Alfa Pages

[BigAl]

http://www.alfaowner.com/Forum/alfa-33-sud-and-sprint/205575-33-sportwagon-cloverleaf-found-in-field.html
_________________
x2 33 16v
pictures http://www.alfa-pages.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=5203

[flat4alfa]

Not listed on our lists that one

Been off the road for 14 years

[JeremyC]

Forcing me to logon to see pictures, boring & petty, how I hate that site.
_________________
'93 Black 33 1.7 16v

[lee16v]

You and me both Jeremy. Logged on to see if there was anything that I'd be interested in and it said I hadn't been on there since Feb 2009......do I miss it?

[paulhide]

Especially with ignorant comments like this:
'5/6 years ago it was the other way round but I guess that a result of the 33 never really matching the standards set by the suds and being left out because of it.'

A sud owner in the owners club wrote a full length detailed article about the history of the sud in the mag and then said he would do one about the 33 and asked for an introduction by me. When I sent the introduction explaining in detail why the 33 was a much larger improvement on the Sud than people realise, the article never materialised.
_________________
Owner's Club 33 Registrar. Now from P4 & S2 1.7 QV
http://www.alfa-pages.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=5188

[JeremyC]

Can we see that please Paul (a friendly audience) if you still have it!
_________________
'93 Black 33 1.7 16v

[paulhide]

Unfortunately, with a move of house and change of two computers it was written I can't find it. Maybe I'll have to rewrite it sometime. All that I can remember at the mo' was that the original 33 was two inches lower with a drag coefficient so much lower that 0-90 with the same engine was 4 seconds faster in a 33 than a sud. The body was not only stiffer, but fractionally lighter aswell. Outboard brakes were reverted to because of problems with oil fouling, not just easier maintenance.
_________________
Owner's Club 33 Registrar. Now from P4 & S2 1.7 QV
http://www.alfa-pages.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=5188

[greencloverleaf pat]

as a sud owner and a 33 owner i have had many 33s in the past 1.5 greencloverleaf 33, 3 33 veloces two 1.5 and a 1.7 veloce which was my favorite 33 and a p4 and a series three 16v and loads of sud as well.
i think the 33 is a very good car and a improvement on the sud but not handling wise unless it was a p4 .
maybe because the sud was the first one with the boxer engine people remember that but the 33 is still a good car.

[john 33_16v]

I think people will always look more fondly towards the sud. It was a groundbreaking car.

I've heared many sud Vs 33 conflicting views over the years regarding handling, chassis stiffness etc.

My personal opinion from having owned sud, sprint, and 33 16v:

Handling
1st SUD
2nd 33
3rd Sprint - span mine too easily

Braking
1st SUD (also easy to do pads after first 2 or three times!)
2nd Sprint (outboard)
3rd 33

Sexiness
1st Sprint
2nd SUD
3rd 33

Build quality

1st 33
2nd Sud
3rd Sprint

The 33 is the most practical of the bunch. and the most comfortable, and the quad cam 16v is a gem.

John
_________________
If it aint broke, fiddle with it until it is!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
93 33 16v Mirtle Met
08 Fiat Grande Punto Exotica Red
90 Yamaha FZR600 Genesis- Silky white/red/blue

[lee16v]

Apparently (reading the latest post on this thread) we are all tight! It's a good way of driving the price down though eh flat4alfa

[flat4alfa]

[paulhide]

On the handling front, I would like to point out that on various race tracks across the years, in similar classes, 33s pretty much always dominated Suds. Draw your own conclusions.

Also braking in an early 33 should be better than a sprint as it has the same brakes and is lighter
_________________
Owner's Club 33 Registrar. Now from P4 & S2 1.7 QV
http://www.alfa-pages.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=5188

[JeremyC]

And anyway, if you need the brakes then you've haven't been thinking ahead enough (on the road anyway).
_________________
'93 Black 33 1.7 16v

[BigAl]

K Simmonds

[flat4alfa]

The car's wrecked, it's always been a breaker. But he wanted 300 notes for it.

[fluffyduff]

[paulhide]

Okay, I see what you're saying now. I thought you meant that the Sud was a better car. What you are actually saying is that the Sud was a better car in its time and I totally agree with you there. The Sud was ahead of its time and the 33 wasn't so much. Apologies are in order. Compared to other cars around at the time the 33's advantages were a little more subtle as shown by strange conclusions that the motoring press came to at the time:

Excerpt from Owner's Club Magazine:

I have just been given the September 1985 Car magazine which has two 33 reviews. The first is about the 4x4 Sportwagon and is very complementary. The reviewer seemed especially pleased about the build quality and ‘uncommonly rigid structure’.
The second review is more detailed and more interesting, comparing three sporty cars – the 1.5 green cloverleaf Alfa 33 against the 1.4 Renault 11 turbo and the 1.6 Toyota Corolla GT. The article reaches an interesting conclusion.

The Alfa 33 is stated as hanging on like a limpet postponing understeer to a very high level. There is mild understeer near its limits, but it takes acts of madness to convert that into any kind of plough. Now it wears proper 185 tyres the 33 resists forward effects – torque steer and failing traction – better than any Alfasud did. There is quicker steering, though this makes it a little heavier than in the other two cars. There is good storage space and it has four doors unlike the other two. It is the easiest car to work on and the cheapest to buy. It also provides the best mpg. In the cabin it has a quiet ride. Despite its compactness the Alfa has the most spacious and comfortable cabin, but the pedal layout is poor. The largest criticism was that the car needed more power as it had, generally, the slowest performance.

The Renault 11 is stated as looking awful. The ride is compliant, the handling reasonable, but not as good as the Alfa. The seats don’t move enough to accommodate everybody and the steering wheel protrudes too far. The engine though strong sounds like a vacuum cleaner and the gear change is notchy. Ultimately the car has no soul.

The Toyota GT is stated as moving more unpredictably into a front slide than the other two and its steering gave less notice of its approach. It has surprising body roll, understeers and moves untidily from power-on understeer to power-off neutrality. The brakes have no feel. The interior is very plastic. There is a good seating arrangement for the front passengers, though not for the rear and a good pedal layout, though no chance of heel-and-toe gearchanges. Although, in the chassis department it’s clear that the Toyota is not state of the art, the engine and gearbox are excellent. The engine revs to 7,700 developing max power of 119bhp at 6,600 and 103 lb/ft at 5,000 revs.

So reading this, which would you plump for. Yes of course, the Corolla… You what…! Well that’s what the magazine decided! Completely baffling. There is no doubt that the Toyota engine/gearbox combination was a good bit of kit, same as in the original MR2, but what is the point if it’s completely hamstrung by being stuck in an average chassis where little of its potential can be realised. Must have been rather frustrating union. I wonder on what grounds they would have plumped for the Corolla if it had been set up a little while later against the 1.7 engined 33 with 119 bhp and 109 ft lb.
_________________
Owner's Club 33 Registrar. Now from P4 & S2 1.7 QV
http://www.alfa-pages.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=5188

[fluffyduff]

No problem justs wanted to clear up the confusion. Reading back over my post on AO it does seem anti 33 but is wasnt meant that way at all.

Interesting to see the reviews against its main competitors at the time but I cant understand the decision to go with the corolla!

[paulhide]

There was another review I remember of a 1.7 renault 11 vs the 1.7 33 and they gave the decision against the 33 again even though most of the review favoured the 33 The motoring press at the time were strangely hard on the 33. I used to own a 1.7 renault 11 before my first 33 and there is just no comparison. The Alfa is simply way ahead of the renault in all areas bar perhaps comfortable ride.
_________________
Owner's Club 33 Registrar. Now from P4 & S2 1.7 QV
http://www.alfa-pages.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=5188