Alfa Romeo Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,220 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Whats the difference between the 3.2 and 3.0 V6. Presumably its bored out with slight increase in torques and horses, but similar otherwise?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,241 Posts
Longer stroke too.
So crank & rods also different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,241 Posts
Can't remember and can't be arsed to look.
The bore may be the same, but the pistons are different anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
just longer stroke - from internet research. Makes sense for most capacity increases, cheaper to add stroke with new pistons and/or rods rather than machine bores. Sometimes can fit new liners, but would need to be pre-engineered of course.

Checked this to confirm the F/L 166 with 3.2 engine was still the Busso unit, not the GM unit. What chance the GM unit would be the same bore?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,943 Posts
Whats the difference between the 3.2 and 3.0 V6. Presumably its bored out with slight increase in torques and horses, but similar otherwise?
Different camshafts ...It has a different camlock kit.

Pomeo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,943 Posts
Isn't it just the inlet camshaft that's different?
don't know badge...just that the kit is different.

If that's the case why not just do like all the software companies do and just do an upgrade...ie the inet locks.

Pomeo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,226 Posts
whats the difference in real terms drivabilty performance etc?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,033 Posts
3.2 has longer stroke and shorter rods, so that the pistons dont hit the heads. Engine block is the same.


3.0 - bore 93.00mm x stroke 72.60mm
3.2 - bore 93.00mm x stroke 78.00mm

3.2 has different inlet cams

All in all 3.2 is a little more torquey engine and powerfull ofcourse.


GM based engine is totaly different: bore × stroke 87.50mm × 88.00mm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
3.2 has longer stroke and shorter rods, so that the pistons dont hit the heads. Engine block is the same.


3.0 - bore 93.00mm x stroke 72.60mm
3.2 - bore 93.00mm x stroke 78.00mm

3.2 has different inlet cams

All in all 3.2 is a little more torquey engine and powerfull ofcourse.


GM based engine is totaly different: bore × stroke 87.50mm × 88.00mm
So Alfa engines should rev higher than GM unit due to being over-square and short stroke. The 3.2 unit is even shorter stroke so could rev even higher that 3.0 as piston speeds will be lower?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,033 Posts
3.0 revs the most :)
3.2 piston speed is bigger and that can be an issue, and also the angle of the rod when the crank is on quarter of rotation is bigger because rod is shorter and the crank has bigger stroke (not good and puts much more stress on components)

Sketch made in paint for understanding:
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Nice picture Alan, thanks. Did not realise 3.2 had different crank, I thought capacity increase was just the shorter conrods giving less stroke, therefore more combustion volume. Guess I was being too simplistic, although is does seems expensive to add new crank for 200 cc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,241 Posts
Nice picture Alan, thanks. Did not realise 3.2 had different crank, I thought capacity increase was just the shorter conrods giving less stroke, therefore more combustion volume. Guess I was being too simplistic, although is does seems expensive to add new crank for 200 cc.
Changing rod length does not change stroke or capacity.
Engine capacity is the swept volume of the piston, not the size of the combustion chamber.

To change from 3.0 to 3.2 would mean new: crank, rods, pistons+liners.
There is no point doing it as an upgrade, going to 3.5 would probably cost less as it still uses the 3.0 crank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
741 Posts
Changing rod length does not change stroke or capacity.
Engine capacity is the swept volume of the piston, not the size of the combustion chamber.

To change from 3.0 to 3.2 would mean new: crank, rods, pistons+liners.
There is no point doing it as an upgrade, going to 3.5 would probably cost less as it still uses the 3.0 crank.
Thanks DavidC
Must re-visit my engine theory, "how stuff works" website perhaps.
If I were in the market, I would look at AH upgrade to 3.7 or 3.8.:wow: with Q2 of course.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,220 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I only asked as am considering a GTV and don't if to go for f/l 3.2 or not ( i'm not keen on the f/l GTV front though)
Just wondered if there was a real difference in the engines performance etc
However in summary 3.2 the crank swept diameter must be longer and con rod shorter to allow the greater stroke over 3.0 if bore is the same.
What is 2.5? Same bore and shoter stroke or different bore/stroke?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,943 Posts
3.0 revs the most :)
3.2 piston speed is bigger and that can be an issue, and also the angle of the rod when the crank is on quarter of rotation is bigger because rod is shorter and the crank has bigger stroke (not good and puts much more stress on components)

Sketch made in paint for understanding:
wow alan ..a flashback to 5th year at high school over 40 years ago.:wow:

Pomeo
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top