Which would you choose and why?
Not trying to evaluate ALL options or power levels. Clearly a 3.0 Busso could be made to have more that 450BHP. Thinking about going to a Twinspark head but the sound of a V6 always calls to me but the weight... oh the weight! hahaha
Re: Which would you choose and why?
3.8 with 400hp NA 
-
Giuliettaevo2
- Verde
- Posts: 790
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2005 11:56 pm
- Location: Netherlands
Re: Which would you choose and why?
Busso turbo for me..
But needs to be 24v for it's revability.
But needs to be 24v for it's revability.
Drive it like you stole it...
Re: Which would you choose and why?
same here busso ... but either 350bhp N/A with throttle bodies and no cats.. oh the noise
or busso without aircon and a charger as its simpler than twin turbos and would easily make 450/500bhp done right
or busso without aircon and a charger as its simpler than twin turbos and would easily make 450/500bhp done right
Re: Which would you choose and why?
Your next poll question should be: and, do you think you're really capable of competitively handling 350-450hp in the track? Come on guys, time to apply for a test drive with an F1 team -the hell with F3 ...toys! 
Jim K.
Jim K.
Re: Which would you choose and why?
Busso. Less turbo lag.
Can we handel it? No we can't but do we like it? Yes we do. drive it like a savage 
Can we handel it? No we can't but do we like it? Yes we do.
drive it like a savage Re: Which would you choose and why?
Sorry Jim K
I thought the worse you can drive the more power you need to cover up your inability as a driver
hence the reason I was going 3.8... maybe i need a rethink lmao
I thought the worse you can drive the more power you need to cover up your inability as a driver
hence the reason I was going 3.8... maybe i need a rethink lmao
Re: Which would you choose and why?
I'm saying we should keep things into perspective. I do admit my cars are faster than I am, so I'm not really looking for more power. This is why I usually say 'I modify an engine for the power level I want, not what I can'. For example, I believe a 75 1.8T with ~300hp and ~320ftlbs (440Nm) is a more than a handful for most people, both on the road and on the track. V6's are thankfully a bit safer on account of the progressive -and much lower- torque characteristics. 
Jim K.
Jim K.
Re: Which would you choose and why?
3.8 requires too many specialists and specialized parts. A good mechanic alone won't do it. He needs to be experienced AND have access to a VERY VERY GOOD machinist. Too many cases of ovalized runners and high oil consumption. Only a few people can build a good one. Adie, Dawie and Ollie come to mind.
For the track I'd go with a 4 cylinder option, for a better balanced car. But for a weekend car, I want a SC/TC V6 to hear the sound bounce off the walls in the tunnel
. Although I would avoid a twin screw SC because that thing will whine you to death and the torque will one day kill your gearbox. A Rotrex will make a 3.0 feel like a proper 3.8, linear.
Maxi,
Make sure you get an equal length pipe (and avoid speedbumps, cause it will hang lower) if you don't already have one. That makes the GTA sound like a GTV6.
For the track I'd go with a 4 cylinder option, for a better balanced car. But for a weekend car, I want a SC/TC V6 to hear the sound bounce off the walls in the tunnel
. Although I would avoid a twin screw SC because that thing will whine you to death and the torque will one day kill your gearbox. A Rotrex will make a 3.0 feel like a proper 3.8, linear.Maxi,
Make sure you get an equal length pipe (and avoid speedbumps, cause it will hang lower) if you don't already have one. That makes the GTA sound like a GTV6.
Re: Which would you choose and why?
Good responses all, remember it say's "road car" in the poll.
The Nord turbo has about 50K turbo miles and while it is still going strong I was offered a 155 TS head for a price I could not refuse so it got me thinking of what to do.
While the V6 sound is incomparable, I think I will stick with the TS for its lighter weight and less complexity. I already have the prepped lower end with a prepared crank and H-beam Carrillos. Steck will massage the head, we will keep the VVT, which when added to the Nord added 60 lb/ft WTQ under 4000 RPM and 20 BHP up top.
That will leave me with the following to sell off:
Steck prepared Nord head with custom cams and VVT intake
tubular exhaust manifold with v-band
Garrett GT3071R turbo and custom 3" oval down pipe
TiAL 38mm external wastegate v-band
Coolant plumbing and overflow tank for turbo
SPICA intake (itb's converted to bosch injectors)
Water to air intercooler and crossover pipe
Electromotive TEC 3R ECU and custom wiring harness
Idle Air Control motor and plumbing
Basically all you need is a bottom end, an exhaust starting from the downpipe and a few hours to get 300 WHP in a Alfetta/GTV6/Milano/75
Know any one interested in a project?
The Nord turbo has about 50K turbo miles and while it is still going strong I was offered a 155 TS head for a price I could not refuse so it got me thinking of what to do.
While the V6 sound is incomparable, I think I will stick with the TS for its lighter weight and less complexity. I already have the prepped lower end with a prepared crank and H-beam Carrillos. Steck will massage the head, we will keep the VVT, which when added to the Nord added 60 lb/ft WTQ under 4000 RPM and 20 BHP up top.
That will leave me with the following to sell off:
Steck prepared Nord head with custom cams and VVT intake
tubular exhaust manifold with v-band
Garrett GT3071R turbo and custom 3" oval down pipe
TiAL 38mm external wastegate v-band
Coolant plumbing and overflow tank for turbo
SPICA intake (itb's converted to bosch injectors)
Water to air intercooler and crossover pipe
Electromotive TEC 3R ECU and custom wiring harness
Idle Air Control motor and plumbing
Basically all you need is a bottom end, an exhaust starting from the downpipe and a few hours to get 300 WHP in a Alfetta/GTV6/Milano/75
Know any one interested in a project?
- Attachments
-
- engine.jpg (50.93 KiB) Viewed 9554 times
Re: Which would you choose and why?
I've asked similar questions in the past.
Obviously a turbo'd 3 litre V6 will give the highest average torque, even if peak HP is kept the same as a 2 litre. If the car's weight is kept within reason, it would be effortlessly fast pretty much everywhere in the rev range.
Effortlessly fast in a straight line, that is.
But packaging and heat could be a real killer!
Lots of metal, at very high temperatures, in a rather small space. Insulation and heat shielding will be a major requirement to keep things inside the engine bay long term durable. It's not normally driving the car that kills stuff that's not protected properly. It's when everything is hot and the car is stopped. No air flow thru the engine bay and the cooking process really begins to set in.
Getting a decent intercooler into the system will be a major challenge. Front mounted air to air intercoolers always look badly compromised on these cars. People don't seam to be able to put in enough effort to make a decent sized core fit, with plumbing that is neat, that works with a decent size radiator (chances are you'll want a bigger, better radiator too).
Engine bay mounted water to air intercooler(s) always look compromised from a packaging perspective. Tho having 2 integrated into the plenum chamber would be a very neat work around. As long as they were effective.
But then there's the weight.........
Quoting a power to weight ratio would be pointless. The car will only be slightly heavier, compared to the power and torque you'd be adding. But where that extra weight is being added, that's where (I believe atleast) a turbo (or supercharger) setup on the V6 is adding weight in all of the wrong areas.
Up high in the engine bay and right at the front of the car.
Both are bad for the already understeering V6 cars.
Yes you could probably brutalise the rear tyres with all of the new found grunt, to bully the car back into some semblance of balance. But that, to me anyways, just seams clumsy.
A turbo V6 would be a lot of fun in some ways, tho. Pure grunt always is and is very adictive.
Definitely the easiest way to smash the transaxle.
Personally, V6 sound aside, I reckon the best engine choice would be a 350hp turbo 4. Either a twin spark or NORD.
Keep the packaging as compact as possible.
Like what Jim has done, integrate a WTA intercooler into the plenum chamber (I understand that Jim's car is a water cooled factory turbo manifold/intercooler), with the smallest, current day technology turbo you can use for your intended power level, using a split pulse manifold and turbine housing.
The smallest amount of plumbing volume in the inlet tract to minimise turbo lag. The smallest turbo you can use for the intended HP for best turbo response and lowest boost threshold (The minimum engine speed the turbo can start doing its job. It's not the same as turbo lag). And a well designed split pulse manifold and turbine housing to help that small turbo do its job as best it can.
Lots of ceramic coatings, insulation and heat shielding. Plus really good ducting to get outside air to the turbo's intake (read about Jim's trouble with this on the 'Best Tuned 75 And GTV6s' Facebook page, if you haven't already).
And run it with a really good, modern programmable system.
It should still be really grunty/have a high average torque number. Be responsive to throttle changes and be very quick.
Obviously a turbo'd 3 litre V6 will give the highest average torque, even if peak HP is kept the same as a 2 litre. If the car's weight is kept within reason, it would be effortlessly fast pretty much everywhere in the rev range.
Effortlessly fast in a straight line, that is.
But packaging and heat could be a real killer!
Lots of metal, at very high temperatures, in a rather small space. Insulation and heat shielding will be a major requirement to keep things inside the engine bay long term durable. It's not normally driving the car that kills stuff that's not protected properly. It's when everything is hot and the car is stopped. No air flow thru the engine bay and the cooking process really begins to set in.
Getting a decent intercooler into the system will be a major challenge. Front mounted air to air intercoolers always look badly compromised on these cars. People don't seam to be able to put in enough effort to make a decent sized core fit, with plumbing that is neat, that works with a decent size radiator (chances are you'll want a bigger, better radiator too).
Engine bay mounted water to air intercooler(s) always look compromised from a packaging perspective. Tho having 2 integrated into the plenum chamber would be a very neat work around. As long as they were effective.
But then there's the weight.........
Quoting a power to weight ratio would be pointless. The car will only be slightly heavier, compared to the power and torque you'd be adding. But where that extra weight is being added, that's where (I believe atleast) a turbo (or supercharger) setup on the V6 is adding weight in all of the wrong areas.
Up high in the engine bay and right at the front of the car.
Both are bad for the already understeering V6 cars.
Yes you could probably brutalise the rear tyres with all of the new found grunt, to bully the car back into some semblance of balance. But that, to me anyways, just seams clumsy.
A turbo V6 would be a lot of fun in some ways, tho. Pure grunt always is and is very adictive.
Definitely the easiest way to smash the transaxle.
Personally, V6 sound aside, I reckon the best engine choice would be a 350hp turbo 4. Either a twin spark or NORD.
Keep the packaging as compact as possible.
Like what Jim has done, integrate a WTA intercooler into the plenum chamber (I understand that Jim's car is a water cooled factory turbo manifold/intercooler), with the smallest, current day technology turbo you can use for your intended power level, using a split pulse manifold and turbine housing.
The smallest amount of plumbing volume in the inlet tract to minimise turbo lag. The smallest turbo you can use for the intended HP for best turbo response and lowest boost threshold (The minimum engine speed the turbo can start doing its job. It's not the same as turbo lag). And a well designed split pulse manifold and turbine housing to help that small turbo do its job as best it can.
Lots of ceramic coatings, insulation and heat shielding. Plus really good ducting to get outside air to the turbo's intake (read about Jim's trouble with this on the 'Best Tuned 75 And GTV6s' Facebook page, if you haven't already).
And run it with a really good, modern programmable system.
It should still be really grunty/have a high average torque number. Be responsive to throttle changes and be very quick.
Re: Which would you choose and why?
With 350bhp and torque to match, be sure to have a garage shelf full of replacement gearboxes-mostly the crown and pinions. We are talking street cars here and a lot of daily driving. That transaxle isn't going to take it too long.
The question has to be asked.
What is it that you want ?
A cruiser?
A sprinter?
A dragster?
A fast shopping cart?
Finally, if you are going to regularly deploy that power in a light car, how long do you expect to retain your driver's license?
Get real guys.
The question has to be asked.
What is it that you want ?
A cruiser?
A sprinter?
A dragster?
A fast shopping cart?
Finally, if you are going to regularly deploy that power in a light car, how long do you expect to retain your driver's license?
Get real guys.
Transaxle Alfas Haul More Arse
Re: Which would you choose and why?
Spoilsport 
Re: Which would you choose and why?
Yeah, reality checks are always a bummer but here are some real life examples.
Got a friend with a 420hp turbo TS powered 75 street sedan. His words : "Mostly undrivable./unusable power".
In my own case, my racer only makes around 220 hp with about 200ftlbs torque. In less than a year on the track it killed the ring and pinion in otherwise a totally fresh gearbox. To ad insult to injury, the track events do not even have standing starts-all rolling starts to save clutches !! So that's about a dozen events. Now we can make all kinds of jokes about my standard of preparation and I am cool enough to wear it but reality is where it really is.
So by all means keep dreaming and keep being creative but the direction should concentrate on weight reduction to improve power to weight instead of just power and of course remembering that very few of us have the luxury of open speed limit highways to exploit very high power in a street application.
If you are hell bent on extreme power, well, you will need a completely different transaxle and a dedicated drive train to take that power. No point having all go and no whoah so your brakes will need revising as will your suspension. Spent enough money yet? with all these modifications, is the vehicle now transport department compliant and will an insurance company insure you?
Keep the faith but keep it real.
.....racing is the place to go nuts. All depends on how big your wallet is and the size of your credentials.
Got a friend with a 420hp turbo TS powered 75 street sedan. His words : "Mostly undrivable./unusable power".
In my own case, my racer only makes around 220 hp with about 200ftlbs torque. In less than a year on the track it killed the ring and pinion in otherwise a totally fresh gearbox. To ad insult to injury, the track events do not even have standing starts-all rolling starts to save clutches !! So that's about a dozen events. Now we can make all kinds of jokes about my standard of preparation and I am cool enough to wear it but reality is where it really is.
So by all means keep dreaming and keep being creative but the direction should concentrate on weight reduction to improve power to weight instead of just power and of course remembering that very few of us have the luxury of open speed limit highways to exploit very high power in a street application.
If you are hell bent on extreme power, well, you will need a completely different transaxle and a dedicated drive train to take that power. No point having all go and no whoah so your brakes will need revising as will your suspension. Spent enough money yet? with all these modifications, is the vehicle now transport department compliant and will an insurance company insure you?
Keep the faith but keep it real.
.....racing is the place to go nuts. All depends on how big your wallet is and the size of your credentials.
Transaxle Alfas Haul More Arse
Re: Which would you choose and why?
But how do the Greeks do it? They have ridiculous bhp. I think JK's 1.8T makes 270 bhp still using his original box.
I think 300 bhp in 116 is plenty. In Rebuplic of California (sounds like AUS is like CA), it's going to be a problem registering a car that is anything not remotely close to being standard. They might even fail you in your MoT (equivalent) test if you put a "Hello Kitty" sticker in the engine bay.
I think 300 bhp in 116 is plenty. In Rebuplic of California (sounds like AUS is like CA), it's going to be a problem registering a car that is anything not remotely close to being standard. They might even fail you in your MoT (equivalent) test if you put a "Hello Kitty" sticker in the engine bay.