GTP Cool Wall: 1971-1977 Fiat 130 Coupe

[SVT Cobra GT]

Rather lovely looking and I had no idea Fiat made this. Why can't they do something similar now? Cool.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Reminds me of the Peugeot 504 Coupe, just more edgy and larger. That makes sense because they were both Pininfarina designs roughly contemporary to each other.

The Fiat isn't that nice though. The detailing is not even close to the same level as the Ferrari 400. The Ferrari looks athletic and delicate. The Fiat looks a little brutal. Its a little Marcel Breuer, whereas the Ferrari is very Carlos Scarpa.

I give it a meh.

 

[Tyger]

Beautiful, with a streak of vulgar brutalism (you know how defects can accentuate beauty), and just oozes class. Shame most of these have or will collapse into a pile of orange flakes if you so much as sneeze on them. I'll take one of these and the 400i thanks

 

[All Your Base]

I don't see the beauty in this car. It looks bland to me.

Meh.

 

[eight6er]

Uglier and boxier than an old Volvo. Pathetic power from such a big engine in a surprisingly heavy car. Uncool.

 

[TheCracker]

Pathetic power from such a big engine in a surprisingly heavy car. Uncool.

But it only cost £6800 brand new. A a pininfarina designed 3.2 v6 coupe for less than £7k!

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Uglier and boxier than an old Volvo. Pathetic power from such a big engine in a surprisingly heavy car. Uncool.

You say that, but in 1975 the Corvette's base engine made exactly the same power from 5.7 litres. By today's standards it's not very potent but it was decent in its day.

 

[Sage Ages]

UPathetic power from such a big engine in a surprisingly heavy car.

You realize this was 1971, right?

 

[Tornado]

You realize this was 1971, right?

You expect someone to put actual thought into a specific output argument?

 

[eight6er]

But it only cost £6800 brand new. A a pininfarina designed 3.2 v6 coupe for less than £7k!

It doesn't really matter who designed it, it doesn't stop it being ugly.

You say that, but in 1975 the Corvette's base engine made exactly the same power from 5.7 litres. By today's standards it's not very potent but it was decent in its day.

Comparing it to another engine that has even worse specific output doesn't help it sound good.

You realize this was 1971, right?

I'm not taking into account when it was made, just saying it's pathetic power from that size of an engine. I probably shouldn't have mentioned that bit because it doesn't really affect my vote on this car much, it's just an added minus point of the car.

You expect someone to put actual thought into a specific output argument?

Try growing up in a country that taxes you on the size of your engine and you'll have a different attitude.

 

[TheCracker]

I'm not taking into account when it was made, just saying it's pathetic power from that size of an engine.

But you have to take it in context. For that era, 165hp from a non-performance orientated V6 was fairly decent.

 

[eight6er]

But you have to take it in context. For that era, 165hp from a non-performance orientated V6 was fairly decent.

Sure it wasn't bad for a non performance v6 of that era.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Comparing it to another engine that has even worse specific output doesn't help it sound good.

Just what do you expect from a 44 year old car?

 

[eight6er]

Just what do you expect from a 44 year old car?

I don't really take the age into account when deciding it's coolness, unless it has something that was exceptionally good for that era. 50bhp per liter isn't anything special even back then, so it's hardly going to be a plus point to the car. Older cars are usually light, but this is fairly heavy so it doesn't have that going for it either. Basically I don't see a reason to give it any higher than uncool.

 

[Tornado]

Try growing up in a country that taxes you on the size of your engine and you'll have a different attitude.

Why would growing up in a different country compel me to assign meaning to meaningless measurements that aren't even being applied correctly? Would growing up in a different country allow me to ignore context so long as it didn't fit what I was saying?

 

[eight6er]

Why would growing up in a different country compel me to assign meaning to meaningless measurements that aren't even being applied correctly? Would growing up in a different country allow me to ignore context so long as it didn't fit what I was saying?

No I'm saying my opinion is affected by where I grew up. Where specific output is important, because I want the most power for the size of engine I can afford to tax when looking for a performance car.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

I still don't see how this car's relatively average specific output has anything to do with its coolness. It's a luxury car, not a supercar. Lookswise, I'll grant you, it comes across as quite bland in photos, but in person it's just dripping with presence.

 

[Liquid]

Also this car is exempt* from VED ('car tax' to your man on the street) under the 40 year rule so.... tax is irrelevant when talking about this car.

In the UK, at least. In ROI there is a 30 year threshold for a bargain tax rate.

 

[eight6er]

I didn't really decide its coolness based on its performance, like I already said. The reason I mentioned it's weight and low specific output was to say there was no reason to give it any higher rating as there was nothing special about it to maybe knock it up to a meh. Do I have to repeat this again, or do you get it this time?

 

[synchromesh]

If GTPlanet existed in the 70's I would rate this meh. But it's become old enough (looks good, too) where it's cool.