GTP Cool Wall: 1985-1986 Lancia Delta S4 Stradale

  • Thread starter Wiegert
  • 39 comments
  • 2,496 views

1985-1986 Lancia Delta S4 Stradale

  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
Wiegert

Wiegert

Premium
13,377
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
1985-1986 Lancia Delta S4 Stradale nominated by @All Your Base

1893306efbc472b8da1120b6c91143aa.jpg


Body Style: 2-door hatchback
Engine: 1.8L Twin-charged I4
Power: 247 hp
Torque: 215 lb-ft
Weight: 1200 kg
Transmission: 5-speed manual
Drivetrain: Mid-engine, four-wheel drive
Additional Information:
Between October 1985 and 1986, Lancia built 200 examples of a road-going version of their rally car, the Delta S4, for the purpose of homologation in Group B. In Italy, the Delta S4 Stradale was priced at 100 million lire ($54,700), five times the price of the second most expensive Delta of the time, the HF Turbo. The Stradale's chassis was a space frame built out of CrMo steel tubes and aluminium alloy, similar to the rally car; it was covered by epoxy and fiberglass body panels. The Delta S4 Stradale is powered by a 1.8 liter Inline-4 equipped with IAW integrated electronic ignition and fuel injection, a supercharger, a turbocharger and two intercoolers. The Delta S4 Stradale was the first production car to go on sale with both a turbocharger and a supercharger. The Stradale is equipped with a three differential four-wheel-drive system; the centre differential sent 30% of the engine torque to the front open differential, and 70% to the rear limited slip differential. Lancia claimed the car could reach top speed of 225 km/h (140 mph) and accelerate from standstill to 100 km/h (62 mph) in six seconds.​

8478409241_4eeb3f87eb_b.jpg

Lancia_Delta_S4_Stradale.JPG

DSC_0516_2.jpg

lancia_delta_s4_stradale_7.jpeg

1985_Lancia_DeltaS4Stradale2-768x544.jpg

1985-Lancia-Delta-S4-Interior.jpg
 
T4/AWD doesn't get my motor running like it does some, and this thing is absolutely pug fugly. SU-ssudio.
 
This car sounds like a boatload of fun. It has everything that would make for an enjoyable driving experience.

Mid-engined? Check.
AWD? Check.
Good handling? Check.
Drives off road well? Check.
Turbo? Check.
Supercharger? Check.
Fast? Check.
Light? Check.
Good looking? Check.
 
Way uglier than a normal Delta and looks more like a parts-bin-special kit car, but it's the last of the crazy Group B era monsters.

Low Cool.
 
Awesome, but only a rallying nerd would know why, it looks like a poorly-designed kit car and the only time you'll see one is at a car show, museum or auction house - on the offchance you'll see one of the few not in private collections at all.

SU.
 
Extremely cool to car enthusiasts, but the average person would just see an ugly, slightly wider-than-usual 80s hatchback. Uncool.
 
Cool. The rear half is not as slick as the Audi Quattro Sport and Clio V6. That's where I bumped it down from Sub Zero.
 
It rallied, looks great, homologation, powerful for the time.

Sub Zero
 
A roughly Delta-shaped weapon. Would have been SZ had it not been one of the main reasons for the death of Gr.B.
 
Skython
Functionality doesn't create art, hence why these particular S4s looks a bit like a downhill cart that someone has fashioned into a car shaped from cardboard. The actual rally version is far easier on the eyes.
Click to expand...
Functionality doesn't always create art. Saying that it doesn't at all means that artwork doesn't have a purpose or meaning, which in that case, it's no longer art. What's "easier on the eyes" is up to opinion, but I certainly don't think a 2 year old could draw a Lancia Delta.
 
Formidable
Functionality doesn't always create art. Saying that it doesn't at all means that artwork doesn't have a purpose or meaning, which in that case, it's no longer art. What's "easier on the eyes" is up to opinion, but I certainly don't think a 2 year old could draw a Lancia Delta.
Click to expand...

It's probably a good thing @SVX didn't allude to such a thing, then:

SVX
This has the body proportions of a car you'd draw when you were two.
Click to expand...

Emphasis mine. Reading is important.

...

The car guy in me loves it. But I know that most people I'd show it to would see little more than a hacked-apart, ugly 80's hatch, with massively less usability than the regular models. My girlfriend appreciates the lunacy of mid-engine swaps — she thinks the Clio V6 is the right sort of crazy — but this doesn't have the same immediate draw.
 
SVX
This has the body proportions of a car you'd draw when you were two.
Click to expand...

Weirdly enough, while I voted SZ for this one because Group B and then made road versions of it, you went with an Uncool vote on this, even if uglier than the normal Delta Stradale, you voted that Delta Stradale a Seriously Uncool.

What the ****? Plus, if that's what you'd draw when you were two, you'd be a car genius then, because all my cars would be basically trash american 80's sedans, like the Aries.
 
Formidable
Functionality doesn't always create art. Saying that it doesn't at all means that artwork doesn't have a purpose or meaning, which in that case, it's no longer art. What's "easier on the eyes" is up to opinion, but I certainly don't think a 2 year old could draw a Lancia Delta.
Click to expand...

I sort of knew that would be your response, I almost posted "Functionality doesn't usually create art," which on reflection I should have. And yes, the easier on the eyes is my opinion, I at no point said that what I'm saying is a matter of fact, you just interpreted it as such (for the sake of argument?). And I never said a two year old designed it, you're making assumptions (and yes, I did like SVX's post saying that, but that was more that I think it's ugly).

And wouldn't purpose and meaning actually be two different things? A piece of art means something, but that meaning doesn't really have a practical purpose. Just like some air vents aren't placed just for expression, though sometimes they are and it's just sad. :lol: There's a reason a lot of artists don't see cars as art.
 
Last edited:
Skython
I sort of knew that would be your response, I almost posted "Functionality doesn't usually create art," which on reflection I should have. And yes, the easier on the eyes is my opinion, I at no point said that what I'm saying is a matter of fact, you just interpreted it as such (for the sake of argument?). And I never said a two year old designed it, you're making assumptions (and yes, I did like SVX's post saying that, but that was more that I think it's ugly).

And wouldn't purpose and meaning actually be two different things? A piece of art means something, but that meaning doesn't really have a practical purpose. Just like some air vents aren't placed just for expression, though sometimes they are and it's just sad. :lol: There's a reason a lot of artists don't see cars as art.
Click to expand...
I know you never said that, but I won't avoid that there's holes in what I said. Now purpose and meaning are two different things, but they go hand-in-hand in artwork. There is purpose in a meaning which, in art, is supposed to convey not only the meaning, but the artist's intention and reason for creating it. In terms of car vents, I do know that some actually do provide cooling air to parts of the car, but sometimes serve no practical purpose. That does not mean that they serve no purpose what so ever; it could be to improve the look of the car. While that may be silly or cringy to some, that's more critique. What the intention behind putting them there was is the purpose.

Now before I tangent further into a novel-length post about that, a few things of mine that need to be cleared up. While it may be to you a car that has "looks a bit like a downhill cart that someone has fashioned into a car shaped from cardboard" or to @SVX "has the body proportions of a car you'd draw when you were two", what I'm saying is that, to me at least, it's one heck of a downhill cart that's been fashioned into a car shaped from cardboard and/or has the proportions of a 2 year old's drawing of a car. :lol:
 
There's absolutely no casual charm about this car to make it cool. Chunky air intakes, slabs for wheels, all the finesse of a hippo in plate armour. SU.
 
Road going homologation specials are always underwhelming... only around 30-50% of the power of the rally car and lack all the special suspension and brakes.

As a rally car, iconic. But not as a road car.

Uncool.
 
Within maybe my top 10 dream cars. Can this be cool like the HF Integrale Evo? Maybe not, but it's not far off either.

Solid cool.
 
An ugly box, uncool. I don't care the performance, a car still has to look good.
 

Latest Posts

Back