E-Segment (BMW 5, MB E, Audi A6 etc) sized Alfa Romeo. 1750 Berlina 1968 - 1977 Alfetta 1972 - 1984 90 1984 - 1987 164 1987 - 1998 166 1999 - 2007
So you prefer cars with no potential that are made to be used for A to B transportation and then crushed? Strange. I thought we (car guys) liked cars which can be modified...
The supra. (no the 86 doesn't count. I mean the supra with a supra badge) < it would be a nice throwback to the 80s if they designed it similar to this
If you think you cannot have fun with FWD then you are very wrong, and yes, I happen to like ordinary cars too.
How many preserved classic Saabs are there? Or Citroen Traction Avants, 2CVs, DSes and CXes? Or Minis? Or Cadillac Eldorados?
IIRC Alfa Romeo used to be working on it, but they decided that price range would be better served by the Stelvio, and the big Alfa is on the back burner not to steal sales from the Ghibli, Charger and 300. --- Post updated --- Exactly.
Vesta isn't good and modern Lada can't be good since it will then compete with Dacia, which Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi doesn't want to happen. Have you ever heard of VAZ 2116, the car that was meant to take Lada to a whole new level? It was axed because it would compete with Renault Fluence. It looks kind of bad, but looks don't matter so much. As you see here, it was an exceptionally safe car. Safer than the new Vesta- and it was developed in mid-2000s.
Even then, compare the 70s Accord to 70s RWD compacts (Toyota Corona, Chevy Nova, Ford Fairmont, Dodge Aspen) and you won't see differences that build quality can't account for. --- Post updated --- I don't think Lada has the brand image to compete in the volume sector. Cheap cars, yes, but midrange? Not so much.
So, you think Lada is doomed to manufacture sh*tboxes forever? As things are now, I even agree with you. Russian car industry needs a fresh brand (like Lada 50 years ago).
It was a sort of continuation to my comment (the part with the Wankel engines and addressing the "reliability " of Samaras) but it got delayed due to "awaiting moderator approval".
It was meant to be one with the comment below, but I decided to split it in two because it takes quite some time for the moderators to approve it. And I had included a link to where I copied it from (carthrottle), so it had to "wait" anyway. And the pictures required it too, so I cut the part which could be posted instantly and posted it . But I forgot to delete your quote from the "original".
