Typically when we report on a car lapping the Nürburgring, the time starts with a seven or even a six – but then again, the car that's achieved those lap times generally sell for six or seven figures. That's what makes this latest lap-time report as interesting as it is. Because while the mid-engined European sportscar in question has clocked in over the eight-minute mark, its price tag – and cylinder count – don't come anywhere near the kind of exotica these reports typically involve.

The car in question, of course, is the new Alfa Romeo 4C, which has reportedly clocked a Nordschleife lap time of 8:04. That would put it in stride with the Audi R8 and Porsche Cayman S, and second only to the flyweight, can't-believe-it's-still-street-legal Caterham R500 Superlight among the fastest four-cylinder cars ever to run around Green Hell.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 52 Comments
      Avinash Machado
      • 1 Year Ago
      Beautiful car.
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
      Black Dyanmite
      • 1 Year Ago
      Certainly nothing to pound your chest about here. I like the car, but not enough to put it on The Ring and expect anything worth reporting, which this isn't...... BD
      FuelToTheFire
      • 1 Year Ago
      Not very impressive, considering that a lightly modified STi dis it in 7:55, abd a STOCK Evo X dis it in 7:57. Where's the praise, AB? Oh yeah, I forgot, AB LOVES European cars and won't dare tell the truth on how overpriced and underperforming they are compared to MUCH more practical sedans which cost half as much.
        John J R
        • 1 Year Ago
        @FuelToTheFire
        In this track power is a key factor, notice for example that the alfa with 240hp was still faster: 161.Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport Coupe 8:13.10 150 '12 436 / 1505 259.Honda S2000 8:39.00 143 '99 239 / 1260 It's impressive that it managed such a time with only 240hp in a tracksuch long straights.
        Willy
        • 1 Year Ago
        @FuelToTheFire
        The 'ring is a high-speed track. Power trumps all in that regard. But the Alfa made its time in handling and braking thanks to lightweight. Not shabby, and it's always fun to see a low horsepower car hold it weight w higher hp cars!
        quuppa70
        • 1 Year Ago
        @FuelToTheFire
        no they dont do those times, you are dreaming
        ELG
        • 1 Year Ago
        @FuelToTheFire
        and a "lightly modded" 4C could knock off 30 seconds. this is stock for stock, including tires. go troll somewhere else
      Charrop
      • 1 Year Ago
      I know that it's not in the same league, but a lightly modified STI driven by Makinen made it in 7:55. That's with more seats, more trunk, more drivetrain, all told ~1000lbs more, a cold track, but still a 2.0L turbo.
        FuelToTheFire
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Charrop
        An Evo X was clocked at 7:57. Japanese AWD sport compacts > European exotics. Any day of the week.
          ChaosphereIX
          • 1 Year Ago
          @FuelToTheFire
          except in sound sensation, driving experience on and off the track, looks, and where you would be parked by the valet. You wouldnt even be allowed to pull up to some expensive restaurants in the EVOSTI, but in the Alfa, they would park it right out front...as it should. those things count
        btulliani
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Charrop
        Yeah, but it's not an ALFA ROMEO................
          FuelToTheFire
          • 1 Year Ago
          @btulliani
          Yeah, good thing it's not an Alfa Romeo. It doesn't have the cheesy vagina grille , the $80 k price tag, or the questionable-at-best reliability. Instead, it is saddled with the terrible disadvantages of lower price, more comfort, and more practicality.
          rcavaretti
          • 1 Year Ago
          @btulliani
          Yes, it's an Alfa. And that counts above all.
        wickedsc300
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Charrop
        Ah yes the old modified car comparison. I can't believe a STI made it around the track without rattling apart lol.
        quuppa70
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Charrop
        very lightly sure.... if we tune this 4c lighly to those same horsepowers (324 hp), that STI would eat dust and badly
      Seal Rchin
      • 1 Year Ago
      Wasn't this car suppose to come to USA as a Chrysler?
        Hek!
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Seal Rchin
        Because it will come here as an Alfa, like it should.
          ChaosphereIX
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Hek!
          Seal: most idiotic comment I have read this year. It is an Alfa, Chrysler is a dead/dying brand that sells to your grandparents and people with no money. Alfa is for enthusiasts. Never, ever would they rebadge this thing. I say get rid of Chrysler altogher, it is dying anyways. Bring over Alfas like they were meant to be, inject some passion into the Fiat group in North America. Just change the badge...wow i am stunned.
          icemilkcoffee
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Hek!
          3rd brand? Where is the second brand?
        Bill Burke
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Seal Rchin
        I'm a Chrysler loyalist and I can't imagine that a Chrysler version off this basic platform, similar to the process used on the Crossfire with Mercedes, isn't being considered. It would effectively amortize development costs and lower manufacturing costs by maximize production capacity with an additional vehicle built on the same assembly line. Of course, unlike the Crossfire which was burdened with a Mercedes engine, the 4C derived Chrysler would use all Chrysler drive line assets including a twin turbo Pentastar V-6 and their slick ZF eight speed automatic. A less expensive interior and other Chrysler borrowed hardware would bring costs down and give Chrysler a new model that will bring in the curious automotive public in droves. Totally distinctive Chrysler styling is applied and we have an instant Crossfire replacement without the 4C price tag. I'm up for this one, how about everyone else?
      TrippulG3
      • 1 Year Ago
      All these arguments about "yeah well this car does this time around the 'Ring" and "oh yeah? well this car does THIS time around the ring, so beat that!" You all sound like a bunch of schoolyard adolescents. To 99.9% of the car-buying public, lap times on the Nurburgring are about as relevant as the number of rivets used to build the chassis. If the car looks great and puts a smile on your face while driving it down some twisty back roads, then who the hell cares how long it took to go around some 13-mile ribbon of asphalt in the middle of Germany?
        waetherman
        • 1 Year Ago
        @TrippulG3
        You are exactly wrong; to most of the people who buy this class of car, lap times, 0-60 sprints, and top speed are everything. Nobody cares about how it performs in the real world, it's all about how people watching thinks it performs vs the competition. And of course how much it costs, because that's the real measure of your (car's) worth.
          TrippulG3
          • 1 Year Ago
          @waetherman
          Do you really think that someone who's considering this, or a Cayman or maybe an Evora, are going to be like "well...I like the Alfa, but it's 8 seconds slower around the Nurburgring, and that just won't do!"? Cars like this are purchased as much because of impulse and passion as they are for their spec sheets. This car will do well in the states when it's introduced because it's new, different, looks sexy, and is pretty quick. (And the association with Maserati/Ferrari dealerships won't hurt either). Sure there may be some people who are obsessed with performance who will turn up their nose, but by and large, we're an image-obsessed society and this car has that in spades.
        spa2nky1
        • 1 Year Ago
        @TrippulG3
        I agree when it comes to consumer cars, I couldn't care less about my Cobalt's lap time...though the SS model did it in 8.22....at $23k
      AcidTonic
      • 1 Year Ago
      Just barely faster than the Evo IX with a time of 8:11 in the rain on a tourist track day. AMS ran the Evo X to the tune of 7:45 and they captured it on video. So it's not exactly #2 but even then it's hard to beat the Caterham :) I love how the 4C uses it's pure lack of weight to run within a few seconds of a car with AWD and more power. Seems like you can do anything with a 4 banger these days.
        qemailja
        • 1 Year Ago
        @AcidTonic
        That Evo IX time has to be on a shorter version of the track... If it was done on a track day it didn't make it through the bigest straight wich is miles long... Despite that i think the Evo IX time should be close to the 4c...
      mbukukanyau
      • 1 Year Ago
      Its barely faster than the old Chevrolet Cobalt SS Turbo.
        wickedsc300
        • 1 Year Ago
        @mbukukanyau
        Yea 18 seconds is "barely faster", lol.
        Shiftright
        • 1 Year Ago
        @mbukukanyau
        You're right, and we all know everyone would want a Cobalt SS over this Alfa any day. Right guys? Guys?...
      waetherman
      • 1 Year Ago
      The fact that this can't beat a Cayman S really undermines this car's raison d'etre. I'm a fan of the car, don't get me wrong - I like it from its spider-eyes all the way back to its tight little pooter. But it's too expensive for the performance and that's something that could easily be corrected with a few extra ponies. It's got the lightweight frame and compact body, now just give it 300 hp!
        ChaosphereIX
        • 1 Year Ago
        @waetherman
        this is the base model, wait for the GTA/Cloverleaf version
          waetherman
          • 1 Year Ago
          @ChaosphereIX
          Which will cost as much as a 911 Turbo and still be slower 'round the 'ring. Don't get me wrong - more choice is better. But Alfa should have put a little more power in this (or made it come in at the original target price of $45k) if they really wanted to stand out. Making a car that does Cayman performance at Cayman prices isn't exactly knocking anyone's socks off.
        GVIrish
        • 1 Year Ago
        @waetherman
        A Z06 or GTR are both faster than a Ferrari 458 but it doesn't make the 458 pointless. The Alfa actually has a lower starting price than the Cayman S anyway so it's not like it's a poor performance value.
        Teleny411
        • 1 Year Ago
        @waetherman
        A lot of folks don't get this but sometimes it's not the sheet speed, but the pleasure of driving the machine.
          ChaosphereIX
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Teleny411
          that is the raison d'etre of this car. And driving pleasure it will have in spades, injected with Italian passion - not the cold German calculated driving...
        wickedsc300
        • 1 Year Ago
        @waetherman
        Really? The Cayman S starts at $63,800 and the one that lapped the ring in 8:04 had the $7,400 ceramic brakes equipped so the Cayman S that ran that time was AT LEAST $71,200. The 4C will have base price of $54,000. Tell me again how it is too expensive for the performance.
          wickedsc300
          • 1 Year Ago
          @wickedsc300
          @waetherman Road and Track tweeted that the base will be $54,000. No way Alfa makes it's return to the U.S. costing $13,000 more than a Cayman S.
          waetherman
          • 1 Year Ago
          @wickedsc300
          Latest figures I've seen put the 4C at 60k euro - take away the VAT and that still puts it at a price of $75,000.
        karlInSanDiego
        • 1 Year Ago
        @waetherman
        Stock US spec Abarth=160hp. Mangneti Marelli ECU 20 minute bolt on at 77% potential=196.5hp so a 23% boost from the factory (MM makes Fiat's ECU and probably Alfa's) So apply similar formula and you get a 295hp 4C for under $800 electronic bolt on. Now Alfa and MM might have already taken the 4C closer to its limit, but maybe not. Don't count on this turbo being done. Overboost is a trick way to give the giant hp for short bursts without frying everything.
          quuppa70
          • 1 Year Ago
          @karlInSanDiego
          this new engine was initially rated around 300hp, this is the 1st version, so there will be more powerful versions
      Willy
      • 1 Year Ago
      I still think the carbon fiber tub borrowed from the KTM x-bow. Anyone have confirmed? Not bad time w only 240hp. I can see 8:40's w 3200 lb weight w same power
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
    • Load More Comments