ALFAGTV6.COM

junglejustice · Post by **junglejustice** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:27 am

So, after seeing 375 horsepower (from 301.5 ATW - if you believe a 20% parasitic drive-line loss) and 440 Newton Meter torque, we decided to see where we are on weight on this thing at this stage...

Out comes the corner scales;

2423 pounds total at this point includes the stock tank half full, the stock rear bumper (but NO front bumper), it includes the dash, the stock hood and trunk-lid, the stock driver seat, 17x7” Team Dynamics Pro Race one wheels w/215/40/17 street tires and no carbon fiber/fiberglass body parts yet....

Also no roll-cage (welder estimates 100 pounds...)

Looking at this, me thinks that with the interior final trim and roll-cage added, but after the carbon body pieces, we end up right below 2400…

[/u]

Hamishm00 · Post by **Hamishm00** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 7:31 am

junglejustice wrote:So, after seeing 375 horsepower (from 301.5 ATW - if you believe a 20% parasitic drive-line loss) and 440 Newton Meter torque, we decided to see where we are on weight on this thing at this stage...

Out comes the corner scales;

2423 pounds total at this point includes the stock tank half full, the stock rear bumper (but NO front bumper), it includes the dash, the stock hood and trunk-lid, the stock driver seat, 17x7” Team Dynamics Pro Race one wheels w/215/40/17 street tires and no carbon fiber/fiberglass body parts yet....

Also no roll-cage (welder estimates 100 pounds...)

Looking at this, me thinks that with the interior final trim and roll-cage added, but after the carbon body pieces, we end up right below 2400…

[/u]

370 bhp and 440 nm is amazing, when you consider the fact that Autodelta the 3.75l v6 for the 147GTA has only been reported at 315bhp (without the ferrari throttle bodies) and apparently they've managed to get it up to 328bhp and 352 newton meters.

What's your secret here?

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 8:57 am

You mean the UK company calling themself Autodelta? The company with no attachment to AR whatsoever?
Probably not the same power because they need total reliability and ability to pass smog checks and so on.

junglejustice · Post by **junglejustice** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:27 pm

How much will cats rob rom 375 horses? And reliability? Come on...

Dawie is doing this on 10.7:1 compression! We ran it on pump gas!

Mats · Post by **Mats** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 pm

It's one thing to have cats and a totally different thing to pass emission demands. What kind of HC/CO does your engine have during a the std driving cycle?
Or haven't you thought about that?

Hamishm00 · Post by **Hamishm00** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 10:05 pm

Reliability?

JJ's motor is pretty much a modded street motor in its characteristics (just the motor that is) - apart from the fancy throttle bodies, but that shouldn't make anything explode or anything.

Catalytic converters traditionally rob 5% from the top end. Or am i talking crap here?

Post by **Zamani** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 11:11 pm

Actually, do we even know that Autodelta UK's cars have emission certifications etc?

Hamishm00 · Post by **Hamishm00** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 11:33 pm

Zamani wrote:Actually, do we even know that Autodelta UK's cars have emission certifications etc?

Surely they would - they have to pass the MOT every year right?

Hamishm00 · Post by **Hamishm00** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 11:34 pm

Mats wrote:You mean the UK company calling themself Autodelta? The company with no attachment to AR whatsoever?

Yes, that one.

Hamishm00 · Post by **Hamishm00** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 11:34 pm

Mats wrote:You mean the UK company calling themself Autodelta? The company with no attachment to AR whatsoever?

Yes, that one.

Post by **Zamani** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:08 am

Not true, MoT test has nothing to do with actual certification.

My car passes the biennial SMOG test but it doesn't mean the car is certified by the State Air Resource Board. To earn certification you have to do more than just pass a single test. Look how Callaway had to earn certification for the GTV6 TT, they had to send in a car to go through some rigorous tests.

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:37 am

Now we're veeery far from the topic again and this has nothing to do with JJ's chassis weight (nor his engines).

Anyway, just to clear thing up, I need to say that what Z'man says is true for most European countries as well.

Passing the annual inspection is really easy. However, the homologation test, which a company has to do to get a "sales certificate" (like TÜV), is much more difficult.

Hamishm00 · Post by **Hamishm00** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 2:57 am

Micke wrote:Now we're veeery far from the topic again and this has nothing to do with JJ's chassis weight (nor his engines).

Not really - we're wondering how JJ is churning out 20% more power and torque from what you normally see from a 3.7l 24v 156 engine.

We want to know the secret!!!

And it's been suggested it has something to do with the restrictions imposed by regulatory authorities / catalytic converters or the fact that the motor may just be unrealiably powerful.

Hamishm00 · Post by **Hamishm00** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 4:40 am

Micke · Post by **Micke** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 4:50 am

YES, really. The topic being 3.7 Milano chassis weight!

I hope JJ doesn't mind continuing on the already hijacked subject.

First reason to pull this hp (which I still regard really good) is that the estimate for wheel vs crank hp is far from what I measured.
For 5-6 transaxles I always got a driveline loss of about 13%. This would yield 347 hp at the crank and 405 Nm. This torque figure is more reasonable and still respectful.

Any exhaust restriction chunks power. In a 150 hp engine the cat probably doesn't do much harm but if 400 ponies have to breath through the same cat it will be restrictive for sure. How many hp I don't know.

Jim can correct me on this one but I think the power is in the range what the flowbench suggests.

ALFAGTV6.COM

3.7 Milano Chassis Weight;

Re: 3.7 Milano Chassis Weight;