1996 Alfa Romeo Spider on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Industrial designer seeking classic car, sketches his finds as he shops

The process of shopping for a vintage car can be both a joy and a nightmare. Wrapped up with the exciting opportunity of owning a classic is the anxiety of picking just the right one. Canadian industrial design professor Bruce Thomson and his wife are chronicling all of those ups and downs in a fascinating way. On their blog Kicking Vintage Tyres, Bruce exploits his talent as an expert draftsman to create detailed sketches of the vehicles they are considering, along with driving impressions of each one. The idea for the site started on a whim. After selling his 1971 Mercedes-Benz 220 a while back, it was time to own another classic. Bruce was looking at a Triumph TR6, and a friend asked for a description of the car. Bruce responded with a massive email detailing everything he saw, and the concept for the blog was born. "It dawned on me early that my search was not going to be as easy or as quick as I had expected," he said to Autoblog in an email. "I decided that the best thing I could do would be to make a sort of 'game' out of the search by sharing it with others." Thomson's sketches truly set the blog apart. He clearly has an exceptional eye for a car's lines and often mixes his drawings with inset depictions of key portions of the vehicle. Beyond just the fabulous diagrams, the site is a great read too. While the TR6 initially topped the list, Thomson's search has broadened over time, and a Series 2 Alfa Romeo Spider and BMW 3.0CS also received consideration. "I'd not commit myself to any preferences though, as my head is easily turned," he said. The criteria are that the car must have a manual gearbox, be made between 1959 and 1976, preferably European, hopefully a convertible and cost 15,000-25,000 Canadian dollars ($12,525-$20,870). No matter how long it takes, this is a wonderful hunt to follow along with. Featured Gallery Bruce Thomson Car Sketches News Source: Kicking Vintage Tyres via Core77 Auto News Design/Style Alfa Romeo Car Buying Convertible Classics auto design alfa romeo spider sketch 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 Stelvio Luggage Test | How much cargo space?

The Alfa Romeo Stelvio is quite obviously more about Sport than Utility, especially the high-octane Quadrifoglio you see here resplendent in Alfa Rosso paint. Frankly, I wasn't expecting much from its luggage-hauling potential. After all, according to the specs, it has only 18.5 cubic-feet of space behind the raised back seat, which is quite simply terrible. That's the same as a Jeep Renegade, which is considerably smaller on the outside. Based on past luggage tests of SUVs with a comparable cargo number, there's no way all the bags from my garage will fit. In fact, there's a good chance multiple bags would be staying at home or riding on people's laps.  Well, let's put that assumption to the test.  Here's what the Stelvio has going for it. Sure looks a lot bigger than a Renegade. Actually, it looks bigger than the Range Rover Evoque, which has 21.5 cubic feet. As you can see, this particular Stelvio came equipped with a cargo rail system and net. Those clasps are easily removed by lifting up on the little handle and moving into that wider part of the track. Now, you'll note that the Stelvio has a cargo cover like virtually all SUVs, but this one is a little different in that it's in two pieces. A smaller one that rolls out from a cartridge aft of the back seat, and a semi-rigid piece that connects to the liftgate.  As always, I started off by keeping the cargo cover(s) in place when trying to stuff as much of my luggage as possible in the back. As a refresher, I use two mid-size roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D). As it turns out, the cover cartridge didn't impede loading at all. I'm guessing because the reel is smaller, but either way, this is a real benefit. It means you don't have to find someplace to store the damn cargo cover if you're picking someone up at the airport, for instance, and discover their bags are too big.  However, you'll note (maybe) that my wife's fancy bag is missing from this luggage Tetris ensemble. That's because it got caught on the rigid cargo cover attached to the tailgate when placed atop the bag on the right. OK, then, let's remove that. Basically, you just yank the thing out. Not too complicated.