ALFAGTV6.COM

Giulietta24vTT · Post by **Giulietta24vTT** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:38 am

Yes , and believe it or not today I'd go with a 3.7 root ,(Stand alone management and throttle bodies of course) plus a front mounted gearbox, probably the Getrag item.
The V6+turbo\SC combo on the Alfa engines is mean and brutal ,I recall the 12v with 8:1 pistons and a single turbo tearng 3.0 boxes to peaces at 12psi 2nd gear,plus 3 times broken CV joints bells.
So many issues to take care of to get the power to the wheels and shiting will still be a bitch to handle with the AR transaxle.

Also good point about the tires Greg, most of my failures occured with semi slicks and very wide tires , I now switched to high performance lower profile tires and these lose traction easier and release the stresses.

bmacf · Post by **bmacf** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 12:45 pm

Greg, I looked at a Google-cached version of your old website and have a few questions.

- What boost levels are you generating with the MT62 and the MT90? I've got a Milano 3.0 and want a good boost in torque, I just don't want my transaxle to explode. This is a street car with an occasional driving school event.
- On oldebottles.com it sais you were working out a solution for the Milano pulley. Have you figured that out?
- Do you know anybody who has installed your SC on a Milano with an intercooler?

Thanks,
Bill in Maryland

Greg Gordon · Post by **Greg Gordon** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:09 pm

Hi Bill,
My old site will be back soon at www.hiperformancestore.com with a few new tech articles (Motronic, EZL ignition and some others)
The Milano pulley issue is solved with a press on pulley. It's kind of a pain because the exact dimensions need vary from one car to the next.
Nobody has installed it with an intercooler. It would be fairly easy though.
Boost levels? I have not tried max boost yet, but with the MP62 I would expect a max of about 9 psi on a 3.0 and around 12 psi on the 2.5. These numbers are up from my original estimates of 7 and 9 due to great improvements in the porting. The MP 90 could put out A LOT more, but how would I use it without breaking stuff?

bmacf · Post by **bmacf** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:17 pm

Greg, you anticipated where I was going with that. On a 3.0 I figured 10 psi would deliver about 300HP (dunno about the torque). 300HP appears to be the breaking point of the transaxle, and unless I plan to glue a big magnet to my rear bumper to pick up all the broken transaxle pieces, I figured I need to stay below 300HP to the rear wheels. 9psi sounds good, especially if an intercooler were in the circuit (which might add what, 5%-15%?). So it sounds like the smaller MT is about right unless I plan to weld a gertrag to a chevy rearend (my attempt at humor).

Happy holidays,
Bill in Maryland

Greg Gordon · Post by **Greg Gordon** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:36 pm

Bill, I think 9 psi would be plenty. I am a little worried about the driveline with the current 228 rwhp setup in SuperVerde running 7+psi (by the way it's doing fine on Californa's 91 octane fuel with this setup).
The MP62 is ideal for a street Alfa V6 that stays within or near the stock RPM limits because it can deliver all the boost the transaxle can handle and it does it more effiecently then the MP90.

zambon · Post by **zambon** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 6:57 pm

Correct me if I am off base here, but I think Superverde will be extra vulnerable to pinnion failure due to its tall final drive ratio.
To use the analogy of a road bicycle, the drivetrain wears more quickly and has a greater rate of failure if the rider tends to lug tall gears. However, if the rider tends to quickly spin the crank at a high cadence, the drive train will last an extremely long time. If a rider with great brute strength is considered, I would immagine that a Jan Ulrich type would wear out his drive train in less miles than a lighter quicker high cadence pedaler.
The verde box is a Jan Ulrich lugger. The teeth of the ring and pinnion should be under more stress than those in a TS or Platinum box.
Like slick tires, tall final drive ratios should result in greater mechanical stress in the drivetrain.

Are these assumptions correct?

junglejustice · Post by **junglejustice** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 9:24 pm

With the twin turbos - what the do tend to do is just pop the covers off... Those side shafts just push the bolts out of the threads - you have to build a rack/frame/box around it to support it!

Giulietta24vTT · Post by **Giulietta24vTT** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 12:11 am

junglejustice wrote:With the twin turbos - what the do tend to do is just pop the covers off... Those side shafts just push the bolts out of the threads - you have to build a rack/frame/box around it to support it!

Sorry John ,
I didn't really understand your advice

Greg Gordon · Post by **Greg Gordon** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:56 am

Hi Zambon,
I follow your thinking. However SuperVerde must use the 3.55 box because it´s intended mission includes a lot of long distance driving. My dad is pretty carefull with the gearbox. I don´t think we are going to bump the power up on it. I am working on a new killer motor for my car instead.
We have decided that SuperVerde´s current level of power is about right for it´s inteded purpose.

zambon · Post by **zambon** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:29 am

Greg,
I understand that for superverde's intended purpose the 3.55 is the ticket. Do you know what kind of fuel economy your father has been getting on his highway trips?
Should still be quite good with Verde gearing, but with so much extra power and that bump in displacement???

Greg Gordon · Post by **Greg Gordon** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 4:42 pm

Hi Zambon,
¿You want to change my horsepower topic to one about fuel economy? The superchager itself causes almost no loss of fuel economy however the big injectors do if you are using LJet unless it´s heavily modified which ours is not. The result is about 23 mpg at 75 mph. Not good, but not that bad, still better them my stock BMW 535i. I think some serious injection mods, or programable efi would get it up near 27 to 28 under those conditions.