[abecketts]

Forgive my lack of knowledge but is a 166 3.2 basically the equivalent of a GTA in std form power and drive train wise? I would guess the suspension might be a little bit softer.

Thanks

 

[GJR68]

Alfa claimed GTA's had extra 10BHP (250) but in reality the 147 GTA, 156GTA, GTV 3.2 and GT 3.2 and 166 3.2 are all the same engines with same output.(allegedly) Very different cars in every other way though. 166 is a big lazy saloon with a bit of a sports bias but is definitely no track day star. The GTA is sports car so suspension, gear ratio's etc all different.

 

[abecketts]

Appreciated, thanks.

 

[mick164]

..the old 166 isn't the worst thing you could fling around a track by any means

 

[abecketts]

..the old 166 isn't the worst thing you could fling around a track by any means

I hope to try at Castle Combe this September

 

[lizard]

With some upgrades (solid flywheel conversion, Bilstein B6/B8 shocks, CF2 exhaust manifolds, braided brake hoses, sport brake pads, and of course Quaife diff) you can make 166 "sharper" to drive.

 

[goremohekan]

I have a 156 GTA and a 3.0 166. I also had a 3.0 GTV before. The GTV is more like the GTA (I.E sports car).

I believe the 3.2 166 is like the 3.0 166 with a bit more grunt....

My 3.0 166 has solid flywheel/gta clutch/quaife diff, and also eibach sports springs and koni fsd shocks (along with suspension overhaul and wheel re-alignment and engine re-map).

These upgrades I have found do improve the 166 but they do not make it into a sports car.....however, if push came to shove I'd keep the 166 over the GTA for its all round combination/compromise...! However, having said that, the GTA is a heck of a car....it amazes me that anyone would want to drive round on public roads with anything more than 250 bhp.....these 500bhp saloons with all their techno wizardry....when do you get to use that power? The GTA has to be kept on a leash 90% of the time.....the 166 is a happy compromise for public roads....and as **** said still needs a track to safely explore its full potential.

 

[David C]

I hope to try at Castle Combe this September

The softer suspension may help with the bumpy track at Combe.
(it is VERY bumpy...)

 

[mick164]

..the brembo brakes on the V6s are pretty decent once they're fresh. I'm sure the original suspension setup was fine as well, but the 166 is old enough now that any cars still on their first set of shocks may roll a bit alright. Setups like the eibach/fsd combo work really well, and personally i think sitting down that little bit really helps the 166 use the complex suspension to best effect.

They're not a car you'd buy specifically as a track car by any means, but if you have one and you get the chance to bring it out on track you'll have a good time. They're calm and progressive, the steering is direct, the engine is gorgeous.. they don't dance at the limit like a 164, and they're not as raw and focused as a GTA, but they're also a really nice place to be on the journey home

 

[David C]

Don't take any risks at Castle Combe though... Limited runoff before the tyre wall and no gravel traps at all...

 

[abecketts]

Don't take any risks at Castle Combe though... Limited runoff before the tyre wall and no gravel traps at all...

dont worry I won't, it's more the I did it that matters than the speed I did. Next month I have an audi r8 driving experience at thruxton thanks to my kids so i can go a bit faster.....