Alpha V6 engines.
Discussion
Hello, I know nothing of the above, but I'd like to learn!
Any Alfaholics out there that can tell me the pro's and cons of the 2.4, 3.0 and 3.2 V6's? Also the 3.0 12 and 24 valve engines?
Are there any variants I've missed?
Is any particular engine better than the other?
I'm thinking Stratos replica.
TIA
Mick.
Any Alfaholics out there that can tell me the pro's and cons of the 2.4, 3.0 and 3.2 V6's? Also the 3.0 12 and 24 valve engines?
Are there any variants I've missed?
Is any particular engine better than the other?
I'm thinking Stratos replica.
TIA
Mick.
Edited by mickrick on Saturday 9th April 07:40
Not mine, but one of the guys in the forum just had his 3.2 GTA engine mapped at Emerald.
(Yes, I know the usual arguments about power figures from rollers...but I've been using them for years, and am convinced that the figures they quote are pretty close to actual. And in their defence, they would be the first to say don't rely on them to be absolutely accurate!)
But, anyhoo, stock 3.2 apart from exhaust and replacing the DBW throttle with a mechanical TB off a 164, result was 282bhp/246ftlb
My supercharged 12V made 256/261 on 7psi (on the same rollers with the same operator). Found some more boost recently so going back for mapping again soon....but with figures like that 3.2, frankly, I wish I'd gone for one of those rather than all the grief & expense I've had with the SC setup.
Avoid the early engines - 12V parts hard to find, early and mid 24V motors had a very ppor cambelt wrap on the rear bank exhaust cam.
156, 166, late GTA or GT or GTV engines are the ones to go for. Another bonus with those....you can still get the parts. 12V getting tricky now.
(Yes, I know the usual arguments about power figures from rollers...but I've been using them for years, and am convinced that the figures they quote are pretty close to actual. And in their defence, they would be the first to say don't rely on them to be absolutely accurate!)
But, anyhoo, stock 3.2 apart from exhaust and replacing the DBW throttle with a mechanical TB off a 164, result was 282bhp/246ftlb
My supercharged 12V made 256/261 on 7psi (on the same rollers with the same operator). Found some more boost recently so going back for mapping again soon....but with figures like that 3.2, frankly, I wish I'd gone for one of those rather than all the grief & expense I've had with the SC setup.
Avoid the early engines - 12V parts hard to find, early and mid 24V motors had a very ppor cambelt wrap on the rear bank exhaust cam.
156, 166, late GTA or GT or GTV engines are the ones to go for. Another bonus with those....you can still get the parts. 12V getting tricky now.
Good info there. Thanks very much for the replies!
My plan is, when I get close to finishing my current project, to buy something half decent, and drive it for a while. Then use the engine and box when it's needed.
It's a way off yet, but I like to plan ahead. Like a friend of mine always says..."failing to plan, is planning to fail.
My plan is, when I get close to finishing my current project, to buy something half decent, and drive it for a while. Then use the engine and box when it's needed.
It's a way off yet, but I like to plan ahead. Like a friend of mine always says..."failing to plan, is planning to fail.
CorseChris said:
Not mine, but one of the guys in the forum just had his 3.2 GTA engine mapped at Emerald.
(Yes, I know the usual arguments about power figures from rollers...but I've been using them for years, and am convinced that the figures they quote are pretty close to actual. And in their defence, they would be the first to say don't rely on them to be absolutely accurate!)
But, anyhoo, stock 3.2 apart from exhaust and replacing the DBW throttle with a mechanical TB off a 164, result was 282bhp/246ftlb
My supercharged 12V made 256/261 on 7psi (on the same rollers with the same operator). Found some more boost recently so going back for mapping again soon....but with figures like that 3.2, frankly, I wish I'd gone for one of those rather than all the grief & expense I've had with the SC setup.
Avoid the early engines - 12V parts hard to find, early and mid 24V motors had a very ppor cambelt wrap on the rear bank exhaust cam.
156, 166, late GTA or GT or GTV engines are the ones to go for. Another bonus with those....you can still get the parts. 12V getting tricky now.
Pretty much all of this^^^. Plenty of 166 engines about now, though I've got an earlier 24v one with the aformentioned poor cambelt wrap, and various parts now unavailable. (Yes, I know the usual arguments about power figures from rollers...but I've been using them for years, and am convinced that the figures they quote are pretty close to actual. And in their defence, they would be the first to say don't rely on them to be absolutely accurate!)
But, anyhoo, stock 3.2 apart from exhaust and replacing the DBW throttle with a mechanical TB off a 164, result was 282bhp/246ftlb
My supercharged 12V made 256/261 on 7psi (on the same rollers with the same operator). Found some more boost recently so going back for mapping again soon....but with figures like that 3.2, frankly, I wish I'd gone for one of those rather than all the grief & expense I've had with the SC setup.
Avoid the early engines - 12V parts hard to find, early and mid 24V motors had a very ppor cambelt wrap on the rear bank exhaust cam.
156, 166, late GTA or GT or GTV engines are the ones to go for. Another bonus with those....you can still get the parts. 12V getting tricky now.
If you get a 2.5 or 3.0 version, a set of larger (45mm) chromed inlet runners are the usual first and easiest mod, as the standard ones are too small and restrict the engine. The 3.2 have these as standard, though they are rather hard to come by (at least when I was looking a couple of years back).
The main tuner is AHM, their usual mod seems to be throttle bodies first, then new cams - very pricey though. they also do various increases in displacement up to 3.8L
I've gone a different route and gone for a set of cams and bigger valves, but I've no idea how it's going to work out yet
The stratossupersite and alfaowner forums are a good source of info, and there's a link to my build diary in my profile. There seem to be a few more people using them now than there was a couple of years ago, so a bit more information is getting onto the web.
As far as I know the Top Gear car was a very good rally car, well used and enjoyed, privately owned and not a new manufacturers demo car. They specifically wanted an Alitalia car, and that was the only person willing to lend they car to those w***ers. Don't read too much into it, it was a used car and any old car can break. If anyone can build a car and in 10 years guarantee nothing will break I will shake your hand. I have been round Zolder in John Rutter's stratos at a fair lick and it did not spin once.
Furyblade_Lee said:
As far as I know the Top Gear car was a very good rally car, well used and enjoyed, privately owned and not a new manufacturers demo car. They specifically wanted an Alitalia car, and that was the only person willing to lend they car to those w***ers. Don't read too much into it, it was a used car and any old car can break. If anyone can build a car and in 10 years guarantee nothing will break I will shake your hand. I have been round Zolder in John Rutter's stratos at a fair lick and it did not spin once.
I don't read anything into Top Gear, it's staged entertainment.I did think the car was supplied by the kit manufacturer though, and your comments are fair.
As much as I find JC's whitisisms funny, I get the impression he's a journo with no mechanical knowlage or sympathy, and I wouldn't let him near any car of mine!
So whatever I see on the TV, or read, I can make my own mind up.
From what I've seen of the Lister Bell car, (Not in the flesh though) it looks like a very nice thing.
Cheers,
Mick.
That whole TG/Strat copy thing has been done to death.....
...but why not flog a dead horse one more time
The car wasn't from the manufacturers direct, it was a privately owned car, and without getting too much into the details, it wasn't prepared in the most appropriate fashion for track use. Nor was it the best example for such work. Like any car, they can be built and set up for different purposes. That said, it did do many laps on the day, under total control of the Stig, including some impressive and controlled power slides.. They picked the most lairy and 'entertaining' of all the takes for maximum comedy effect.
FWIW, if I was building one now, it would be a Lister Bell, with most likely a box-stock 3.2 GTA engine. In case the screen name isn't obvious, I have a Corse
...but why not flog a dead horse one more time
The car wasn't from the manufacturers direct, it was a privately owned car, and without getting too much into the details, it wasn't prepared in the most appropriate fashion for track use. Nor was it the best example for such work. Like any car, they can be built and set up for different purposes. That said, it did do many laps on the day, under total control of the Stig, including some impressive and controlled power slides.. They picked the most lairy and 'entertaining' of all the takes for maximum comedy effect.
FWIW, if I was building one now, it would be a Lister Bell, with most likely a box-stock 3.2 GTA engine. In case the screen name isn't obvious, I have a Corse
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff