Alfa 156 V6 on LPG
Discussion
Has anyone converted the V6 in there Alfa, 156 or otherwise to LPG?
At the moment I have a Volvo S60 D5 which will do 44mpg. Its a very nice car, comfy with an excellent stereo and a great mile muncher. It is a bit boring though and isn't great fun to drive! So I've been looking at all sorts of cars and would love an Alfa V6, but they drink a bit too much for my mileage, ~12k - 16k miles per year.
So I've been considering the viability of buying a pre 2001 V6 (for VED reasons) for around £2k and spending a further £1k on an LPG conversion.
And get this... an Alfa V6 is cheaper to insure than a Volvo diesel!
At the moment I have a Volvo S60 D5 which will do 44mpg. Its a very nice car, comfy with an excellent stereo and a great mile muncher. It is a bit boring though and isn't great fun to drive! So I've been looking at all sorts of cars and would love an Alfa V6, but they drink a bit too much for my mileage, ~12k - 16k miles per year.
So I've been considering the viability of buying a pre 2001 V6 (for VED reasons) for around £2k and spending a further £1k on an LPG conversion.
And get this... an Alfa V6 is cheaper to insure than a Volvo diesel!
£2k should get you a belter, for a pre-2000 model. I paid that for my 48k mile 2001 V6 veloce a couple of years ago. The petrol consumption isn't too bad - my last tank was 29mpg of mixed driving. The £1000 you've set aside for the conversion (although I believe it's more like £1500) would buy a lot of petrol. I do a tank a week, about 18k miles/year and don't find it ruinous. And I'm by no means well off. The car is screwed together well, and apart from being a little small, is all the car I need. Parts are cheap and readily available and you can save a lot of money working on it yourself - I replaced my rear window motors today in an hour and for £35, and I'm distinctly average with spanners. which is irrelevant but I'm proud of myself and thought I'd say so!
I know it hasn't answered your question but I would say that an extra nozzle for the LPG would kind of detract from the effort of the hidden rear handles, lack of aerial, etc.
I know it hasn't answered your question but I would say that an extra nozzle for the LPG would kind of detract from the effort of the hidden rear handles, lack of aerial, etc.
I think it depends on how long you intend to keep the Alfa for, as to whether or not its worth paying out for an LPG conversion of around £1,500??..... You may want to consider a 2.0TS, as I get 390 - 430 miles out of a tank driving a combination of motorway and through town.
The 2.0TS is only marginally slower in terms of 0-62 and top speed, but in the real world these things never really account for anything as you cannot ever realise them. The 2.0TS is also faster through the gears in both 30-50mph and 50-70mph than the V6 and IMO is the better all rounder. That said the V6 does look nice when you pop the bonnet with those chrome inlet pipes and sounds nicer too.
When you factor in Petrol being 7p a litre cheaper than Diesel, the running costs pretty much level out.
Just a thought
The 2.0TS is only marginally slower in terms of 0-62 and top speed, but in the real world these things never really account for anything as you cannot ever realise them. The 2.0TS is also faster through the gears in both 30-50mph and 50-70mph than the V6 and IMO is the better all rounder. That said the V6 does look nice when you pop the bonnet with those chrome inlet pipes and sounds nicer too.
When you factor in Petrol being 7p a litre cheaper than Diesel, the running costs pretty much level out.
Just a thought
PJ3074 said:
The 2.0TS is only marginally slower in terms of 0-62 and top speed, but in the real world these things never really account for anything as you cannot ever realise them. The 2.0TS is also faster through the gears in both 30-50mph and 50-70mph than the V6 and IMO is the better all rounder. That said the V6 does look nice when you pop the bonnet with those chrome inlet pipes and sounds nicer too.
There's something I didn't know. Are you sure about that?YEP I have a PDF car test on the 156 down at Millbrook... not much in it between the V6 and 2.0TS.
Go to the end of this thread for the attachment http://www.alfaowner.com/Forum/alfa-147-156-and-gt...
I have a PDF car test on the 156 down at Millbrook... not much in it between the V6 and 2.0TS.Go to the end of this thread for the attachment http://www.alfaowner.com/Forum/alfa-147-156-and-gt...
As an experience and pleasure to own, shirley the V6 is the one to have?
Also, remember that a car with an LPG kit is normally worth about a grand more than a car without, even when they get to pocket money levels.
That is, as long as the gov. doesn't start upping the tax on LPG.
And you can also remove the LPG kit and fit it to your new car if you wish when you come to sell.
Turbo engines don't like lpg too much fromw hat i've seen.
Also, remember that a car with an LPG kit is normally worth about a grand more than a car without, even when they get to pocket money levels.
That is, as long as the gov. doesn't start upping the tax on LPG.
And you can also remove the LPG kit and fit it to your new car if you wish when you come to sell.
Turbo engines don't like lpg too much fromw hat i've seen.
robsco said:
PJ3074 said:
The 2.0TS is only marginally slower in terms of 0-62 and top speed, but in the real world these things never really account for anything as you cannot ever realise them. The 2.0TS is also faster through the gears in both 30-50mph and 50-70mph than the V6 and IMO is the better all rounder. That said the V6 does look nice when you pop the bonnet with those chrome inlet pipes and sounds nicer too.
There's something I didn't know. Are you sure about that?What would be bizarre would a be a company the size of FIAT & Alfa marketing a more expensive car, with a 25% bigger engine, approx 20% more power & a similar weight, when it was slower than the the model below it...
MarkwG said:
robsco said:
PJ3074 said:
The 2.0TS is only marginally slower in terms of 0-62 and top speed, but in the real world these things never really account for anything as you cannot ever realise them. The 2.0TS is also faster through the gears in both 30-50mph and 50-70mph than the V6 and IMO is the better all rounder. That said the V6 does look nice when you pop the bonnet with those chrome inlet pipes and sounds nicer too.
There's something I didn't know. Are you sure about that?What would be bizarre would a be a company the size of FIAT & Alfa marketing a more expensive car, with a 25% bigger engine, approx 20% more power & a similar weight, when it was slower than the the model below it...
chances are if you run the v6 on lpg,she will eat her headgaskets,due to the fact lpg burns at a higher temp.just was't designed to run on the stuff.if you want a cheaper 156 to run get the 150hp 1.9d,get her mapped{200bhp) if mapped well.don't bother with the 2.4d any fuel costs you save will be totally wiped out with the first fault you run across.
but do consider then 1.9 jtd 16v,once mapped it is pretty shocking how quick they are.celtic tun**g get 212bhp,and 320ib/ft.and 38mpg...think about it.
but do consider then 1.9 jtd 16v,once mapped it is pretty shocking how quick they are.celtic tun**g get 212bhp,and 320ib/ft.and 38mpg...think about it.
renorti said:
chances are if you run the v6 on lpg,she will eat her headgaskets,due to the fact lpg burns at a higher temp.just was't designed to run on the stuff.if you want a cheaper 156 to run get the 150hp 1.9d,get her mapped{200bhp) if mapped well.don't bother with the 2.4d any fuel costs you save will be totally wiped out with the first fault you run across.
but do consider then 1.9 jtd 16v,once mapped it is pretty shocking how quick they are.celtic tun**g get 212bhp,and 320ib/ft.and 38mpg...think about it.
Any fault on ANY of the diesels can be expensive and they are prone to certain thing being problematic - but because it is a diesel and not because it is an Alfa.... belts, wishbones etc are no more than the petrols... The 2.4JTD sounds nice and in standard form pulls like a train... 35-40mpg and sits between the 2.0TS and 2.5 V6 in terms of performance... then you can remap these to 200+bhp safely and they are daft fast and still economical!... Saying that... my next one is going to be a V6 for the noise and power...but do consider then 1.9 jtd 16v,once mapped it is pretty shocking how quick they are.celtic tun**g get 212bhp,and 320ib/ft.and 38mpg...think about it.
16k miles in the V6 at 28mpg will cost £2515 (@£1.31/ltr)
16k miles in the V6 at lower 26mpg (LPG is lower, with slight performance loss too!) will cost £1152 (@ £0.60/ltr)
So it will "almost" pay for itself in the 1st year....
Even on the 12k mileage you state it save about £1200....
Edited by Reedy156 on Friday 6th May 10:51
Just passing on something that I was told by a Bosch service agent/auto electrics specialist re LPG. Apparently on certain engines, the 'dry' LPG gas can cause valve problems as they do not get sufficient lubrication as compared to old fashioned liquid petrol. Also I have heard that cold starting can be difficult on some systems. Of course neither of these issues may affect Alfa V6 engines...!
Gassing Station | Alfa Romeo, Fiat & Lancia | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff