ALFAGTV6.COM

[Plastic Pig]

...Michael, if you are listing, how about you and I collaborate on a "Vendor's Page"/"Vendor Room" where Barry and I (for Dawie) and Chris from Praggia and Domingo for GoTech and others can go and link-in some pics, post basic prices and maybe keep updated ourselves somehow.
...

How about you guys just stop advertising in the forums because, in my opinion, that's what's killing this site at the moment. I come here looking for advice, but when I read the blatant sales pitches, I'm suspicious that the postings are anything but impartial and considered even if they are liberally scattered with "IMHO".

I set up and administered the AROC (UK) forums and one of the first rules there is "no advertising". I have pulled threads where the poster was obviously advertising and the moderators are told to do the same. We have a classifieds section where people can buy and sell: the forum is for members to FREELY offer advice and experience - no strings attached.

(This policy of AROC (UK) extends to rules limiting the number of committee members with a "trade interest" so that the committee's impartiality is maintained.)

I don't want this forum to lose anyone's input (Barry, JJ or anyone else), but if I want advertising I'll start reading all the junk mail that arrives daily or type "take my money I'm an idiot" into Google. Recent events here have actually made me reluctant to discuss the fact that I have a Dawie engine for fear of being seen as part of the marketing effort.

Please have a think about this. The original GTV6.org was a site for enthusiasts. Give it back to them.

[Andrew.b]

Can't agree more......

[joey]

^ well said. I'm trying not to follow the whole saga, and truth be told the old site had its moments, but come to think about it - it too was vendor related...

remember the vendor reviews anyone?


its a shame tho - i used to fondly await any hint of a new product being mentioned in related threads... many times folks like Greg and Zamani have come out mentioning something in passing which was exactly what i was looking for or thinking about.

still, there is enough info out there, and businesses dedicated to alfa performance and upkeep, so if this is the price of civility and a return to semi-intellectual discussions and friendly banter... then well... i can do without this mess.

i have a feeling its driving away some of the old members, they're not posting like they used to, and i can see why.

for anyone who truly thinks their products are of value to the community - i highly suggest you give Mr Greg Gordon a call or email - he's the model of good taste, perhaps he can give all potential vendors a guide on providing a community with much needed advice and useful products without alienating them in the process.

baz, don't go you idiot. why punish us and hang out with the fwd rabble? damn you older guys are all the same - run out on us for the younger more attractive models ! cant you see they have no substance on the inside ? dirty fiats !

ps: say hello to the ladies for me.

[fortom]

Yes well said guys , and i think we owe it to Michael to make an effort to get this forum back to a friendly informative place to hang out. Lets work on other ways to promote and keep a fantastic vehicle on the road. How about trying to get ALFA to recognise what a wonderful car the GTV6 is and helping enthusiasts(a suggestion!) there is enough mention of the 105 series cars .....

Tom

[junglejustice]

We should probably also lay down some rules regarding hijacking of threads (part of the problem....), while we’re at it.

This thread was started with "350 horses in a Milano" NOT "...hey I want to sell you xyz - hand over your money you idiot...." as implied. When Barry posted the runner pics a bit prematurely (Dawie had not setup the ground-rules for them yet) and JimGreek 1-2’ed with the “Hi Barry, what’s the price?” post, we kind of got off track… Look where we ended up!

I asked my brother back home, (who is arguably a much busier guy than I am) to please take the time and make two visits over to Dawie's shop and shoot us some updated shots to post, (for those who had asked for updates and detailed pics of the intakes, gears etc) since my last trip back in Sep/Oct...

This thread started as a technical/informational post - no one had ever seen these intakes - not even the guys in the UK who have been buying from Dawie for 6 years! They're new. (So were the huge new intake runners that I had had contracted with Dawie for development off…) Yes – I pay for the molds, but WE ALL benefit...

On a side-note about these runners; Sperry was not returning phone calls/emails, or shipping product or anything these past 4-5 months. A few of the people who new I was going over asked about runners… I agreed to pay Dawie to develop a mold for me and the minimum first run was 6 sets. I also invested in a 2nd hand set of Sperry runners for comparison after the first run was completed!

Of the first run of 36 pipes, only 6 are headed my way today. Anyone else besides me benefit from this….? The “JJ is the scapegoat/commercial interest is the problem” argument is a bit of a cliché – again, just my opinion. (The “we were all one big happy family until that JJ guy arrived” is also a bit hollow by now.)

It is my “commercial interest” that paid for the development of the 6 individual throttle bodies, those huge custom intakes, as well as the enlarged intake runners for the more modest street cars. Jes’ and my investment brought additional samples of the Praggia brakes State-side for ALL to see, touch feel, and test over here - as well as the first samples of 156-based engines in the US...

It’s a similar situation with the Milano/GTV 6 body-parts for the US… Always a great subject that comes up from time to time with a great deal of interest to develop domestic supply, (usually about 10 “buyers” who say they want a set…) Then when the time comes to actually shell over the dough for the molds and a minimum first run, rigor mortis of the wallet hand sets in. (Jes and I are the only two members in the US who have actually put down money and contracted with a custom body man to develop a US-based Evo-type kit that we would ALL have access to…)

How would the most staunch of my critics like for me/Barry/Greg et al to respond, the next time a member posts a question like “…Hey! These are awesome! How much…?” (Serious question, no jabs please )

[LENZ]

Barry when will your site be active.

[AlfaTipo]

I don't want to keep this going within this topic so I created the Bitch Pit Topic under 'Site Feedback / suggestions'.

Those that want to slug it out go there, let the rest of us (including them) talk shop, get dirty and enjoy the marque here.

[AlfaTipo]

Hey Lenz. Do you have the 24V 2.5?

If so, how does it compare with the 3.0? I'm thinking revability, feel, sound, power band etc. rather than out and out power.

[joey]

alfatipo, you're a nut !

who wouldn't want more bottom end? (and top to go with it)

hey, i'm with you i LOVE and perfer the 2.5 over the 3.0, but the 24v 2.5 really isn't that much stronger... what is it stock vs stock? 120kw vs 140?

big deal. the expense with such a swap seems like overkill when you could spend less sqeezing more outta the original. If you want a 24v, 3.0 or larger is the only worthwhile proposition IMO.

the 2.5 156 is okay, i dunno i didn't like it as much, the modified 2.5 gtv6's sounded better in my opinion, and the 156 is a bit of a dissapointment, inferior to the 2.0 IHMO, but maybe that was due to the H-gate auto contraption?

the GTA 3.2 is another beast entirely. That sounds like pure evil. its bloody great.

[LENZ]

Alfatipo i have the 164 3,0 24V.
The difference between 2.5 and 3.0 is way less for the 24V variants than with the 12V engines.
I love the 24V in my 75 but it shouldn't be used with the 75 3.0 gearbox.
I'm swapping it for a TS gearbox and if thats not enough i might consider a 1.6 box.
The 156 gta is great because of it's 6 speed gearbox ( first gear=<60km/h, my 75 now hits 85km/h in first gear wich is totaly useless).
The 156 2.5 is probaly faster than my 155 2.5 12V but i wouldn't go through all the trouble of changing it for a 24V 2.5.
The 12V is better in every aspect below 3500 rpm but once you pass that point all is in favour for the 24V (with the 3.0 12V box, this hopefully changes with the TS box)
The 156 2.5 is way better than the 2.0 IMHO, but only with the 6 speed. The Q system 4 speed auto should have never been build.
The combination of a 222Nm torque 2.5 witha 4 speed auto is very disapointing.
The 156 24V engine isn't as easy to use in a transaxle as the older 164 24V engines.
However this 164 engine is more difficult to be used in a FWD155, thats why i will be using a 166 3.0 24V for my 155 2.5, but it needs to be with a very short 5 speed or the 6 speed box, or else go for the 3.0 12v.

[joey]

ah, nice post lenz.. i totally forgot to mention that, the 24v is weak at lowish rpm..

note that this wasn't my car, so i never brought it past 3.5-4k rpm, so you of course have a much better overall picture.

yes i drove the q-system, but i don't think its the peak torque + 4sp auto thats the problem. my other car is a 4sp auto with 210nm peak, but it feels much better trundling along. its a 2.4l 4 banger, so its not so much max numbers but the way it makes it, and yes - you hit the nail on the head the 2.5 24v is gutless at this normal driving range.

again, i dunno if its the auto, if it has a problem or if the 2.5 156 weighs too much, but its weak. i'm sure a 6sp would have been much nicer.

the stock sound of the 2.5 156 is very nice too, but like i said - there is a lot of modifications you can do to your gtv6 with less money.

comon lenz, spit it out! worthwhile mod or not? you're right, the 24valver has a higher top end as you'ld expect, but with the money you could easily hit those peak numbers with a nice rebuild. i'm not sure you'ld want to search for more power in the 24v 2.5... thats 4 cams and twice as many valves ! (don't forget alfatipo is in the US - 2.5 24v engines were never sold there AFAIK) how much do you wanna spend for custom headers?

[AlfaTipo]

Joey, thanks for the observation. I do have a reputation for possessing less common sense than many.

My understanding is that the 156 blocks have better belt routing. It would also be the basis for a staged program of improvement.

Spendthrift by nature and often high on Consumer Obessesive Syndrome, even I understand the need to preserve some funds to continue a life of unemployed leisure.

If I were to go for the 2.5 24V I woiuld investigate maybe upping bore but keeping stock stroke (2.8?).

JungleJustice implied that the 2.5 uses smaller heads (or same heads small combustion space?). The larger bore would presumably also require the 3+ heads?

It is really vapourthought right now.

For Sale: I WILL repost in proper area:
I have an extra GTV6 that I should probably sell. Anyone interested? Straight, almost totally rust free (San Francisco most of its life), strong motor, lotz of history, real sloppy gearchange. New O2 and cat. Just passed OR emmisions.

G/box synchos rebuilt and has been known to do 3-2 without a ching but slow easy is better (usually given the damn gearchange). Clutch bites well but comes up a long way. May be original twin plate. I haven't seen any receipts for a new clutch.

Mech. tensioner, bent front discs (I have replacement Brembo's, not got round to fitting them). Needs suspension rebushed.

Braided lines, Ansa rear. I have been driving it and it makes a really good base for a nice car but I would not want to do a track day with it.

Poor interior. Tan leather, real nice bronze (can't remember the exact color) exterior. However, the clearcoat is lifting in many places. Missing air dam. The picture shows the worst part of the car.

eMail for more info and the answer to the most important question, "Why are you selling this Jef"? I've got more photos if anyone is interested. I'll consider offers over $2500 before listing on eBay and Craig's List.

Viewed in Portland, Oregon.

I shall also try the 'proper' place to list.

[LENZ]

The 2.5 auto would have been better of with the 12V unit.
I like the 156 2.5 6speed but the 12V sounds nicer.
The 24V engine (3.0)in a transaxle car is a worthwhile mod, depending if you do the transplant yourself and if you change the gearbox to a shorter version.
I have 4 24V 3.0 engines laying around and they don't cost me more than a late model 3.0 12V/QV engine.
The latest 3.0 24V i bought was from a low milage 166 with bent intake valves for 250 euro's with sensors and intake/exhaust etc.
I'll use the vlaves from one of the other engines and i'll use it for my 155.
My 155 V6 has the later (long version) 5 speed gearbox wich won;t be a good combination with the 24V engine, so i'm preparing the 6 speed gearbox of a 166 2.0 TS to be used with the 24V. I'm sure this will be a perfect combination.
230Bhp standard.
In the 75 i'm sure a 210 Bhp 12V 3.0 would outperform the standard 210 bhp 24v engine,
but it would have cost me more to get my 12V from 188 bhp to 210 bhp.
The custom headers were bought from an alfa enthoustiac from SA.
The 24V 75 engine can easily reach 240 horses and with the right gearbox it absolutly is worthwhile.
It idles much better than the 12V i had and it's very smooth.
The injectionsystem has got a diagnostic possibily and the sound past 3500 is just awesome.

[AlfaTipo]

Real clean, pretty motor Lenz.

Thanks for all the input everyone. I crave a quad cam option.

The comments on gearing are also appreciated.

[LENZ]

Alfatipo, later model 24v engines like in the 156 do have a much better distribution system than the 164 system.
The 164 24V has the old type oil pump drive wich can be used with the transaxle sump.
The 156 uses a chain driven pump wich needs a custom made sump if you take a look at the 3.7 engines.
I don't have a problem with a 164 24V in my75, because in this car the belt is very easy to replace unlike on a FWD alfa.
I hardly use the 75 so i don't expect problems with the belt for the coming years.