Best alfa engine?
Discussion
Hello,
I am new for your forum and like more and more the design of the alfas.
The GT is very nice and the 159 is also very beautifull.
The choice of engine is big and according to car magazine, the more powerfull are not always the best driving one.
Could you help me find out the best for everyday use and a touch of sport (of course)?
Thanks
Ben
I am new for your forum and like more and more the design of the alfas.
The GT is very nice and the 159 is also very beautifull.
The choice of engine is big and according to car magazine, the more powerfull are not always the best driving one.
Could you help me find out the best for everyday use and a touch of sport (of course)?
Thanks
Ben
I would go for the V6 over the 4 every time, yes it can make the car a little nose heavy but you seldom notice it and you appreciate the sound, smoothness and power of the V6 all the time. The V6 is also widely regarded as being more reliable.
The 5 cylinder diesels are very good too.
The 5 cylinder diesels are very good too.
judas said:
Whereas the 3litre V6 is widely regarded as one of the best V6 engines ever made
I like the V6 but it does seem a bit heavy, its not massively powerful & boy has it got a drink problem!
It does however sound glorious & has got great power delivery, definitely a classic.
I've taken 2litre twin spark & V6 round a track & have to confess to prefer the smaller engine, just more chuckable somehow
wowbagger t.i.p said:
cirvy said
boy has it got a drink problem!
My 155 2.5 V6 averaged between 25 and 28 mpg, which I thaught wasn't bad considering my lead footed driving style. It handled well enough and was fast enough for me to overtake a rather pissed off Mercedes 190 Cosworth owner on a track day.
Wow, thats impressive, must be my driving then
I cant get much above 20mpg out of mine, mind you that is with an awful lot of the urban commute.
It did average 27mpg on a gentle cruise down to Cornwall in the summer, but soon fell back to 20 when we got home! Never mind, it does sound nice
Thanks for the reply.
Unfortunately, for the Alfa I do not plan to take the V6 (belgian tax system and it is not planned to be my sport car).
In my magazine, they propose for the 159:
1.9 ltr - 160 bhp
2.2 ltr - 185 bhp
OR
1.9 JTD - 115 or 136 or 150 bhp (official remaps to please the client regarding the tax system)
2.4 JTD - 200 (also tax+++, but may be Ok)
The GT does exist in 2.0 165 bhp but coming from a Volvo V70 (2.4 170CV, not funny at all, but very usefull) it may be too small...
Diesel or benzine is not a big deal for me as I only do 12000 mls par year.
Other info?
Thanks
Unfortunately, for the Alfa I do not plan to take the V6 (belgian tax system and it is not planned to be my sport car).
In my magazine, they propose for the 159:
1.9 ltr - 160 bhp
2.2 ltr - 185 bhp
OR
1.9 JTD - 115 or 136 or 150 bhp (official remaps to please the client regarding the tax system)
2.4 JTD - 200 (also tax+++, but may be Ok)
The GT does exist in 2.0 165 bhp but coming from a Volvo V70 (2.4 170CV, not funny at all, but very usefull) it may be too small...
Diesel or benzine is not a big deal for me as I only do 12000 mls par year.
Other info?
Thanks
wowbagger t.i.p said:
I live in rural Perthshire, so I don't do much town driving, also mine was a 12 valve, maybe the 24 valve is much worse on the juice.
Mine is the 3.2 in a GT, fantastic car but a little bit of me does still prefer the chuckability of the smaller engined cars, especially the 155 TS's, my first & still my favorite Alfa, wide body, in red, with the Silverstone Alloys
bher said:
Thanks for the reply.
Unfortunately, for the Alfa I do not plan to take the V6 (belgian tax system and it is not planned to be my sport car).
In my magazine, they propose for the 159:
1.9 ltr - 160 bhp
2.2 ltr - 185 bhp
OR
1.9 JTD - 115 or 136 or 150 bhp (official remaps to please the client regarding the tax system)
2.4 JTD - 200 (also tax+++, but may be Ok)
The GT does exist in 2.0 165 bhp but coming from a Volvo V70 (2.4 170CV, not funny at all, but very usefull) it may be too small...
Diesel or benzine is not a big deal for me as I only do 12000 mls par year.
Other info?
Thanks
Having driven 156s with most of the engine range I'd go for the 2.4 JTD either 10 or 20V every time.
The blinding amounts of torque and power delivery outweigh the others everytime.
I used to be a real petrol fan but I must admit my 156JTD changed my mind about diesels. Not keen on the JTS it always seems fairly torque less to me and is very thirsty if driven hard.
Jim
The blinding amounts of torque and power delivery outweigh the others everytime.
I used to be a real petrol fan but I must admit my 156JTD changed my mind about diesels. Not keen on the JTS it always seems fairly torque less to me and is very thirsty if driven hard.
Jim
OK, I'm going to have to do this!
3.0 12 valve V6 gets my vote and here's why...
It is a lovely flexible, torquey engine that also pulls to the redline (and then some!!)
It isn't especially heavy.
Mine was built in 1990. It had done 84,000 miles with a full service history up to 78,000. I bought it in 1999 and have only ever serviced it myself since.
In 2000, the car ended up in a flood (long story!) and was immersed in SEAwater (!) up to the top of the headlights. At least the engine wasn't running at the time! I broke the car and kept the engine. It then lay in the corner of the garage for about 18 months until I bought another 164 with a dead engine so I wondered about putting my "flooded" one in. Believe it or not (OK, I changed the crank sensor!) it started up second turn of the key!
It has now done over 220,000 miles and I've recently "chipped" it!
Other than changing the odd oil seal, oil pressure sender and cam belt & tensioner, I've not spent a penny on that engine and (up until I chipped it) it averaged about 30MPG per tankful. The best I ever got was 37 between fillups and it was never worse than about 20.
What more can I say?! It still puts a smile on my face every time I get in it and is the next-best sounding car only to a TVR 390 I used to run.
3.0 12 valve V6 gets my vote and here's why...
It is a lovely flexible, torquey engine that also pulls to the redline (and then some!!)
It isn't especially heavy.
Mine was built in 1990. It had done 84,000 miles with a full service history up to 78,000. I bought it in 1999 and have only ever serviced it myself since.
In 2000, the car ended up in a flood (long story!) and was immersed in SEAwater (!) up to the top of the headlights. At least the engine wasn't running at the time! I broke the car and kept the engine. It then lay in the corner of the garage for about 18 months until I bought another 164 with a dead engine so I wondered about putting my "flooded" one in. Believe it or not (OK, I changed the crank sensor!) it started up second turn of the key!
It has now done over 220,000 miles and I've recently "chipped" it!
Other than changing the odd oil seal, oil pressure sender and cam belt & tensioner, I've not spent a penny on that engine and (up until I chipped it) it averaged about 30MPG per tankful. The best I ever got was 37 between fillups and it was never worse than about 20.
What more can I say?! It still puts a smile on my face every time I get in it and is the next-best sounding car only to a TVR 390 I used to run.
cirvy said:
Wow, thats impressive, must be my driving then
I cant get much above 20mpg out of mine, mind you that is with an awful lot of the urban commute.
It did average 27mpg on a gentle cruise down to Cornwall in the summer, but soon fell back to 20 when we got home! Never mind, it does sound nice
Mm, that ain't right. Tried changing the thermostat?? Mine was running too cold and using too much fuel as a consequence - seems to be a common problem. New stat has helped a lot. Got about 36mpg on a run recently. Usually get about 26-27mpg on the very short trip to work.
164 V6 used to do 30mpg on the same work run.
Gassing Station | Alfa Romeo, Fiat & Lancia | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff