Jump to content

Talk:Lancia Montecarlo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

This article needs a reshuffle of somekind, It Jumps strait from the introduction to info on a sub model only available in the US, then goes into a section about problems with it. Logically it should start with history, and info on the US model should be towards the end. (82.3.45.126 (talk) 00:14, 19 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Fiat X1/9

[edit]

How is Lancia Montecarlo related to Fiat X1/9? Lancia was developed from X1/8 project, alter the X1/20, not the X1/8. Sources please. YBSOne (talk) 17:28, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Both were commissioned by Fiat, from both Bertone and Pininfarina, as replacements for the 124 Spyder. Both are designed around the same platform of 128 Macpherson struts at both ends, with 124 brakes and the 124 twin cam or 128 SOHC engines. Both had the same engine plans: the single cam in a low powered version, the twin cam for a higher powered, or emissions-resilient California version. As this was also the time of the oil crisis, production only used the single cam. The winner was Bertone's design, which went into production with a Fiat badge as the X1/9. However the X1/20 was considered too good to waste, so after a few years it went into production with a Lancia badge and the larger twin cam engine.
This is very well known and is in any of the usual histories. If you demand a cite right now, then I'd suggest Alfred Cosentino's Faza book, as the best known US tuner of the X1/9 and Scorpion. However my copy is buried in a box and I can't get to it without digging. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:32, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So because their engines are based on simillar architecture and they share a platform (maybe), doesn't make them related to each other. So put down the relation to Fiat 124 or 128 IF You have a proof that they are same in means of platform and running gear. Always relate to a doner not to the simillar receiver of parts. Wikipedia needs sources not widely known stories, there are many stories around...YBSOne (talk) 21:21, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Did some more research and: the platform is straight derivative of the X1/8 platform which was designed by Pininfarina not Fiat, so the platform is not shared with the Fiat X1/9. Secondly the engine is an Lampredi twin-cam from Beta, again not Fiat's. So it leaves us only with suspension which is sourced form Fiat 128. YBSOne (talk) 21:57, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Lampredi engine isn't Fiat's? OK, thanks for making it clear that you just don't have a clue what you're talking about. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:05, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Its Fiat/Lancia and not only Fiat like the one in the X1/9. And its a different engine with different head and differect block, due to its different capacity, so its not shared with X1/9, it is a different engine. The 1.8 engine is probably shared with Fiat 124, again not Fiat X1/9, also it's not single cam but twin-cam. So any proof that the platform is shared? will quote what i said above: "the platform is straight derivative of the X1/8 platform which was designed by Pininfarina not Fiat, so the platform is not shared with the Fiat X1/9." YBSOne (talk) 11:09, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Almost everything you've since added to this article is both uncited and wrong. You're hopelessly confused between the X1/8 and X1/20 projects (they were intended to make cars for different markets, with different pricetags). In what possible way was this to be a replacement for the 124 or the 124 coupe? The Lancia Beta uses a transverse derivative of the Fiat Lampredi engine from a decade earlier, as does the Montecarlo, but the only component that's common to both and isn't a pre-existing Fiat part (even the blocks are cast "Fiat") is the oil pump pickup pipe. The Montecarlo engine has more parts in common with the Fiat versions than the Beta. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:47, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The engine is obviously neither here nor there (easily switchable, both Fiat units), whereas chassis underpinnings and structures are indeed relevant. It sounds more, however, as if the X1/9 and the Monte Carlo are cousins who share a common ancestor. Will look up a source somewhere later, but have to go to work now.  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:05, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the sources first, the X1/8 and the X1/20 are basically the same car(project). X1/8 is just a predecessor to X1/20 and neither of them nor the Montecarlo(derived from X1/20) are based on X1/9YBSOne (talk) 17:50, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How is my work uncited? did You even read it? I have found at least 4 sources (more then You), please READ with understanding: "originally designed as Pininfarina's contender to replace Fiat's 124 Coupe, but lost out to Bertone's cheaper design, which became the Fiat X1/9.". Next, it does not matter that the engine block is simillar architecture to the X1/9(it's not the same as they are different capacity), and they have different Lancia-designed head(stated on the source) AND it's TWIN-CAM ONLY.YBSOne (talk) 17:55, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
cite: "Both the X1/8 and the X1/9 was technically heavy influenced of the midengined prototype Fiat G.31 back in 1966." this is the ONLY relation between this 2 projects, "influenced"YBSOne (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are still basically no sources in this article - just some crappy websites.
The X1/8 project was intended as a modern-looking, mid-engined replacement for the Fiat Dino, based on the performance of a 3 litre V6, probably derived from the Dino's own Fiat-built Ferrari-originated engine. It would be a prestigious flagship sports car for the Fiat brand, badge-engineered somewhat to bring the price down, but never intended or required to achieve mass sales. I don't have hands-on experience with the X1/8 (I've owned the others though), but as I recall it was to be double wishbone front suspension, rather than MacPherson strut. Although I don't know if competition was ever intended for the X1/8, the Lancia Stratos (which is about as close as the X1/8 project ever came to fruition) was best known through its rally career, as an advert for the Lancia brand (and selling lots of cheap Betas on the back of it), rather than a commercially successful product in its own right.
The X1/9 and X1/20 projects were simultaneous, and pre-dated the oil crisis. Like the upmarket X1/8, they were intended to update a successful 1960s product, the 124 Spider, and modernise it for the '70s market. Both were designed to meet identical goals: the common engines, the suspension components, the brake components, and to use as much else of the Turin parts bin. Beyond this, the designs could diverge. Neither of them used "Fiat 128 suspension", they used components from it. The rear wishbones in particular were of course specific to a RWD car with struts, and these were no longer even MacPherson struts in the full sense (any more than the Lotus Europa used a Chapman strut).
The X1/9 vs X1/20 contest was always intended as a competitive tendering process, with only one expected to enter production. The idea to build the other under the Lancia marque was a later idea.
The engines were swappable - not surprisingly, as both had been intended for use in the 124. Their mounts and bellhousing make this an easy swap. Oddly, both even have the carbs on the left hand side (can't fit twin sidedraught carbs as the brake master cylinder is in the way, although we did in the UK). Early plans were to offer both in the same car, as a high performance option. The choice to build only the SOHC (in the X1/9) was the result of the oil crisis. As the Montecarlo (having higher build costs and carrying the more prestigious Lancia badge) was always the more upmarket, it had the twin cam. Cosentino in the US and Rizutti Brothers in the UK made a good business out of fitting twin cams to the X1/9. Maintenance access was a pain, but then it always was for the Montecarlo too.
Guy Croft's book sources much of the engine history and even the Haynes manuals cover the basic chronology, but a good text on this is (as I already told you) Cosentino's Fiat / Abarth / Lancia Bible. I had this, and my factory workshop manuals, in my hand just two weeks ago, but I packed them into a box several boxes beneath others and I have neither time nor inclination to pull them out, just to explain the difference between a 124 Spider and a 124 Coupe. Any of these books are far better than the current rag-bag of websites. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:06, 11 November 2012 (UTC)e[reply]

None of this above is any proof that Montecarlo is based on the X1/9.. and now You say that Stratos is based on the X1/8?? http://www.lanciamontecarlo.net/monte_history.html here are pictures of the X1/8 and X1/20 project cars, they are the same project. Again just because the engines are swappable does not mean they are the same, they just share basic architecture. Again different displacement, different heads=different engines. As for 128 suspension, this is what the sources said. I feel that You just want to sustain this urban legend with any means... They are 2 different projects! Where do You get that X1/20 is a different project from X1/8 in spite of the sources indicating that the X1/8 is a predecessor to X1/20?YBSOne (talk) 21:41, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.lanciamontecarlo.net/Scorpion/Technical_Suspension.html How is this not a strut? Did you ever seen a McPherson strut suspension?YBSOne (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Lancia Monte Carlo, which was originally called the Fiat X1/8, then later the X1/20 at the design stage." Another source... YBSOne (talk) 21:51, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please argue with what I've written, not what you think you've read.
Of course the Montecarlo wasn't based on the X1/9! However they were both the production versions of two external designs produced to Fiat's same requirement, for a parts-bin based mid-engined replacement for the 124 Spider.
The Montecarlo was not based on the X1/8. The X1/8 was a substantially different car, being aimed at a more affluent market, with a better engine and better suspension. The only connection is that Pininfarina produced the X1/8 body design, and when the X1/8 didn't result in a production car, they re-used the styling as their entry for Fiat's 124 Spider replacement requirement. The dimensions are, I believe, a little different though with the X1/8 being a little longer between the driver and rear axle line. This is as far as your "The X1/20 was a development of / the same project as the X1/8" stands up. It was two related solutions by Pininfarina to two different requirements from Fiat.
I have never claimed that the Stratos was the X1/8, or was based on it technically, merely that it filled the X1/8's vacated, or at least similar role, in promoting the Fiat/Lancia brand by campaigning a modern mid-engined Ferrari-based V6 engined car in motorsport.
Of course the engines are different - no-one has ever said anything different - although you seem to think that the heads are their only difference?
The suspension is based on 128 components (saving costs for Fiat) but is far from being merely 128 corners bolted onto the floorpan. Most obviously, the rear suspension is still a strut suspension but is no longer a MacPherson strut, as the lower track control member is now a broad-based wishbone (MacPherson's strut patent is more specific than is usually realised). Andy Dingley (talk) 00:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
the related field is mainly used for cars using same platform, there is no point to use it for cars for example using same engine -->Typ932 T·C 03:11, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then "related" would seem close enough to link all six of X1/8, X1/9, X1/20, Montecarlo, 030 Abarth and 037 Abarth. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry: "they were both the production versions of two external designs produced to Fiat's same requirement, for a parts-bin based mid-engined replacement" they are related because of the requirements?? So every front wheel drive cars are related because they meet same requirements? The engine is different and platform is different (even You said so), so no relation between them. Case closed. YBSOne (talk) 11:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC) And only this cars are related to each other: X1/8, X1/20, Montecarlo, 030 Abarth, 037 Abarth, Montecarlo Turbo. YBSOne (talk) 12:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Abarth 030 Pininfarina

[edit]

Lancia Montecarlo was not based on the Abarth 030, both cars were developed directly from project X1/20YBSOne (talk) 17:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pininfarina production records

[edit]

Updated production number stated by Pininfarina production records
From 1981 to 1982 they built 220 "Fiat Lancia Beta Montecarlo Corse" I suspect it could be the 037 Stradale.YBSOne (talk) 12:05, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lancia Montecarlo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:20, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lancia Montecarlo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:49, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]

Interestingly the British advertising in the UK in 1977 called the car Beta Monte-Carlo (note the hyphen) so note quite as per the article. Was this used elsewhere or just a British quirk? Warren (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Must be a singular quirk, all UK brochures for sale that I saw spelled "Montecarlo". YBSOne (talk) 16:39, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lancia_Montecarlo&oldid=1208087907"