Should Fulvia Series 4 die here?

[Nicola]

Thanks Paul, I thought my arguement made sense, but wasn't sure how others on this forum would feel. I know that there are a great number of anti-GM people out there and perhaps the thought of an Italian car using an American platform would be a bit much for some. But in all honesty, platform sharing and component swapping are simply realities in todays auto industry -- no one is immune. And if Lancia (or Fiat or Alfa) are to share parts with another company, then at the very least they should be good parts --- and it appears as though GM's Kappa has the goods and is the real deal.

Yeah, the "Kappa" reference is dead on! GM should give it to them for free on principal alone! Funny that GM has decided to name all their new platforms after Greek letters -- just as Lancia currently names their vehicles. In GM's case, the new platforms (developed so far), are Sigma, Zeta, Kappa, Epsilon, Theta, Delta, and soon, Lambda -- with a few more in the works. And yup, a number of those names are former Lancia names! GM has done a great deal of late to repair their lackluster reputation with good products and these new platforms are from where these products will be dervied. As for Lancia and their use of Greek letters, I sometimes wonder if they should have left the naming of their cars the way they used to be -- after Roman Roads and such. Though I know that very early Lancia cars were also named after Greek letters, names like Aprilia, Aurelia, Appia, Augusta, Flaminia, Flavia, Fulvia, Trevi, Ardea, and Stratos just seem more appealing -- or even Romantic -- than Thesis or Ypsilon. Just my opinion though. If I were to chose a number of things to fix about Lancia today, I'm sure other things would take precedence over renaming the range!! Just my two cents on this.

[mark]

yeah i'm not too sure about the whole platform sharing bit with GM. i know obviously it makes good business sence to platform share with other companies, but, well GM? Unless the platforms Fiat Auto will use are going to be heavily modified its not going to work. Lets be honest, GM=USA=haven't a clue how to set up a car, unless you like "cruising" and not "driving"! Need i mention SAAB?! since Gm took control and based every SAAB on Opels the company sales have nose dived.

But, i have to say that Fiat should NEVER have made the decision not to build the new Fulvia, without doubt one of the worst decisions they've made in recent times. It so could have been the perfect "halo" model for the rest of the range, i can't see the problem with it being based on a modified Barchetta platform.

[P. de R. Leclercq]

The problem with the Barchetta is that the company that made them has gone bust!

Paul

[Shant Fabricatorian]

I think the fact that Maggiore hit a financial rocky patch didn't help, but as I understand it the main problem was the fact that the Barchetta is based on the chassis and suspension of the original Punto, which is now eleven years old. Now there's no inherent problem with that, but you need to remember that platform technology and chassis dynamics have come a long way in those eleven years, and for that matter, continue to do so. I am guessing that in order to get acceptable chassis dynamics for what would have been pitched as a premium sporting coupe, Lancia would have liked to junk the Punto/Barchetta's front/rear strut/trailing arm arrangement and gone for something a bit more sophisticated. Clearly this would have cost a prohibitive amount of money. The platform itself was also a bit of a problem in that Lancia would quite probably have liked to use something a bit newer and stiffer than the Barchetta.

I can't remember for sure but I also do recall hearing something about a time restriction on putting it into production, related once again to the platform running out of 'homologation' if you like, it had to be by June/July this year if memory serves. Not homologation in the racing sense, but something to do with European regulations, I think. Alternatively there is the possibility that this particular point is a load of cobblers, but I don't think I could have invented it.

Maybe Lancia could have plonked the Fulvia design straight onto the current Stilo platform but one of the main attractions of the Fulvia Coupe concept was that it was near-enough to being 'production ready' - ie, little investment would have been required to make it a production reality. Putting it onto a different platform would have meant a near-total re-engineering job, which may well have made it totally uneconomic. Bear in mind what I have said before about the allocation of resources in the Fiat Group currently running Fiat, then Alfa, then light commercial vehicles, then lastly Lancia. Despite the fact that Fiat's position is improving all the time, the fact is that they are still making a loss, and when you allocate resources on that basis there was very little chance of the Fulvia making it to production, especially if there was re-engineering involved.

[Randy Adams]

I have a question for the Italians about the names on the older Lancias.

I have always loved the mellifluous sound and feel of names like Fulvia, Flaminia and Aurelia. But in Italy, did these names just seem corny--sort of like naming a car "Route 66" would seem here?

Just curious.

Count me as a GM knocker. It's been a damn long time since Americans built truly great cars. In fact not since Stutz, Duesenberg and Marmon--all from Indianapolis incidentally and all independent of each other.

[P. de R. Leclercq]

Fulvia was Caesar Augustus's sister-in-law (Flavia was his wife I think) I cannot speak for Aurelia or Flaminia however...

[P. de R. Leclercq]

Shant Fabricatorian wrote:
>
> ... Despite the fact that Fiat's
> position is improving all the time, the fact is that they are
> still making a loss, and when you allocate resources on that
> basis there was very little chance of the Fulvia making it to
> production, especially if there was re-engineering involved.

You made good points about the age of the Barchetta ppaltform; I think that what you wrote makes good sense.

However, I still insist that FIAT is missing a trick here (unless it is decided on killing Lancia) in that here was a golden opportunity to improve the group's profile at relatively small cost; something it desperately needs after the Stilo's apparent failure. And if the platform was running out of "time" whose cock-up was it in authorising the exercise in the first place?

The Lancia was applauded everywhere; to ignore this seems like image hari-kiri to me.

Paul

[Shant Fabricatorian]

Aha, I think you've hit the nail on the head Paul.

I think the current attitude at Fiat runs something along the lines of, if Lancia holds up until we start making serious profit, then we can turn it around. But if it doesn't, well, then, it's not really such a big loss.

Yes, I know it's wrong too, but I can't think of any other rational explanation for their attitude. Let's face it - how many other concept cars have you seen in recent times which have attracted that sort of clamouring for it to be put into production? The ghastly Audi TT springs to mind, no doubt there are a few others. If Fiat was serious about Lancia, the decision to put it into production is a no-brainer. But Fiat simply does not regard Lancia as important anymore - if they did they'd put more resources into it. As long as they continue to make a loss, it will continue to be regarded as unimportant. It'd be nice if there was anyone high up in Fiat who thought differently, but the new CEO, Herbert Demel, is known to not be a Lancia fan. Difficult to do anything in those circumstances.

Oh, and regarding the names, there are roads built in the days of the Roman Empire known as the Vias Flavia, Appia, Aurelia and (I think) Flaminia...

[Shant Fabricatorian]

"And if the platform was running out of "time" whose cock-up was it in authorising the exercise in the first place?"

But here's the rub - originally, the car was never intended to be put into production, the Barchetta platform was simply an expedient means of getting a base to put the styling exercise. When the clamours for production began, Lancia said they would look into the possibility, partly, I think, to announce the decision that they'd decided not to build it well after the coverage of the Motor Show itself - less press kickback. I believe there was a possibility for it to happen, but it was a very very small one and would have required total backing from Fiat. Clearly that wasn't very likely to happen.

[justin]

Your collective views are very inspiring, academically.
But I just want to know who in Germany/Italy/Europe etc, to go and punch 'til they change their mind !

Regards,
An old-and-new Fulvia nut,
Justin