l/km; from aerodynamic inefficiency to aerodynamic efficiency; from 1495 kg to 1000 kg; from steel to carbon fiber!!!

Am I a happy man?!


PS: And, the planet thanks me!

Congrats.

But the 1M is a daily drive with comfort, the 4C is anything but those. It's a good weather weekend car. Nice for a couple of hours every week, and not more than that.

Also get a grip about those fuel figures. Buy a Prius if it matters so much to you.

 

[Mr Robert]

Ah, finally.

 

[Z4ever]

Fuel consumption figures are meaningless (not only to me, I believe) if the car isn't able to perform.

The sole driving force behind today's car technology progress is fuel efficiency. You should have noticed it by now.

Maybe BMW should stop consider making M or M Performance cars, other than diesel, if their main concern is 'Efficient Dynamics'. Or, maybe they should invest a lot more in their 'I' portfolio then. Meanwhile, they can save a lot of money by choosing the former path... Alpina can easily teach them how it is done!

The 1M and all the others that will follow using the same old recipe represents BMW's incapacity to build a lightweight sports car. Nothing else. Who needs a 1M when there's a M3?!

If they want to build something more affordable, build it light w/o all the unecessary luxury for a true sports car, other than the lightweight itself.

If I had to choose between a [BMW 1M] or a [Nissan Juke 1.5 diesel + Alfa Romeo 4C] for the same money, I would choose the second package... Hey, that's precisely what I did!

A true sports car is not mainly intended to be a passenger car. Besides, what I get in terms of driving enjoyment with the Alfa 4C more than compensates the very little I lost, comfort wise, w/o the 1M, because 95% of the time I drive alone and travel light (now w/ the 4C, I can say it literally).

If you want both worlds in one car, you should absolutely buy a Porsche, don't waste time and money with the BMW of the present... except if you are a drifter. (For sure there's always space for a daily commuter on the garage)

Are you a drifter?!

 

[Mr Robert]

But, it's an Alfa... Why not a Lotus?

 

[Z4ever]

But, it's an Alfa... Why not a Lotus?

That's an easy one!

Because 1) Performance wise the faster car would be a Exige S or a Evora S, both of which are significantly more expensive than the Alfa 4C; 2) For far less weight and far better fuel economy than both of them, I get more comfort, more space and a higher quality product overall; 3) Loo... let's forget the looks, I'm not even gonna bother talking about it!

The Alfa 4C is my daily drive either on the heavy rain or on the sunshine, let's not forget about it. And, I can perfectly live with it as I could with my former Cayman.

 

[Mr Robert]

The Alfa 4C is my daily drive either on the heavy rain or on the sunshine, let's not forget about it. And, I can perfectly live with it as I could with my former Cayman.

If you can live with an Alfa day to day, you are a true motorman. Good on you!

 

[Z4ever]

If you can live with an Alfa day to day, you are a true motorman. Good on you!

Have you ever driven an Alfa 4C?

Anyway, my point is that most of the people who bought the BMW 1M or that will buy the M2, did bought or will buy them as a SECOND car or a weekend toy!

Are the majority of them drifters?! I don't think so!

 

[Mr Robert]

How long have you lived with that Alfa and why not compare it to other single-minded vehicles?

 

[Z4ever]

How long have you lived with that Alfa and why not compare it to other single-minded vehicles?

How long have guys like Chris Harris lived with the cars they tested (let alone own them)?!

At least they get to drive them, even if only for one day... shouldn't the Cayman R be considered a single-minded vehicle also?!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Z4ever]

One just have to replace the Cayman R for a more fuel efficient formula and Chris Harris for Giampaolo Tenchini, et voilà...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mr Robert]

I like the 4C but it's no Cayman R.

 

[Z4ever]

I like the 4C but it's no Cayman R.

Sure! But when the glorious motorsport past is invoked there's ONE car today that best resembles those single-minded cars of yore... and surely it's no Cayman:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

That's the difference!

 

[Mr Robert]

I think we need a "heart" emojiwhathef#ck...

 

[MABfan11]

The new lightweight structure means that the Sports Ride Concept’s total weight is close to 750kg.

sounds perfect for 750 hp

 

[Z4ever]

Here you have a car as close as it can get to a competition car which, actually, you can live with on a daily basis, but since it is so focused - 'single-minded' you say - one shouldn't compare it to a BMW 1M performance wise, so you say.

Then, a comparison between the 1M and the most focused version of the Cayman, the Cayman R, which is apparently found acceptable (no word from you saying otherwise) was shown, and your statement is: a Cayman R is no Alfa 4C.

Finally, we have Porsche invoking precisely their competition cars of yore trying to sell the idea that the Cayman represents somehow that heritage just because the engine is now a 4-cylinder, when in reality the Cayman was never so far away from that competition concept as today.

So, my conclusion is a) if one can compare the BMW 1M to the Cayman R and b) Porsche invokes their competition cars heritage as the Cayman's unique selling point, then c) is fair to say that an Alfa 4C can be compared to a BMW 1M as the Alfa 4C is closer to a competition car than the Cayman R itself, which means Porsche was superseded on their own game.

 

[Z4ever]

sounds perfect for 750 hp

I doubt it very much from a road going 1.5l turbocharged engine.