Alfa Romeo Forum banner

21 - 32 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
471 Posts
I think they are underpowered (by modern standards), lacking in low rev torque, fragile and thirsty.
Underpowered by modern standards? Not really, 150bhp from a normally aspirated 2.0 litre is still a reasonable benchmark. The point is that Alfa got there well ahead of the pack (with Honda). Most manufacturers have realised that 150bhp is the practical maximum for a mass produced 2.0L engine that has every day useability. Most have had to turn to turbos to take the step up to 200bhp (Alfa included and again Honda excepted). Finally in terms of BHP per litre the twinny is identical to the 3.0V6 if I am not mistaken.

Lacking in low rev torque - no point in denying it and kicking it down a gear smoothly needs some degree of skill as the clutch is so light, but you either delight in this aspect or you don't. Any half decent diesel these days will nail a V6 on torque though, so V6 owners should n't be too smug about this one.

Fragile - relatively yes, its not that they don't thrive on hard driving its just that owners don't warm them up or maintain them properly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,881 Posts
GTA is a fair bit heavier in the stats, but partly cause everything that is an optional extra on a normal 156 is standard on the GTA, so gets weighed with the car. Plus the GTA leathers are considerably heavier than normal seats.

You can tell the difference in the weight of the front end from the JTD to the V6 I reckon, the V6 feels nimbler. Sometimes the JTD 10v with a remap is more powerful than a 2.5, looking forward to getting mine done. I still don't know if it would stick with a 2.5 V6 in a drag race cause of the gearing, but the JTD would feel quicker in day to day driving, even a well running non-remapped one like mine feels very quick.
It's probably all the turbo parafanailure at the front of the jtd that makes it feel a bit front heavy .. In a drag race tough I'd imagine the v6 would be much better in the lower gears (1st gear in the jtd is only useful for ploughing;)), but once in 3rd the jtd would really do it's stuff :thumbs:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
45,008 Posts
I'd love to have a drive of your car actually, before I get mine mapped, just to see how quick it is.. I'm tempted to do the intercooler first as well :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,881 Posts
I'd love to have a drive of your car actually, before I get mine mapped, just to see how quick it is.. I'm tempted to do the intercooler first as well :D

Well I better get myself to the next tunnel run then :thumbs: ... alternatively I'm probably going to be up at Hemel Hempstead (for work) soonish so could pop up and give you a go
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Plus the GTA leathers are considerably heavier than normal seats.
Would ya go way there not at all. I have had 3 sets of seats in my 156 from standard cloth, to the leather with armrest all with airbags and now have a full GTA leather interior and there isn't much in different about 2kg per front seat due to the heating element and the electric motor nothing major.

There is a lad that has done this conversion but he had a crashed V6 from behind to get all the parts out of, the fuel tanks are different, the whole wiring loom had to changed he had to take the dash out etc said it was a big job to do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37,147 Posts
I think it will depend on the year of the 156..

Early 156's have alloy framed seats. later ones have steel frames which in theory will be heavier.

I know that the seat I took out of my 156 (with the steel frames) were heavy. And they didn't have airbags in them
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
761 Posts
Underpowered by modern standards? Not really, 150bhp from a normally aspirated 2.0 litre is still a reasonable benchmark. The point is that Alfa got there well ahead of the pack (with Honda).
Ahem.

Peugeot 405 Mi16/Citroen BX Gti 16v - 160bhp from a 1.9 16v ;) back in 1988/89.

Sorry, really must stop spreading my old Pug love around these parts :D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
45,008 Posts
Would ya go way there not at all. I have had 3 sets of seats in my 156 from standard cloth, to the leather with armrest all with airbags and now have a full GTA leather interior and there isn't much in different about 2kg per front seat due to the heating element and the electric motor nothing major.
Never weighed them but they feel a lot heavier when lifting and carrying them about, which I've done a fair bit in the last year & a half. Standard seats I can carry all day, GTA seats require effort.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,994 Posts
...Finally in terms of BHP per litre the twinny is identical to the 3.0V6 if I am not mistaken.
BHP/L
If you are talking about the 155bhp 2.0TS:
More than a 3.0V6
about the same as a 3.2V6.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
471 Posts
Ahem.

Peugeot 405 Mi16/Citroen BX Gti 16v - 160bhp from a 1.9 16v ;) back in 1988/89.

Sorry, really must stop spreading my old Pug love around these parts :D
Good call, but just to regain a few pedant points, the Twinny actually debuted in 1987 - and at that time had only 8 valves to generate its 148bhp.

All the same, Pug did some great cars in the late 80's, I remember owning a Sud Sprint at the time and a 205Gti 1.9 was a rocket ship by comparison.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,994 Posts
Good call, but just to regain a few pedant points, the Twinny actually debuted in 1987 - and at that time had only 8 valves to generate its 148bhp.
That was a COMPLETELY different engine though.
No relation at all to the 16v TS.
 
21 - 32 of 32 Posts
Top