The Low Glow Halo - Alfa Romeo 2600 Sprint Zagato

In 1985 I encountered my first Alfa Romeo 2600 Sprint Zagato ‘in the flesh’ on a visit to Piero Pesaro’s Alfetta Racing Centre in Brentford.  Whilst we were walking around the premises, discussing the possibility of appointing the business as an official Alfa Romeo ‘Service Point,’ we reached a corner where a Junior Z and a TZ1 were at rest.  My attention thus became diverted from the 2600 SZ, at which I’d intended to take a close look.  Some years later (!) I’m now taking the opportunity to do that, even if only on a virtual basis.  Back then, our UK sales were on a marked downward trend, and we needed not only better quality ‘regular’ production cars but also a ‘halo’ model to help re-establish the marque’s reputation and attractiveness to new car buyers.  Two decades earlier, Alfa Romeo , though enjoying improving sales volume prospects with the Giulia family of models, was intent on the same thing, believing that however practical the Giulia was for the current market in volume terms, there should be a six cylinder model at the head of the range to convey brand values related to sport/performance and prestige/technical sophistication.  As a result, the 2600 was created and presented in Geneva in ’62.  Initially there was a Berlina, a Bertone Sprint coupe and a Touring Cabriolet.  On launch these models were not perceived by the Press as ‘halo car’ material, being cosmetically little different from the 2000 models they effectively replaced.  However, the new six cylinder in line engine was recognised as a significant addition to the marque’s inventory and worthy of a more glamorous body form to carry it.  With an established relationship in mind and the success of the recent collaboration resulting in the Giulietta SZ and the ongoing TZ project, it was not surprising that Zagato was looked to for this, especially as a 2600 Sprint body by the Carrozzeria could be expected to enhance performance through light weight, (even though Alfa Romeo specified that it should be made of steel), as well as being aesthetically in tune with the Zeitgeist.  As is usually reported, Ercole Spada, (at Zagato since ’60), drew the initial shape, but said in more recent times that he was not responsible for the finalised, production styling.  In this form, from chassis # 856006, one hundred 2600 SZs were made during ‘65/’66/’67.

Alfa Romeo 2600 Sprint Zagato body. Courtesy Scuderia Azzurra

By the time the Zagato version of the 2600 Sprint was presented at the ’65 Frankfurt Show – three years on from the first prototype – it had a big job to do.  Ongoing evaluation of the Berlina, Coupe and Cabriolet models had not been favourable and it had been generally accepted that the car had failed as a ‘top of the range’ product worthy of Alfa Romeo’s heritage.  Performance and handling were not rated favourably by journalists, test drivers, dealers and customers alike.  The Solex carburettor set-up was considered much to blame for the performance aspect.  The triple 44 PHH carburettors operated on the two stage principle and were therefore dependent on optimum delivery of vacuum.  Less ‘temperamental’ Webers - 40 DCOEs  - were available as a factory option with a bespoke manifold.  The handling shortcomings were attributed to a major extent to the weight and far-forward location of the engine.  With this in mind, it is quite amusing to read Bill Boddy’s report/road test of the Sprint in Motor Sport magazine’s November ’63 issue.  It is a formulaic, bland piece typical of the man, generally complimenting the car, presumably – as was the convention then – as reciprocation for the wining and dining he would have enjoyed on Alfa Romeo-hosted press events such as new model launches, factory tours, etc.  His headline summary read: “A beautifully-appointed, smooth-running, extremely handsome Italian saloon with impeccable handling and controls.”  In fact, the Zagato version was needed as soon as possible if there was to be any chance of salvaging Alfa’s ‘halo car’ aspiration.  As would become ever more clear as time moved on, doing this with a six cylinder car was not an inherent expertise Post-War at Portello/Arese.  The Alfa 6, 164 3.0 and Alfa 90 were 70s/80s duds and it wasn’t until the GTV6, Alfa 75 3.0 and SZ (ES30) arrived that the company had products that in any way fulfilled the desired role.

Left:#856075, Solex 44PHHs. Courtesy SVS Ltd; right: #856061, Webers. Courtesy Milestone Motor Cars

But the 2600 SZ did have ‘ingredients’ that offered hope in ’65.  Thanks to Zagato’s body construction principles, (even though the Carrozzeria was not commissioned to build it in aluminium as was its usual custom), it weighed 9% less than the Bertone-bodied Sprint.  This, along with 20 more bhp from a modified state of tune of the triple Solexes, certainly helped with the performance aspect while also allowing better handling/steering.  The SZ could accelerate from rest to 60 mph in 9.1 secs and reach a top speed of 130 mph.  The original first prototype, #856001, was constructed on a Spider chassis and shown in late ’62.  This was subject to further development the following year and eventually appeared as below, with notable refinements to the front panel, shield grille and bonnet intakes.  Note also that the rear haunches/C post are very different from the forms adopted for the production version.

Courtesy Peter Bovym Fotografie

It was early ’64 before a third prototype emerged.  The front end styling had been further revised, giving a pronounced aggressive appearance characterised by the enlarged shield grille.  #856003 was taken up as his ‘daily driver’ by Elio Zagato.  The car is shown below, left, and in comparison with an early production example, #856015 (Q3, ’65), illustrating how the front end had been ‘tidied’ in finalising the styling.  Of main note are: simplification of bonnet/front panel; relocation of Alfa Romeo badge to incorporation with the grille shield frame; revised grille mesh pattern; relocation of indicator lenses to the leading edge of front wings:

Courtesy Zagato-Cars (left) and Bonhams Cars (right)

Production version of grille, #856061. Courtesy Milestone Motor Cars

Left, #856034. Courtesy Zagato-Cars; right, #856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction

The rear, chromed bumper bar was one piece with two integrated number plate lamp holders on the upper face in the centre.  On early cars this mainly had a constant depth along its total length with a slight taper towards the wheel arches.  On later examples the corners were flared, as seen, right, below:

Left, rear bumper, early version. Courtesy Lana-Classic; right, #856079. Courtesy Cool Classic Club

The type and location of the tail lamp units and reverse lamp remained unchanged throughout the production run.  Customisation is seen on #8560075 which has a rear plate lamp mounted centrally on the underside of the trailing edge of the boot lid.  #856079 had a boot lid release knob mounted above the tail lamp unit in the rear face of the right hand wing.

Tail lamp unit, #856079. Courtesy Cool Classic Club

A body detail feature often commented on is the absence of an external, body-coloured sill (rocker in the U.S.) panel.  I judge this successful, helping to make the 2600 SZ appear more of a lightweight car than it actually is when metrically assessed.  It does however exaggerate the extent of ground clearance and possibly causes the wheels to look somewhat oversize.

#856029. Courtesy ISSIMI, Inc.

 

As mentioned above, the Alfa Romeo ‘Cross & Serpent’ roundel badge was mounted centrally above the front intake:

#8560079. Courtesy Cool Classic Club

As for other Zagato-bodied cars of the era, ‘Zagato Milano’ badges were mounted on the front wings above the indicator repeater lamp, between the door leading edge and the trailing edge of the front wheel arch at a level slightly above the height of front tyre:

Left, #856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction; right, #856079. Courtesy Cool Classic Club

The rear badge was a simple chrome ‘2600 SZ’ script with no base plate.  It was applied to the lower, vertical face of the boot lid between its right hand edge and the right hand edge of the number plate niche at a level a little above the lower edge of the tail lamp.

#856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction

The rear badge is replicated in style terms inside the car, applied to the glovebox door:

#856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction

The 415 mm, three slotted spoke, black rimmed, steering wheel was of a type commonly fitted to several Alfa Romeo GT/Sport models of the period.  The spokes were chrome plated and the horn button featured a gold coloured rendition of the traditional 'Cross & Serpent' image, as seen below:

As might be expected with a car of this type, some owners specified alternative wheels – some preferring a wood rimmed type by Nardi or Moto-Lita. 

16” magnesium road wheels with chrome hub caps were standard.  Original tyre fitment was with Pirelli Cinturato CA67, 175 HR 400s.  There are example SZs running on Borrani wire wheels.

#856053. Courtesy Fantasy Junction

Despite the relatively exclusive nature of the SZ and its successful aesthetic character, it was not a success.  Value for money may have been a significant factor, for its price was just short of £3,000 – around £45,000 in 2024 terms.  Back in ’67, what you paid for an SZ would have bought you two GT Juniors with plenty of change!  If this brought about any customer hesitation to purchase, a record of achievements on the racetrack, as with any ‘specialist’ car of this sort, could well have been an effective counter-measure.  However, whilst GTs bodied by Zagato for Abarth and Lancia, (and for Alfa Romeo with the Giulietta SZ), had proved highly capable in the motor sport arena, there was little or no such activity associated with the 2600 SZ.  Notable reasons include: thanks to the body being of steel, the car was not especially light weight; a concern that the crankshaft was lacking in durability became a received wisdom; though the wheelbase was shorter than that of the 2600 Berlinetta and Sprint models, it was still regarded as a chassis lacking nimble characteristics; Alfa Romeo was preoccupied in its developments for and support to motor sport enterprises with the 4 cylinder cars, especially the Giulia coupes and the tubular chassis, built-for-racing, TZ and TZ2 models.  It is believed that a factory project to create a twin spark head was initiated, but soon abandoned.  Equally, work to homologate the car with the FIA was not pursued with any vigour.  It has been suggested that #856034 was prepared as a rally car by Autodelta with involvement too of the Etceterina, Patriarca.  Also referenced – but not substantiated – is the modification for competition of #856013 by the tuner/constructor, Conrero; (the car in contemporary times has worn a Conrero sticker on its boot lid).

Left,#856013. Courtesy Route59; right, #856034. Courtesy ClassicCars.com

Although the 2600 SZ did not glow halo-esque as the intended marque/range icon, it did radiate elegant optics and was fast/well handling enough to be rated as an authentic Grand Tourer.  From many angles its appearance is lithe and dynamic.  Those that have survived – mostly by now ably restored – provide a glimpse today of how stylish Alfa Romeo was before its decline set in the decade after the model’s production.

Andrea - What If? Part 2

After two years in Formula 3, it was important for Andrea to sustain momentum in his career by moving up to Formula 2 full time.  This he was able to achieve with the help of his Marlboro sponsorship and positive discussions with Ron Dennis.  Ron had founded his team, Project 4, in 1976, and it had run Chico Serra in 1979.  It had greater experience in F2 and put a lot of focus on this category for 1980, fielding March 802-BMWs for Andrea and Serra in the European series.  The first race of the new season was at Thruxton, in April, and Andrea outpaced Serra to finish third. The championship was comprised of 12 races, of which Andrea was entered in all but one.  He won the penultimate round in August at Misano, and ranked fifth in the championship.  That he did not appear at the final round and perhaps improve his position to fourth was due to the highly significant opportunity then afforded to him through the Marlboro connection.  1980 had been a fraught year for Alfa Romeo’s Autodelta team, headed by Carlo Chiti.  The flat 12 177 had proved uncompetitive and had been entered only intermittently.  The replacement, 179, with V-form engine, had been subject to reliability problems.  Off the circuit, there were concerns that the powerful unions in the Factory should not be alienated by any perceived lack of commitment to number two driver, Bruno Giacomelli.  The new driver, Patrick Depailler, brought in to spearhead the team’s endeavours, though brimming with confidence and ability, was found to be struggling as he had not fully recovered from a hang-gliding accident.  Then, just as he appeared to be finding his form, he was killed in a testing accident at Hockenheim.  At this point, Marlboro, naturally concerned to ensure return from its investment, (with substantial sponsorship payments to the team), overruled Chiti, who was inclined to recall the veteran Vittorio Brambilla. The tobacco manufacturer insisted on the vacant driver’s seat being taken by ‘their’ Andrea de Cesaris – the expectation being that by dint of his youth, much in contrast with Brambilla, he would be the more likely front runner.

In March 802 at Thruxton, 1980

Thus, Andrea was in Montreal in late September for round 13 of the Formula 1 World Championship.  Given his relative lack of experience, Andrea needed all the track time he could get.  So, the prevailing weather for the opening practice session was particularly unwelcome in the Alfa Romeo pit – it was raining cats and dogs, deterring even some of the most long-served of drivers from venturing out onto the circuit. Conditions did improve later, (and on the following day), but for a debutant they remained decidedly ‘tricky.’  It was therefore all the more to Andrea’s credit that he qualified in eighth, in front of some of F1’s then-established front line contenders, including Patrese, Prost, Villeneuve and Arnoux.  It was an encouraging situation for the team, as Bruno was fourth, half a second quicker than Andrea. But hardly had the race got underway than a big accident occurred, bringing out the red flag.  The restart was delayed for an hour – another very challenging and nerve jangling circumstance for a young driver in his very first Grand Prix.  However, Andrea handled the race resumption without difficulty and appeared to have settled well, only for engine trouble to intervene on lap 8, necessitating his retirement.  The sense of anti-climax and frustration experienced by Andrea in Montreal can only be imagined. Meanwhile, Giacomelli – who was never bestowed with a shunt-referencing nickname – crashed out when he misjudged an attempted overtake of Didier Pironi.

At Circuit Île Notre-Dame, Montreal for the Canadian Grand Prix, 1980

The final round of the championship, the U.S. Grand Prix, was run at Watkins Glen on 5^th October.  The turn of speed shown by the Alfa 179s in Canada was maintained at the Glen, with Giacomelli taking pole and Andrea tenth.  On the race’s opening lap Andrea was pushed onto the grass, losing several places.  Reacting to this, Andrea was probably trying too hard when his 179 struck Derek Daly’s Tyrrell and sustained retirement-inducing damage on the third lap.  So, Andrea’s brief encounter with the Grand Prix scene ended in disappointment, though promise for future success was shown by the speed he had been able to show in both practice/qualifying and the races.  With the future in mind, it is germane at this point to say that several writers have observed that Ron Dennis came to be averse to running Italians in his cars, usually adding that this stemmed from his experience with Andrea in 1981.  His adoption of Andrea for the new season was probably not wholehearted from the outset.  With the merger of his Project 4 team with McLaren being a risky enterprise, pragmatic Ron needed to be especially closely compliant with the sponsor’s wishes, and Marlboro was keen to see Andrea in an M29. 

Speaking in 2012, Andrea reflected: 

I don’t think Ron ever treated me fairly. I had the old car, (M29), and very little testing - just 20 laps at Silverstone before my first Grand Prix with them.  Crazy.  I had connections with Marlboro at a time when Ron Dennis wanted the company to continue its sponsorship.  He was taking over from Teddy Mayer, and McLaren had been performing badly under Teddy. Ron needed good sponsorship, because he was building the first carbon-fibre chassis with John Barnard. So yes, he gave me a chance because I was important to Marlboro and Marlboro was important to him. I’d driven for Ron in F2, so he knew I could be quick. 

Ron and Andrea avoiding eye contact!

Andrea was teamed at McLaren with the Belfast-born John Watson, who had first driven a Formula 1 car in 1973. Broadly, in terms of experience, John was ten years ahead of Andrea.  This was evidenced by their comparative qualifying performances – John’s average being ninth, whereas Andrea’s was fifteenth, but it is notable that John was provided with the new MP4 from the 3^rd race, Andrea having to wait until the 6^th for the innovative and potentially far superior John Barnard-designed model.  As for the races, Andrea’s best result was sixth place in San Marino.  Any hope of a good championship placing was undermined by the numerous DNFs – 9 – but of these, only 3 can be attributed unequivocally to fault on Andrea’s part.  On the other hand, Watson made a mistake and had a colossal accident at Monza, the common wisdom being that his life was preserved only by the immense strength of the revolutionary carbon fibre monocoque construction of the MP4.

Andrea, #8, and team-mate Watson, #7, take to the grass at the Brazil Grand Prix, 1981

Further analysis of available data and contemporary reports shows that specific own-fault accidents/beaching spins by Andrea amounted to 10 in practice/qualifying/racing in the season’s 15 Grands Prix.  I would not dispute the previously quoted figure of 19+ since some reports refer to ‘multiple’ incidents/spins/offs, etc.  But for added insight, another driver’s 1981 is worth considering and comparing with that of Andrea’s.  Like many others, I greatly enjoyed seeing Gilles Villeneuve’s exploits on track in Ferraris which were often not exactly au-point chassis/handling-wise.  His chutzpah will remain in the collective memory for as long as the sport is ongoing.  However, in 1981 he too did a fair amount of spinning and shunting, just like Andrea, Gilles’s ‘score’ being 13.  An enthusiastic advocate for the man in the Ferrari #27 was Denis Jenkinson, the Continental Correspondent of Motor Sport magazine.  Conversely, that he formed a dim view of Andrea’s qualities from an early date is evidenced by the prejudicial comments/turns of phrase that frequently featured in his articles, e.g. (Argentina) – ‘Andrea de Cesaris spent most of his time spinning his older McLaren M29F.’  (Holland) ‘Andrea de Cesaris  . . . who had continuously crashed their (McLaren’s) cars throughout the season.’  (Italy) ‘de Cesaris, the Italian with the funny eyes actually keeping his car on the track this time.’  Contrast this approach to how Jenkinson generally wrote in admiration and affection about Giles Villeneuve. 

Fortunately, Marlboro had financially supported both the McLaren and Alfa Romeo Formula One campaigns in 1981 and was happy enough to continue this aspect of its marketing strategy for 1982.  With Nikki Lauda eager to join McLaren for the new season, Marlboro was once again instrumental in facilitating a move for Andrea back to Alfa Romeo where a seat had become vacant as a consequence of Mario Andretti’s retirement from Grand Prix racing.  So, Andrea returned to a team that he considered genuinely supportive, and once again was alongside Bruno Giacomelli.  They got on well, and among many complimentary things Bruno said about Andrea was that he was ‘very correct and honest,’ and that he was ‘not too proud to say when he was wrong.’  Their friendship was tested several times in 1982, notably at the Austrian Grand Prix when their cars collided at the start of the race, but the conciliatory nature of both men enabled them to resolve disputes relatively quickly and amicably – something many teammates struggle to achieve, given that if the man in the same machine as yourself is quicker, you can’t blame your car - he is your most direct competitor, the yardstick against which you must measure your own performance.

Andrea and Bruno at the presentation of the Alfa 182

The 1982 season was a controversial one.  It began with a drivers’ strike, ostensibly over new ‘superlicence’ stipulations proposed by FISA – a reflection of the continuing dispute between the ‘manufacturer’ teams, aligned with the FISA governing body and the ‘garagistas,’ members of FOCA, such as Williams, McLaren and Brabham.  The conflict by 1982 had much to do with the FOCA teams feeling at a disadvantage against the turbo-engined cars of the manufacturers.  A work-around, enabling their cars to run out on the circuit at reduced weight, compounded the situation and when ruled ‘illegal’ by FISA, led to a boycott of the San Marino Grand Prix by most of the FOCA members.  Meanwhile safety re-emerged as a major concern in the wake of the death at Zolder of the much-loved Gilles Villeneuve, (and of novice, Riccardo Paletti, in Canada).  Moreover, to confirm the season’s peculiarity, the Championship went to Keke Rosberg, despite his haul of wins being just one. 

Early in the year Alfa Romeo could be hopeful – an improved V12 car, the 182, had been developed and was ready for introduction at the second race, in Brazil.  At the same time, work was progressing on a new V8 turbo engine.  But at round 1, the 179s of Andrea and Bruno were not competitive, finishing thirteenth and eleventh respectively.  Andrea figured much more prominently in Brazil in the new car but was forced to retire when the undertray was dislodged.  Then came Long Beach.  A memorable event as Andrea snatched pole position – at that point the youngest ever driver to start at the head of a Grand Prix – and initially led the race in authoritative style.  Eventually outfoxed by the vastly more experienced Nikki Lauda, Andrea maintained second place for a while until he was distracted by deteriorating brakes and a supposed rear suspension failure, and lost control.  The damage sustained was sufficient to dictate Andrea’s retirement.

Pole position in the 182 for the U.S.West Grand Prix at Long Beach, April 1982

Andrea’s season was largely undermined by the 182’s unreliability.  Though his average qualifying position was eighth and at tracks to which the car was suited, he could race in the top 6, he failed to finish in 10 of the 16 events, of which 4 could be considered the result of own-fault accidents.  This would compare with several other drivers’ records – Rene Arnoux’s ‘score’ for example being 3 - once again giving the lie to the lazy ‘deCrasheris’ slur. 

Part 3 (next post) covers Andrea's 1983 season and presents the arguments for his potential as a World Champion