2015 Alfa Romeo 4c on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2018 Alfa Romeo Stelvio Quadrifoglio vs. 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk: On-paper sibling rivalry

Pricing was revealed for the 2018 Alfa Romeo Stelvio Quadrifoglio, and with its $81,590 price tag, it's within range of yet another high-performance SUV from Fiat-Chrysler: the 2018 Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk. The Hellcat-powered Jeep is more expensive than the Stelvio at $86,995, but depending on options, the price advantage might go either way. This left us wondering, how similar are these two high-powered SUVs? Besides sharing the same number of words in their very-long names, we took a look at some of their performance specs and put them in the spreadsheet below. As always, if you want to compare either of these with other speedy SUVs, be sure to try out our comparison tools. As far as outright speed, both SUVs are surprisingly close. The Trackhawk is just a bit quicker in a straight line, hitting 60 mph in just 3.5 seconds as opposed to the Alfa's 3.9. The Jeep's 180-mph top speed is also 3-mph quicker than the Alfa. But neither of these differences is especially huge. What makes this interesting is how different the paths each SUV takes to get to its results. The Trackhawk accomplishes the task with pure grunt. It has Dodge's Hellcat supercharged 6.2-liter V8 making 707 horsepower and 645 pound-feet of torque to overcome its hefty 5,363-pound body. The Alfa, on the other hand, makes do with less power and torque, 505 and 443, respectively, from its twin-turbocharged 2.9-liter V6. It has less weight, though. Exactly how much less we're not sure, since Alfa hasn't revealed that number, but a regular Stelvio weighs right around 4,000 pounds, so we would guess the weight is similar, possibly a little more. View 14 Photos The differences in how each SUV achieves its performance should result in pretty different driving characteristics, and probably different buyers. Each SUV's bragging points also indicates this. The Trackhawk boasts an impressive 11.6-second claimed quarter-mile time, something that American muscle car fans everywhere care about. The Alfa brags about how it's the fastest production SUV to lap the Nurburgring, something sure to impress fans of foreign cars and those that value handling over straight-line performance. So really, although these two SUVs have performance similarities, they're also very different, and the right one for you depends on what you value. View 29 Photos Also, as an afterthought, we wonder if the guys that attempted a Viper record at the 'Ring would be up for trying to break the Alfa time with the Jeep.

Alfa Romeo Giulia gets top safety award from IIHS

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has awarded a Top Safety Pick+ rating, its highest award, to the 2017 Alfa Romeo Giulia midsize luxury sedan — but with a caveat. The Giulia must have been built after May of this year, when the car's front-end structure was improved and the door hinge pillar and door sill were reinforced, among other changes. Vehicles that earn the IIHS's Top Safety Pick+ must achieve good ratings in all five crash tests — small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength and head restraints — an advanced or superior rating in front crash prevention and and acceptable or good rating for headlights. The Giulia's optional front crash prevention system earned a superior rating after it avoided a crash in the 12 mph track test and reduced its impact speed by an average 24 mph in the 25 mph test. The car's optional curve-adaptive headlights earned a good rating, while the base headlights rated poor. It joins 2017 versions of the Lexus ES 350, Audi A3 and A4, Volvo S60 and V60, and BMW 2 series and 3 series, as Top Safety Pick+ awardees for its segment. You can read our First Drive review of the Giulia here. Featured Gallery 2017 Alfa Romeo Giulia Ti Lusso View 26 Photos Alfa Romeo Luxury Sedan crash test alfa romeo giulia

Stellantis tells UK: Change Brexit deal or watch car plants close

LONDON - British car plants will close with the loss of thousands of jobs unless the Brexit deal is swiftly renegotiated, Stellantis has told the UK parliament, the latest in a series of warnings from the industry since the country left the European Union. The world's No. 3 carmaker by sales and owner of 14 brands including Vauxhall, Peugeot, Citroen and Fiat said that under the current deal it would face tariffs when exporting electric vans to Europe from next year, when tougher post-Brexit rules come into force. "If the cost of EV (electric vehicle) manufacturing in the UK becomes uncompetitive and unsustainable, operations will close," Stellantis said in a submission to a House of Commons committee examining the prospects for Britain's EV industry. Stellantis urged the government to reach an agreement with the European Union about extending the current rules on the sourcing of parts until 2027 instead of the planned 2024 change. In response, a government spokesperson said the business secretary had raised the issue with the EU. "Watch this space, because we are very focused on making sure that the UK gets EV and manufacturing capacity," Britain's finance minister Jeremy Hunt said on Wednesday at a British Chambers of Commerce event. The potentially existential problem facing Britain's car industry is closely tied to the shift to EVs. Under the trade deal agreed when Britain left the bloc, 45% of the value of an EV being sold in the European Union must come from Britain or the EU from 2024 to avoid tariffs. The problem is that a battery pack can account for up to half a new EV's cost. Batteries are also heavy and expensive to move long distances. Experts have been warning since Britain left the EU at the end of 2020 that the country would need a number of EV battery gigafactories or potentially lose a hefty chunk of its car industry. Only Japan's Nissan has a small EV battery plant in Sunderland, with a second one on the way. Cost of failure Britishvolt, a startup which received UK government support for an ambitious 3.8 billion pound ($4.80 billion) battery plant at a site in northern England, filed for administration in January after struggling to raise funds. The company was then bought by Australia's Recharge Industries, which has yet to unveil plans for the site.