ALFAGTV6.COM

the intake on Greg's spider engine is similar as the intake of the 75's 1.6ie and 1.8ie.

So the SC kit will be a straight bolt on onto a 75 1.6ie, 1.8ie engine and the 2.0ie from the spiders and the rare IE alfetta's sedan / alfa 90.

As I was on a part search for some 1.8ie parts for a fellow alfista (top secret) project
I stumbled over 2 incomplete / half torn down 75 1.8ie engines.
With some work and some minor part searching , I have a complete engine, loom etc...

JimGreek wrote:Greg, in terms of hardware/space utilization, I can see the pictured SC kit and our std 1.8T are very close. In fact, with my air/water IC (modified/enclosed std IC) I can see switching from turbo to SC a very easy swap. Maybe we should think about working on such a pilot project. The 1.8T ducting/throttle will do just fine and the routing is very close. The only other addition would be the std 1.8/2liter exhaust manifolds or -why not- headers.
Jim K.

I tend to think it would fit, although I have no idea if there is a market for the 1.8T. We never had that engine here, and I can't imagine there are many over there, let alone people who would want to swap to a supercharger. This unit is sized for a maximum of about 300hp, although that's a lot!

The Sprintex supercharger is pretty small, you may notice it's so short I managed to fit the throttle onto the back of it. This makes it fairly quiet during normal driving.

The mounting is simple, it connects to the head and the engine's side of the motor mount. It's very strong. It uses a sliding mounting system for belt tensioning. No risk of thrown belts or tensioner issues that way!

Headers are a good idea, I plan to make some.

All that said, I haven't driven the car. Look closely and you will see there is no brake fluid in the reservoir, the master cylinder is shot, and no throttle cable yet.

I have three turbo projects in the way at this moment, a twin turbo Alfa, Mustang SVO, and twin turbo Viper Truck (not my idea).

Greg, there are a lot of 1.8T's in Europe and very many are in the 250-350hp range. I do know for a fact that most are total dogs under ~4 or even 5krpm mostly because of wrong turbo selection, but strangely enough those guys live with them... I say this as I see many of them (even in this small country). Some drove my car and were amazed it was even driveable from idle on up.... Now you know the level of ignorance and bad mechanical planning. If they could drive the same engine with a SC having approximately the same top end power, I believe many would be really interested in a switch! We'd have to work out the cost and work required for this. Keep in mind, my car is one of the very few modded 1.8T's with p/s and a/c so their eventual SC conversion is much less involved.
When my engine goes in this week (?) I'll post a pic of how it looks with the air/water IC and then you can better evaluate the complexity of the switch to SC.
Jim K.

I guess it could work. I designed this kit for the 200-300hp range. At this time I don't have a pulley/belt arrangement for anything more than about 14psi. I have it set up for a 4.5" crankshaft pulley with a 5.0" pulley optional. Any bigger and in the Spider's chassis you start to need to cut things.

I think the GTV6/Milano/Alfetta chassis has enough room so it won't effect pulley diameter. That means I could go with a 6 inch crank pulley. However then it will require an idler pulley to keep the belt clear of the water pump. With a 6" pulley it should be possible to go up to about 20psi. Any more will require an 8 rib pulley, which significantly complicates things, or a bigger supercharger (S335 in this case). How much boost are people running on the Turbo 1.8s over there?

Here are the pulley charts for my kit in its current version. I made a huge amount of new charts for the new version of my supercharging book.

Greg

Most are running ~1.6bar (23.5psi) steady boost with momentary 1.8bar (26.5psi) overboost when shifting etc. Very few people run 1.8bar steady, although they are mapped for that -maybe live through the dyno session but they're scared to run that for any length of time in trackdays. At 1.8bar (26.5psi) they have ~280-290 rwhp.
in my new 1.8T engine (as pictured above) pulley external diameter is 125mm (~5") so I think 6"would be no problem, provided the grooves for water pump and p/s would be smaller, same as current size. If you want to get serious, I can have such a pulley made here. Should it be all aluminum, all steel or mixed construction?
Jim K.

I have seen people running larger versions of this supercharger on V8 32 valve Mustangs at 25psi so I think that's the upper limit.

Regarding the pulley, the Spider's factory crank pulley may be different from the 1.8T. We bolt the supercharger pulley to the factory crank pulley. So when going from 4.5 to 5 or 6, the water pump etc. drive ratios don't change.

We also make a replacement Spider crank pulley, just like OEM but better steel, nickel plated, and with more timing marks. Pulleys are not really a problem for us.

Greg

Ok, the engine has ~100km now. I took it for a good highway run, accelerating hard from ~3400-4600, then coasting, then back again, in 3rd/4th/5th and max 0.6bar (9psi) for the first 40km. No problems at all, runs great. I'm thinking of taking a ~700km trip with the same (boring) routine and that's the end of break-in. Tomorrow morning I'm installing the TD rad+twin fans. The weather is getting real hot so its a prudent move, since I'm taking this car on our vacation. Initial afrs are good and so is the msd map I made for the previous engine. The head was re-torqued after the first heat cycle and all nuts gave by ~10-15*. It was torqued 3 times before starting and all nuts gave a bit every time. According to the gasket makers (Nava) I'll have to re-torque after ~500-700km and that should be it. Here's a pic from yesterday.
Jim K.

nice....

accelerating hard from ~3400-4600, then coasting

that's a nice one in morning traffic, a lot of people would get pissed of
I hope everything works out ok, as I really hate this...a few day before a holiday trip something popping up.

Jim,

I'm surprised you used a foam filter. Those things are one of the worst when it comes to filtration. Imagine how meticulous you were when cleaning the liners, then you use a foam filer....

I think if you can get the paper cone filters, if available locally, it would be much better. Especially if you live in a dusty, dry and hot area.

Otherwise it looks great!

Its a clean foam filter -I don't like it either. I took it off on the dyno, maybe 2-3hp gain. There is nothing else I can fit in that small space. I do have a very good and longer K&N cone filter but no room. One of these days I may rethink component placement.
Took me 9 hours non-stop today, to fit the TD rad in the 1.8T, heavier wiring, big relay, sheet metal cutting... I am tired, but its definitely a necessary job well done.
Jim K.

Alfa 75 TD radiator install:
I thought I'd write a few words about some particulars of this installation/upgrade. In the pics below, you can see what sheet metal has to be removed to fully open the 'window' for the new rad. The bottom pegs fit in the alternate hole (already there as std). In the pic with the old std 1.8T rad, you can see where the sheet metal extends to in std form. The other pics are the 'after' pics. Since the fans draw ~12.5A each, I installed a heavy duty relay (40-50A) and heavier wiring to handle the current. Note that inrush current on start-up can easily go to 35-45A. As yet, I didn't install any fuse, but probably will soon. Battery voltage during idling is ~13.7v and with the fans running it drops to ~12.6. With lights also on, I see ~12.5 (220w total for the lights). All told, not bad!
Driving around town at noon with ~36*C, engine temp played from 74-82*C. That's excellent, compared to the std rad which stayed close to 87-90* (same thermostat, same fan switch). I think I will have to implement some kind of electronic temp control, in order to keep tighter/more precise control -and no I'm not talking about Davies-Craig. There are other ccts to better control the fans, individually or in unison (as they are now).
Jim K.

A project a friend of mine is working on , modified the cylinder head to fit these manifolds . Pretty neat stuff

It's an early 164 TS 1962cc head? It has a a dizzy drive on the rear of the engine, can't be a 75 engine. The later 1995cc 8V TS engine has COP.

What's the manifold?

75evo wrote:It's an early 164 TS 1962cc head? It has a a dizzy drive on the rear of the engine, can't be a 75 engine. The later 1995cc 8V TS engine has COP.

I can't distinguish the 164 origin from this picture, the 75 ts casting also has the mounting position for the dizzy on the bulkhead side of the head. It is only blanked off.

I'm not sure.... but I was always under the impression that most 164 ts are bore 84 [mm] x stroke 88.5 [mm], like the 75 ts. There has been a very short period 84x90 164 ts's, called the 164 ts super.
The 90 [mm] stroke was mainly a 155 8v thing, but please correct me if I'm wrong.