Imprint


Bookstore
Exercises

Wheel change
Save Energy
History
Formulary



Italy 1
Italy 2
Italy 3

Lancia

History
2014 Ypsilon
2002 Thesis
1999 Lancia Lybra
1995 Dedra
1986 Delta
1984 Thema
1981 Trevi
1977 Gamma Coupe
1975 Beta Montecarlo
1973 Beta Coupe
1972 Stratos
1970 Fulvia
1962 Flaminia Coupe
1954 Aurelia
1953 D24 Spider
1938 Aprilia Spider
1937 Aprilia
1935 Astura
1929 Dilambda
1923 Lambda
1919 Kappa
1914 Theta
1912 Epsilon





Lancia Fulvia






Models
EngineFour-cylinder V-engine (13°)
Displacement (bore * stroke)
CrankshaftMounted threefold
Compression ratio
Engine control2 * OHC, chain
Mixture preparation2 Solex horizontal draught dual carburettors
Cooling
Lubrication
Torque
Performance
Drive trainFront drive, longitudinal
Suspension frontWishbones, transverse leaf springs
Suspension rearRigid axle, leaf springs
BrakesDisks, front dual piston, handbrake separately on drum brake
Wheels
Wheelbase2.330 mm
Turning circle11.100 mm
Length3.975 mm
Width1.550 mm
Height1.320 mm
Tank capacity38 litres
Top speed
Payload
Kerb weight
Year of manufactureFrom 1967
Purchase price
Electric system12 V/ 45 Ah/ 400 W



Lancia as part of Fiat suffered from a too large type program at the time, as opposed to the current situation. It has always been produced confusing much in preferably wide variability. As an example may be considered the Lancia Appia from 1953. This is the with the missing B-pillar.

But more importantly for the Fulvia was its engine, also a V4, but with 10.14° cylinder angle and two bottom-mounted camshafts. The wandered meanwhile much more useful upward in the Fulvia. With the now slightly larger cylinder angle each supplied a bank, if you can really speak from it case of a cylinder head.

The Fulvia therefore afforded far less peculiarities than previous models. Unlike the Lancia Appia it had a longitudinal front-wheel drive and there was already important the significantly shorter constructed engine than an in-line four-cylinder engine. So, seen from the basic concept, one could not say anything negative about this car. However, from the processing ...


The steering was denounced as too sluggish, the body as too little aerodynamically and too noisy, just as the engine. One had the feeling of a foolish act, when one saw that the spare wheel occupied the rear luggage compartment. The tank actually contained only 38 litres. This in turn matched to the 1.6 HF, however its hard suspension took the travel bug. It could not be that one might rather bought the smaller model after much consideration, but not because of the price.


These sentences really distressed in view of the pretty body. And the the grandiose win of the Monte Carlo Rally and the brands World Cup 1972 did not help further (pictures below). And the processing then made everything worse. Some testers saw the car wear out already during a test program of 3,000 kilometres.Pity about the many advantages of the car, such as this brilliant, complex braking system. Also the dashboard knew to please, though certain displays and the radio required a front-seat passenger.


It was such a pity, that some car of the late 60s or early 70s suffered under the harsh laws of the market and therefore could have no particular technical finesse and Lancia, in contrast had the reputation to enforce higher prices, but did not manage to organize better and to deliver an appropriate quality. And yet, the brand image did not seem to suffer ... 07/15




cartecc.comEmailIndex