Which series of the Fulvia Coupé is best?

[Jean de Barsy]

Dear All,

Which series of the Fulvia Coupé do you prefer and why?

My preference goes the the series 1 because it has all the beautiful little details that are missing on the later series. It's a true Lancia as "only the best" will do. Latter series have different suspension parts (except for the HF... here the best was kept), extensive use of chromed plastic parts and the fact that FIAT reduced the building costs (which was never an issue with Lancia) is just too visible to me. "Some say" the 5 speed gearbox imposed by FIAT is an improvement... but the 4 speed box works much better and has almost the same final ratio, so there's no gain on the highway either. The white faced instruments, it's a matter of taste of course, throw their cheapness right into the face of anyone who looks at them!

There must be a myraid of other details but these are the most obvious ones.

It's easy to put all the blame on Fiat and their budget restrictions, as we'll never know how Lancia would have coped with market evolutions and "updating" their models. The Fulvia being designed in the 60's, it's lifespan was stretched by esthetic surgery well into the 70's, but I'm not a great fan of esthetic surgery in general.

It's also the "S1" that made the racing pedigree of the Fulvia!

[fulvia a.i.]

ha ha...in the words of a wise man back in the 50's, 60's & early 70's:

"my 1949 Ford is the best car in the world....because it is mine"

he owned the 49 Ford from 1949 (I don't remember it from then !!) until about 75 or 76, when it was bought by Benny, to customize into some sort of flamed-hot-rod low-rider; which I never saw !
I asked Dad "you always said you would never sell it; so why did you sell it ?
He replied... "it never required any major-maintainence; I did what I could do & that was enough...so it really never cost me not much more to own for 25 years than the 600 bucks I paid for it in 1949. When Benny asked me what it would cost if it was up for sale, I thought...I want my $600 back; so I said $600.
Benny paid & I now have a 1953 Buick with automatic & a radio even ! I bought it from the widow of a friend who bought it in 1953 ..... it is a cream-puff & cost a lot less than $600. She doesn't have a driver license anyway & it was just sitting in the garage !

That Buick was then "the best car in the world". I think he paid nothing at all for it !!

Thus I reply that "the best Fulvia in the world is MINE !! Because I own it ! " Even though I did pay for it !

Anyone disagreements ??

[Randy Adams]

I'm not really qualified to respond because I've only owned and driven 1st series cars and both of them were pretty dog-eared and rusty by the time I acquired them. (I was still a young man of limited means at the time and Fulvias were thin on the ground in the U.S. by the 1980s.) BUT I've always appreciated their jewel-like finish to the body work, with delicate stainless steel brightwork and all the body junctions filled. Even my rusty Sport Zagato with rotting sills would close its doors with a gentle push. I always marveled how such a precise steering gear with a hard-rimmed wheel could transmit so little road-shock to my hands but always tell me exactly in what attitude the front wheels were and what sort of road surface I was on. Second-gear synchromesh was worn-out on the Sport but it was very easy to double clutch for clean downshifts. My new 2012 Fiat 500 only matches the 1.3 Fulvia's freeway fuel consumption, though the modern technology in the Fiat does give better in-town stop-and-go fuel consumption. On the other hand, it was a good thing I live in Southern California because neither my coupe nor my Sport had a perceptible heater. Altogether wonderful cars.

[Ed Levin]

I doubt that anyone could make a convincing argument that the Fulvia 3 is the best. But, personally, I think picking between an S1 and an S2 is mostly a matter of taste. At this point, any of the "objective" factors you can name--bronze vs metalastic bushings, 4-speed vs 5-speed, Dunlop vs Girling brakes--are far less important that the condition of those items on any particular car.

[NMLancia]

I always like the first series better, whatever the make is. The product is usually closer to what the designer intended.
Many times the "improvements" made to second series were due to regulatory changes, and the Americans are not solely to blame, witness the horrible headlights on the British Fulvias.
As time marches on the first series (all makes) are more in demand.
Of course "better" is always subjective but I think the only car that truly improved is the Porsche 911.

[fulvia a.i.]

quote: Of course "better" is always subjective but I think the only car that truly improved is the Porsche 911.

in my many yrs of 912/911 experience I never thought that they were good cars; they were (& are) under-engineered, poorly-designed dangerous hi-price disasters.

the early swb 9ers were a potenital killers; the later somewhat lwb versions were a slight improvement but still needed lots of air-dams, gurneys, rear wings, fat wheels & tires to make them roadable.........Porsche finally gave up on further development of the 911 & introduced the incredible 928....which was everything the 911 wasn't; unfortunately it was never offered as a light-weight performance V6 & died after only a few yrs production.

Reenter 911; Porsche finally began to do what was necessary to make the 911 a safe-vehicle to drive at speed... an improvement-evolution continued right up to the newest model again getting an extended wheel-base.

I owned, drove, bought & sold every version of the 912 / 911 / 930 from thge 1964 to late 1980's models, without ever being truly impressed. Today ? .... I drive a Fulvia ... which impresses me every time I drive it.... not to forget me Gamma .... which is every bit as good as a 928...except Gamma rust; 928 don't ! (ps: avoid either model with A/T)

[lucasgeheniau]

That is a difficult question, or not.

When new, the second series was better than the first, I am sure.
I don't believe the Lancia engineers did not improve between 65 and 70.
What did happen, was better understanding of quality v.s. cost. As an example, the steering idler of the last second series and the third series had pvc bushings instead of bronze. Designed for 20 years instead of for life, whatever that means.
In order to survive, quality and thus costs must be set to the average life of the car. That is not 40 years.
So, as we discuss the quality of the steering idler of a first and a second series car at this very moment, the first series is winning.

Untill now, I did not read any magazine articles written at the launch of the S2, that tell the first series was better.

It is not so important, I drove a S1 Coupe from 1965 for ten years with great joy. After that two second series 5 speed berlina's for also ten years.
Now for one year a S2 coupe. I am driving the Fulvia's as daily drivers to my work, and for map reading rallyes.
For restauration, I have a first series Sport and a second series Sport. I think I will start with the second series...............

Cheers

Lucas

[fulvia a.i.]

I vote for :

"or not"

"or maybe"

[Geoff]

There are a couple of answers to this:

The orthodox one has always been the s. 1 is the pure Lancia, and the later ones are cheapened. There is no doubt about that factually, but they were also possibly improved in some minor ways, the most obvious being the 5 speed box. Don't some of the later ones have 2 speed wipers, a trivial matter, but for those of us living in horrid climates, its the little things that count.

Seriously, the other option is that condition matters more than anything. Given a s. 1 vs 2 coupe, I'd go for the 1. I've had three in the past and enjoyed them all.

But I'm also in love with the 1600 FZ, and feel that the larger motor, different driving position and five speed are just a delight. I suppose a s.1 FZ has magic too, but there is something about that later combination that really intrigues me. Feels like a GT with sporting blood.

Some time ago I saw a s. 1 Beta sedan and was amazed by the build quality. The doors shut well, the overall fit and finish, while not older Lancia standards, was intriguing. Far better feeling than many cars today (OK - not everywhere, but in some places). I could see such a car being attractive with a neat improved motor in it. Not quite Citroen exotic, or meeting deeper Lancia standards, but an interesting proposition none the less. All this to say that sometimes its OK to reconsider older dividing lines and explore things that we wouldn't have touched before.