You said so yourself: So, to sum up: - Older Ladas aren't really any stronger than other contemporary cars because they were basically 124s with mechanical adaptations to cope with the harsher climate. - By the time Lada could walk on its own two feet, the classic models probably had become marginally safer than the original 124 (mostly because of equipment, not really thanks to structural improvements), but they were also getting a bit long in the tooth so they weren't really any safer than fresh new western designs of the '70s/80s. - By the end of the century, with new regulations in place, it was kinda obvious that a 30 years old design, albeit improved, couldn't withstand the test of time any longer, so Ladas are withdrawn from most western markets. - ARCAP tests at the turn of the millennium are kinda conclusive in this sense: classic Ladas aren't safe cars by any means, and that's kinda expected given the age of the basic platform and structure. So, what are we discussing again?
actually by the end of the production of the 124 based models the Innocenti steel presses, made in the early 60s in Milan, were so worn that the workers had to clarckson away the body pannels to close doors, bonnets and fenders, so yeah the early 2101 were tougher that the later ones
what the fuck, the 21045 has a 2107 engine(1.7), literally the 21044 is the same text, but says it's a 1.7, then the 21045 says it's a 1.8, the only 1.8 engine based on that block is the 2130 of Chevy Niva. Who the fuck wrote the wikipedia article? --- Post updated --- I was asking about the source that says russian steel is to blame for fiats rusting.
As mentioned, the payment in russian steel is historical fact. It was not the only reason at the bottom of the rust scandal, but it certainly played a role. Also, russian steel being less-than-adequate quality is a well-documented aspect. It was probably not as tragic as the press loved to highlight, but still, "thicker body panels" was your main argument in favor of Ladas supposed crashworthiness: not only body panels hardly contribute in a meaningful way in case of an impact, but admitedly poor manufacturing also means thicker panels weren't necessarily more solid... While social unrest is often reported as the actual culprit when it comes to the Alfasud plant (which, at the time, had no relationship with the FIAT group yet), the Beta was another matter altogether. The Chivasso plant where the Beta was assembled was hardly touched by the uprisings. Lancia joining the FIAT empire (at the time still the biggest automotive group in Europe) was just an easy target for some bashing from the british press.
Just because you own a Lada doesn't mean you know how they crash dude. They're 60s cars built with massively sub-par materials that managed to squeak by with faked crash results and modified press cars.
i feel like every 90s eastern european car was made of bad material, dacia 1310s were acting like they were made out of potatoes, i mean, my grandparents had a 94 model, and when i was leaning on the fenders they would bend.. and im not fat
My dad's Touran does that too, is it also made of shit steel ? --- Post updated --- Can you link me the documents?
Same, but I weight over 125kgs, and I'm not fat either... I'm just thicker, like body panels on Ladas... EDIT: I have no access to documents, but it was part of the deal as it was always presented to the public and the press. FIAT would fund the entire construction of the plant and receive raw materials directly from the new factory. Also: Poor Quality Of Steel Forces Russian Automakers To Import This comes from the chairman of AutoVAZ himself... Given that quality was a problem even in recent times (interview dates back to 1998), there's no way a freshly-established supplier like the Tolyatti foundry - whose workers had to be formed for the occasion - would have been capable of producing better material out of the blue. Anyway, this is irrelevant to the conversation. The conclusion, whichever truth we can find in the whole rust scandal and its following implications, is: - Thicker body panels are not a sign of good quality. - Thicker body panels are irrelevant in the event of a crash. - Ladas would perform in a crash exactly like the 124 they are heavily based upon. So, marginally better than average when compared to similar vehicles of the '60 (the 124 was a class-leading design when it was launched), but very outdated when judged by any subsequent criteria.
dude, are you trying to imitate shotgun chuck? we understand you love ladas, but, like every other car, they're not perfect.
