Alfa 75 or GTV6?
Discussion
Can anyone outline the relative strengths and weakneses of the Alfetta GTV6 and it's saloon cousin? Both are nominally 4 seaters with a boot behind (I'm expecting the 75 is a little more spacious, but still it's broadly similar) both had similar engine options (I'm thinking of the V6 in particular) and both have a transaxle gearbox at the back.
So, barring the looks (always loved the GTV, but the 75 is growing on me) what's to choose between them?
Chris.
So, barring the looks (always loved the GTV, but the 75 is growing on me) what's to choose between them?
Chris.
Chris71 said:
Can anyone outline the relative strengths and weakneses of the Alfetta GTV6 and it's saloon cousin? Both are nominally 4 seaters with a boot behind (I'm expecting the 75 is a little more spacious, but still it's broadly similar) both had similar engine options (I'm thinking of the V6 in particular) and both have a transaxle gearbox at the back.
So, barring the looks (always loved the GTV, but the 75 is growing on me) what's to choose between them?
Chris.
The 75 got better engines - the 2lt TSpark is a gem and with 150bhp still puts some modern cars to shame. It also got the 3lt V6, rather than the 2.5 fitted to the GTV.So, barring the looks (always loved the GTV, but the 75 is growing on me) what's to choose between them?
Chris.
Mechanically, they're almost identical with very little improvement between a late GTV and the late 75s.
I'd love a GTV for the looks, but I'd have to transplant a TSpark or 3lt engine into it. As far as I can recall, the GTV never got EFI, which makes it relatively thirsty and not as reliable for 'cold starts'.
75s are more comfortable, with a much better dash and ergonomics - they're actually very well built cars.
I think it all comes down to personal preference.
I'm sticking with my 75, 'cos they're much more individual than the GTV, which is becoming a bit of a cliched classic Alfa these days, if that makes sense?
(I'll try to explain.... turn up to an AROC event in an Alfetta GTV and you'll be welcomed with open arms, turn up in a 75 and no-one will talk to you)
'I'm sticking with my 75, 'cos they're much more individual than the GTV, which is becoming a bit of a cliched classic Alfa these days, if that makes sense?
(I'll try to explain.... turn up to an AROC event in an Alfetta GTV and you'll be welcomed with open arms, turn up in a 75 and no-one will talk to you)'
Oh I don't know, try turning up in a 155 then see who speaks to you.
(I'll try to explain.... turn up to an AROC event in an Alfetta GTV and you'll be welcomed with open arms, turn up in a 75 and no-one will talk to you)'
Oh I don't know, try turning up in a 155 then see who speaks to you.
75_Steve said:
I was also largely ignored when I had a 33 Green Cloverleaf.
..........possibly just a personal thing then? 
(I'm joking of course
)I certainly prefer the 75 cabin to the early GTV, but I think they both look pretty good int he later incarnations.
Engine wise, I've been told (by an ex 75 owner!) that the 2.5 in the GTV is sweeter than the 3.0 unit?
Is there any additional resistance to corrosion on the 75s?
Chris71 said:
75_Steve said:
I was also largely ignored when I had a 33 Green Cloverleaf.
..........possibly just a personal thing then? (I'm joking of course
)I certainly prefer the 75 cabin to the early GTV, but I think they both look pretty good int he later incarnations.
Engine wise, I've been told (by an ex 75 owner!) that the 2.5 in the GTV is sweeter than the 3.0 unit?
Is there any additional resistance to corrosion on the 75s?
75s are partially galvanised, so they don't rust anywhere near as badly as the GTVs. Mine lasted 16 years until it needed anything structural fixing - a small patch near a front suspension mount. However, they do rust around the rear arches where the plastic bodykit is rivetted on, through the galvanised coating.... Other than that they're pretty solid compared to most other cars of the era.
It's a shame you're not closer to me, or you could have tried mine out.
Chris71 said:
Are they fairly similar mechanically then? I presume the saloon is fractionally heavier, but performance and handling are fairly comparable?
Yes, the 75 is heavier, I've not driven a GTV for years, so have forgotten what the comfort in them was like. Even then, it was only a short test drive.You can't really compare performance, 'cos the phase II 75s (the only ones worth looking at) have more power than the equivalent GTV.
eg. 2lt GTV was non-TSpark and had around 130bhp whereas the 2lt 75 was TSpark with 150bhp.
Mechanically, almost everything is swappable - they're essentially the same car as the Alfetta saloons at the end of the day. GTVs are a bit sharper as they came with uprated torsion bars as standard and thicker sway bars. But you can easily get hold of uprated items for the 75, or use a lot of GTV bits to sharpen up a 75.
Mine rolls like you'd expect a car designed in the 70s to roll.... but it's huge fun on the track and attracts a lot of attention and positive comments. Much as I love the GTV shape, the 75 is a more practical proposition to own, especially if you're going to drive it regularly. Our 75 was a daily driver for 2 years before it became a track toy.
Here's some examples of roll....
I love it so much, it has been officially designated a long-term 'keeper' in the household. We can't think of any reason why we'd ever sell it.
75_Steve said:
Chris71 said:
Engine wise, I've been told (by an ex 75 owner!) that the 2.5 in the GTV is sweeter than the 3.0 unit?
Not too sure about the engine, to be honest - it could be something to do with the difference between the carburettor and injection engines.More likely just the smaller capacity engine revs more freely - that's certainly my memory of it. I also think it sounded better, but again it's hard to be sure without driving them back-to-back.
Edited by jamieboy on Monday 12th November 09:17
jamieboy said:
75_Steve said:
Chris71 said:
Engine wise, I've been told (by an ex 75 owner!) that the 2.5 in the GTV is sweeter than the 3.0 unit?
Not too sure about the engine, to be honest - it could be something to do with the difference between the carburettor and injection engines.More likely just the smaller capacity engine revs more freely - that's certainly my memory of it. I also think it sounded better, but again it's hard to be sure without driving them back-to-back.
Edited by jamieboy on Monday 12th November 09:17
I'm not a V6 expert, having only ever owned the 4-pots.
jamieboy said:
More likely just the smaller capacity engine revs more freely - that's certainly my memory of it. I also think it sounded better, but again it's hard to be sure without driving them back-to-back.
That's pretty much what I've heard previously. The 3 litre 75 engine into a GTV still seems like a fairly common swap though.75_Steve said:
Chris71 said:
Are they fairly similar mechanically then? I presume the saloon is fractionally heavier, but performance and handling are fairly comparable?
Yes, the 75 is heavier, I've not driven a GTV for years, so have forgotten what the comfort in them was like. Even then, it was only a short test drive.You can't really compare performance, 'cos the phase II 75s (the only ones worth looking at) have more power than the equivalent GTV.
eg. 2lt GTV was non-TSpark and had around 130bhp whereas the 2lt 75 was TSpark with 150bhp.
Mechanically, almost everything is swappable - they're essentially the same car as the Alfetta saloons at the end of the day. GTVs are a bit sharper as they came with uprated torsion bars as standard and thicker sway bars. But you can easily get hold of uprated items for the 75, or use a lot of GTV bits to sharpen up a 75.
Mine rolls like you'd expect a car designed in the 70s to roll.... but it's huge fun on the track and attracts a lot of attention and positive comments. Much as I love the GTV shape, the 75 is a more practical proposition to own, especially if you're going to drive it regularly. Our 75 was a daily driver for 2 years before it became a track toy.
Here's some examples of roll....
I love it so much, it has been officially designated a long-term 'keeper' in the household. We can't think of any reason why we'd ever sell it.
Hi there, I'm new here (or more like, I haven't posted in ages)
I missed my 75 3.0 so much that I bought another in 2004, 8 years after I sold my old one! I've driven and owned many cars, but this one is really for keeps.
The car's good points aren't immediately obvious, you actually have to own one before the true benefits really sink in.
The 75 is one of those cars that are practical enough but have still retained all the rawness of a sports car. The V6 is one of the best sounding engines ever to grace a medium priced car. The car's superbly adjustable on the throttle (which itself is as precise as a scalpel) and the LSD makes it a true hooligan's car if you feel like it. The steering is a bit low geared, but it's feel and weight are beautiful. The gearbox is rather slow, but has a nice mechanical feel to it. The roadholding isn't as good as modern cars, allowing you to have fun at reasonable speeds. If you like your cars to be tactile, sporting and to give you a challenge while not fearing of loosing your license everyday, then this car is part of that rare and extinct breed. Nothing like this exists anymore... (please give me an example if you know of any)
Compared to a GTV6, it's of course more powerfull, but I also prefer the sound the 3.0 makes over the 2.5. In the GTV, at low revs, the 2.5 is more musical and louder than the 75's 3.0. In the 75, you can drive at a relaxed gate and the car won't tire you. But pass 3-3500 rpm and the 3.0's howl becomes harder and more ferocious than the 2.5. With the longer gearing of the 75, it seemingly just never ends and never fails to make the hair of my back stand up... Both engines sound glorious anyway.
Also, 75's (especially post '89) are pretty well rustproofed. They have an "isostatic" gear linkage which give the gearchange a much better feel. And are generally better developped than the GTV6.
I like GTV6s, but would never have one over a 75 V6.
Between 75s, the V6 is a bit more nose heavy than the perfectly balanced 2.0 Twin Spark, but when you drive a TS after a 3.0, you kind of go... where has the engine gone (and the TS engine is already a gem).
I missed my 75 3.0 so much that I bought another in 2004, 8 years after I sold my old one! I've driven and owned many cars, but this one is really for keeps.
The car's good points aren't immediately obvious, you actually have to own one before the true benefits really sink in.
The 75 is one of those cars that are practical enough but have still retained all the rawness of a sports car. The V6 is one of the best sounding engines ever to grace a medium priced car. The car's superbly adjustable on the throttle (which itself is as precise as a scalpel) and the LSD makes it a true hooligan's car if you feel like it. The steering is a bit low geared, but it's feel and weight are beautiful. The gearbox is rather slow, but has a nice mechanical feel to it. The roadholding isn't as good as modern cars, allowing you to have fun at reasonable speeds. If you like your cars to be tactile, sporting and to give you a challenge while not fearing of loosing your license everyday, then this car is part of that rare and extinct breed. Nothing like this exists anymore... (please give me an example if you know of any)
Compared to a GTV6, it's of course more powerfull, but I also prefer the sound the 3.0 makes over the 2.5. In the GTV, at low revs, the 2.5 is more musical and louder than the 75's 3.0. In the 75, you can drive at a relaxed gate and the car won't tire you. But pass 3-3500 rpm and the 3.0's howl becomes harder and more ferocious than the 2.5. With the longer gearing of the 75, it seemingly just never ends and never fails to make the hair of my back stand up... Both engines sound glorious anyway.
Also, 75's (especially post '89) are pretty well rustproofed. They have an "isostatic" gear linkage which give the gearchange a much better feel. And are generally better developped than the GTV6.
I like GTV6s, but would never have one over a 75 V6.
Between 75s, the V6 is a bit more nose heavy than the perfectly balanced 2.0 Twin Spark, but when you drive a TS after a 3.0, you kind of go... where has the engine gone (and the TS engine is already a gem).
Edited by Real driver on Monday 26th November 23:18
Real driver said:
Hi there, I'm new here (or more like, I haven't posted in ages)
I missed my 75 3.0 so much that I bought another in 2004, 8 years after I sold my old one! I've driven and owned many cars, but this one is really for keeps.
The car's good points aren't immediately obvious, you actually have to own one before the true benefits really sink in.
The 75 is one of those cars that are practical enough but have still retained all the rawness of a sports car. The V6 is one of the best sounding engines ever to grace a medium priced car. It's superbly adjustable on the throttle (which itself is as precise as a scalpel) and the LSD makes it a true hooligan's car if you feel like it. The steering is a bit low geared, but it's feel and weight are beautiful. The gearbox is rather slow, but has a nice mechanical feel to it. The roadholding isn't as good as modern cars, allowing you to have fun at reasonable speeds. If you like your cars to be tactile, sporting and to give you a challenge while not fearing of loosing your license everyday, then this car is part of that rare and extinct breed. Nothing like this exists anymore... (please give me an example if you know of any)
Compared to a GTV6, it's of course more powerfull, but I also prefer the sound the 3.0 makes over the 2.5. In the GTV, at low revs, the 2.5 is more musical and louder than the 75's 3.0. In the 75, you can drive at a relaxed gate and the car won't tire you. But pass 3-3500 rpm and the 3.0's howl becomes harder and more ferocious than the 2.5. With the longer gearing of the 75, it seemingly just never ends and never fails to make the hair of my back stand up... Both engines sound glorious anyway.
Also, 75's (especially post '89) are pretty well rustproofed. They have an "isostatic" gear linkage which give the gearchange a much better feel. And are generally better developped than the GTV6.
I like GTV6s, but would never have one over a 75 V6.
Between 75s, the V6 is a bit more nose heavy than the perfectly balanced 2.0 Twin Spark, but when you drive a TS after a 3.0, you kind of go... where has the engine gone (and the TS engine is already a gem).
Hi. Any pictures?I missed my 75 3.0 so much that I bought another in 2004, 8 years after I sold my old one! I've driven and owned many cars, but this one is really for keeps.
The car's good points aren't immediately obvious, you actually have to own one before the true benefits really sink in.
The 75 is one of those cars that are practical enough but have still retained all the rawness of a sports car. The V6 is one of the best sounding engines ever to grace a medium priced car. It's superbly adjustable on the throttle (which itself is as precise as a scalpel) and the LSD makes it a true hooligan's car if you feel like it. The steering is a bit low geared, but it's feel and weight are beautiful. The gearbox is rather slow, but has a nice mechanical feel to it. The roadholding isn't as good as modern cars, allowing you to have fun at reasonable speeds. If you like your cars to be tactile, sporting and to give you a challenge while not fearing of loosing your license everyday, then this car is part of that rare and extinct breed. Nothing like this exists anymore... (please give me an example if you know of any)
Compared to a GTV6, it's of course more powerfull, but I also prefer the sound the 3.0 makes over the 2.5. In the GTV, at low revs, the 2.5 is more musical and louder than the 75's 3.0. In the 75, you can drive at a relaxed gate and the car won't tire you. But pass 3-3500 rpm and the 3.0's howl becomes harder and more ferocious than the 2.5. With the longer gearing of the 75, it seemingly just never ends and never fails to make the hair of my back stand up... Both engines sound glorious anyway.
Also, 75's (especially post '89) are pretty well rustproofed. They have an "isostatic" gear linkage which give the gearchange a much better feel. And are generally better developped than the GTV6.
I like GTV6s, but would never have one over a 75 V6.
Between 75s, the V6 is a bit more nose heavy than the perfectly balanced 2.0 Twin Spark, but when you drive a TS after a 3.0, you kind of go... where has the engine gone (and the TS engine is already a gem).
Jeez. What a post! Thanks dude.
Just sold my current car, so might keep half an eye out for something like a 75. We've established it's a good car and one that resists tin worm better than many of its contemporaries, but I still have slight reservations about attempting 15k+ a year of commuting in an old car. Still - I have a cunning plan - my girlfriend is finally taking her driving test next month (she's 25!) so maybe I can offload my daily driver onto her if she passes and then pinch it back for any particularly harsh journeys and use the Alfa the rest of the time. Hmmm, "take the Alfa" - has kind of a nice ring to it.
Just sold my current car, so might keep half an eye out for something like a 75. We've established it's a good car and one that resists tin worm better than many of its contemporaries, but I still have slight reservations about attempting 15k+ a year of commuting in an old car. Still - I have a cunning plan - my girlfriend is finally taking her driving test next month (she's 25!) so maybe I can offload my daily driver onto her if she passes and then pinch it back for any particularly harsh journeys and use the Alfa the rest of the time. Hmmm, "take the Alfa" - has kind of a nice ring to it.
Mine was low mileage (30k miles) and cost me about 4'500£ in '04 (I'm on the continent). It was a private buy and was as near as new as it could get, a real timewarp. It's cost to run just about what it would have cost me if it was a 5 years old car. And now that they're becoming rare, I'm really happy to have paid the price for a really nice example.
So, do buy the best you can get. Mileage isn't that important, but how and by whom they have been taken care of is. Well maintained by an Alfa specialist, these cars are pretty reliable (although they aren't Golf IIs). Some of the engineering is very Alfa specific.
By the way, my car is LHD, I've never sat in a RHD one, but english mags never seemed to like the driving position...
So, do buy the best you can get. Mileage isn't that important, but how and by whom they have been taken care of is. Well maintained by an Alfa specialist, these cars are pretty reliable (although they aren't Golf IIs). Some of the engineering is very Alfa specific.
By the way, my car is LHD, I've never sat in a RHD one, but english mags never seemed to like the driving position...
Yes, I've heard about the Italian 'short legs, long arms' position.
Difficult to gauge the condition of cars you see advertised without investigating further (and I'm not really in a position to do that just yet...) but cars like this seem to be in half decent condition for under £2k:
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/269046.htm
So it's nearly as practical as something like an e36 BMW 328, should be pretty much as reliable barring electricle niggles (I'm going to live to regret saying that aren't I?) and has a whole lot more character.
Difficult to gauge the condition of cars you see advertised without investigating further (and I'm not really in a position to do that just yet...) but cars like this seem to be in half decent condition for under £2k:
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/269046.htm
So it's nearly as practical as something like an e36 BMW 328, should be pretty much as reliable barring electricle niggles (I'm going to live to regret saying that aren't I?) and has a whole lot more character.
Chris - keep an eye on http://gtvince.com/_wsn/page2.html and http://www.velocesport.com/mainsales.htm for 75s coming up for sale.
Gassing Station | Alfa Romeo, Fiat & Lancia | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff