Not every Pininfarina design was flawless – even the best in the business get it wrong once in a while. The Alfa Romeo Spider, which had an unusually long production run (1966-1993), went through four distinct iterations. The coda tronca (“truncated tail”) version we have here was the second one, made from 1969 to 1982. That first cut was the deepest indeed. A deep mistake?
It’s not the worst of the Spider’s incarnations by any means. The original front end, largely untouched and, as this is not a North American market car, it is not afflicted with the atrocious 5mph bumpers seen on American post-1973 Spiders.
But that chopped tail with those big rectangular taillights is a far cry from the graciously rounded osso di seppia shape of the original.
It’s a bit less egregious in profile, I guess. Kamm tails became such a fashionable way to design the rear ends of sports cars that it doesn’t shock the eye that much. Until you compare it to the pre-chopped profile, that is.
That scalloped flank resolves itself so elegantly on the 1966-69 Spiders, with that curve echoing the shape of the bootlid and punctuated by those far more characterful and discreet taillights. Much more organic.
There were a lot of different versions of this second series Spider. Virtually all of the Alfa DOHC 4-cyl.’s iterations were available (1.3, 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0 litres), though not necessarily all at the same time. The fuel-injected 2-litre was never available on the series 1 Spiders, so I guess it does give this particular car a bit of an edge.
With better aerodynamics, thanks both to that new tail and a steeper windshield, and 128hp under the hood, this was a better performer than any Spider before it. But is “performance” what these cars are really about?
The interior was also thoroughly revised. The Junior Spiders (with the 1.3 and 1.6) carried on with the original dash, but the 1750 and 2000 Veloce got this all-black interior with a big pair of hooded dials and a console. It does not have the ‘60s charm of the Series 1, but all in all, the added comfort and dramatic styling makes this equally satisfying.
The Veloce cars kept the headlight covers until nearly the end of this series, whereas the Junior Spiders (and the US market cars, I imagine?) did without. Much better with them on, in my view.
Looking at this car from the vantage point of 2024, it’s impossible to completely reject this Spider. No, it wasn’t Pininfarina’s finest hour, but it could have been a lot worse. And it soon would be, in the ungainly shape of the absolute travesty that was the series 3 Aerodinamica.
Yes, Pininfarina committed a few stinkers. But this one doesn’t quite make the list.
Related posts:
COAL: 1990 Alfa Romeo Spider (S4) – Ch-ch-changes, by Fred G. Eger
COAL: 1985 Alfa Romeo Spider Veloce – Ciao, Baby!, by Jim Klein
In-Motion Classic: 1986 Alfa Romeo Spider Quadrifoglio Verde – Alfa-Bits, by Joseph Dennis
Curbside Classic: 1987 & 1988 Alfa Romeo Spiders – A Cluster Of Spiders, by Joseph Dennis
Curbside Classic: 1986 Alfa Romeo Spider Veloce – A Work In Progress, For Four Decades, by PN
Museum Classic: 1966 Alfa Romeo Spider 1600 Duetto – Music By Simon & Garfunkuttlefish, by T87
Curbside Classic: 1992 Alfa Romeo Spider Veloce – Tall Tails, by T87
Not so sure about the graciousness of the roundtail. Yes it has a nice rear but the picture provided is not the most flattering. Looks banana-shaped! The long rear overhang droops too much. High on its wheels. Is the picture cropped? Or that lady sitting on a pillow?
I never found the Kamm rear bad looking. Instead I always thought it suits the car well.
+1
She’s clearly not sitting in the seat.
The problem with this car is that the original design of its long tail goes all the way back to 1956, first seen on the Superflow 3000 concept. By the time the actual “Duetto” Spider arrived in 1966, it was already looking somewhat out of date, although of course it was still an attractive design. But it just had no future. If this car had been replaced by an all-new one in around 1970 or so, it wouldn’t have been an issue. But Alfa just kept on building it, and the long round tail really made it look dated. So while the new squared off tail is controversial, it really does suit the car better for the 1970s, as it did make it look much more contemporary.
The original tail is probably best appreciated by those old enough to remember it when it first came out. I was quite smitten, and a bit shocked when it was cut, but I totally get why. And why the older tail doesn’t work mostly for those that were around when the square tail version was being sold.
Agree, had it not been for the cuttlefish cars the Kamm tail universally would be admired but the cigar-shaped original, which does break the odd design rule, is lovely.
As an owner, briefly, of a Kamm tail 1974 I prefer that style. And I always did, as soon as the revised design was launched, though I’m coming around to appreciate the original as well. Overall, I don’t think there’s any car, at least from the “modern” era, which has been ruined by styling and trim refreshes as much as the Alfa Spider from 1982 on. It’s been almost 40 years since I sold mine but I don’t recall the gearshift being that long, and coming so close to the steering wheel. Almost like my first Volvo.
The original is very pretty indeed, but that rear would have made it a strong candidate in the ‘ugliest accommodation awards’ for impeding bumper regulation in the US market, so there is that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Talk about damning with faint praise!… it’s still a pretty car. Having owned a white ’66 Duetto 1600 “boattail” project and a silver ’71 “Kammtail” 1750, also a project, I love both types, even though both of mine were sold as-is unfinished. That said the later versions were ruined by the safety updates. And I’d take a 105 or 115 coupe over any of them.
We’ll never agree on this I know and It’s an unpopular opinion I’m sure, but I adore the third generation (of which I owned one) and really like the fourth, I’d happily take but don’t lust after a first gen (I’d prefer a Guilia of the period) but am pretty ambivalent about the second one as featured here, the taillights in particular are the worst of the four designs and could have come from a delivery truck. This particular one seems lowered a bit which helps though.
Interestingly (to me) it’s somewhat similar to updates of the 911 prior to the 993 (which visually started to diverge much more greatly from the original), where I prefer the 964 ’89-’94 with the smoothed out body color bumpers, then go back to the rest of the 1980s, then the original 1960s, and then the earlyish 1970s are less interesting to me. Overall a similar length run through the eras and the 911 has a somewhat similar debate in regard to “long hood” up to ’74 vs “short hood” (later cars).
But back to the Alfa, it’s remarkable how they were able to keep it fairly fresh and competitive visually with whatever period it was sold in. In the 1970s the truncated one was modern and worked and the original was simply an older car. Then in the 1980s the rise of black plastic began and brought it into that era as well, and then the last series worked yet again especially with the interior revamp as well, although I do like the hooded dash such as the one here and the one I had, but that looked old compared to the then-restyled interior at least a decade before it was redone. Had the boat-tail been sold side by side with the newer style into the 1970s as the Alfa Romeo Spider Classic (a la GM…) I doubt it would have sold as well as the kammtail. Except to the mighty keyboard warrior demographic of course. 🙂
Such a beautiful, sexy car in all its iterations, even the one with the dubious black plastic. Tatra, you are correct in thinking the clear headlight covers never made it to North America. To this American, the idea of such a big car being propelled by a 1.3 liter engine sounds almost implausible. When I was very young my Dad had a smaller sports car, 1957 Triumph TR-3, purchased overseas, and even that had a 2 liter engine.
The headlight covers were on US versions in ’66 and ’67. They were banned due to a new federal regulation in ’68, which also affected the XKE, Fiat 850 Spider, the VW Beetle and others.
The boat tail version seems somehow boring in its uniformity.
It’s the same with good architecture or a good interior design concept: it needs something like a visual counterpoint – an inconsistency that creates an arc of tension to become interesting.
The steep rear end of the revised version achieves it.
It’s a shame that it feels like 95% of these cars are red. Yes, yes – I know about “Italian racing red”. But also unimaginative in its own way. The Alfa Spider is one of the few cars that looks best in white, I think.
I think Michelotti’s chop job on the Triumph Spitfire was more successful, it fit the proportions of the car and created a strong family resemblance with the 2500 sedan and the then new Stag.Of course the Alfa was last one standing.