Why does a 164 feel faster then a Milano Verde?

[pavanbabut]

I am talkin abt 164 only, not Milano which may be faster due to its body style (ofcourse everything is different)....
I am happy to come by with my buddy's SVX, if he wants to....
-Pavan

[164 FAMILY]

The 164 I am talking about has a Q in its name?

[jontg428]

Oh snap, Lenard is bringing out his doomsday device! Let that 24V monster roar!

[redbaron]

The milano is quicker on paper. It has a better power-weight ratio obviously. The margin might be slimmer on an S or Q car though. I know my GTV6 seems quite a bit faster than even the S. I do think the 164 may have a top-end advantage over the Milano however.

[jontg428]

I agree, the 164 is much more aerodynamic, and thats what counts for top end.

[JoeCab]

There are a couple of things that can contribute to the feeling that a 164 is quicker than a Milano Verde:

1) The 164 with Motronic has a higher rev limit than the Milano Verde with L-Jetronic

2) The 164 transmission is much easier to shift quickly

I have driven many of both and feel the 164 is a better fast tourer, with a much higher top speed, but I don't really feel comfortable driving it hard on tight, twisting roads where a Milano excels.

Joe

[DonBeeson]

There's probably a few conclusions to this, but here is a quick checkup on the specs:
Autoweek, Jan 1991
1991 164S
0-35 mph 3.6 sec
0-55 mph 6.7
0-60 mph 7.7
0-100 km/h 8.2
0-65 mph 8.9
1/4 mile 88mph, 16.1
braking 65-0 158 ft
braking 55-0 113 ft
Max. output: 202.8 PS (200.0 bhp) (149.1 kW)@5800 rpm
Max. torque: 264.0 Nm (195 lbft) (26.9 kgm)@4400 rpm

Taken from globalcar.com for the milano 3.0

0-60mph: 7.5 s
0-100mph: 20.6 s
Quarter mile: 16.10s @ 88.00 mph
Kilometre: 29.40s @ 180.00 km/h
Top speed: 220 km/h
Power to weight: 154.55 bhp/ton
Max. output: 189.6 PS (187.0 bhp) (139.4 kW)@5800 rpm
Max. torque: 245.0 Nm (181 lbft) (25 kgm)@4000 rpm


The 164L is not as fast as the verde (on the top end), that im quite sure of, although they are close. The milano verde compares closer to the 164S, and it shows here in the specs that their quarter mile is perfectly on par. You are right in how the car 'feels' my Verde seems to be a slow car for a few seconds and then the engine decides its time to move and much of what was close is now just dots.
* I dont always like globalcar.com, as you can see the top speed on the milano verde is wrong. But finding specifications on these cars is hard nowadays and I find global car has a good ballpark.

[DonBeeson]

But here are the specs for the 164L from globalcar.com:
0-60mph: 7.5 s
0-100km/h: 7.7 s
Quarter mile: 16.20s
Top speed: 230 km/h
Power to weight: 140.66 bhp/ton
Max. output: 194.7 PS (192.0 bhp) (143.2 kW)@5800 rpm
Max. torque: 245.0 Nm (181 lbft) (25 kgm)@3000 rpm

which raises the question....how the heck is the 164L rated faster 0-60 than the S?

[jontg428]

I think its becuase the 164L has more torque off the bottom, and its kind of a trade off, more top end power for the S versus more bottom end power for the L. I think top speed would be handed to the S though

[DonBeeson]

Gearing is also different on the S versus the L is it not? Im actually surprised how close the specifications are on those three cars, although that doesnt mean too much because they could all be somewhat wrong. I remember finding slalom times on the 164 and milano and they both pulled through within a few milliseconds of eachother.

[Hit an Apex]

I've been in quite a few verdes and they don't have the "fast feeling" as much as the 2.5L cars do.

[DonBeeson]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hit an Apex I've been in quite a few verdes and they don't have the "fast feeling" as much as the 2.5L cars do.

[Grant]

I'm looking to switch to Motronic for this very reason. The Verde just plain feels slow, even though it beats a 2.5 milano every time to 60 and on. The gears are SO long, and more importantly, the gap SO large from gear to gear, that the car isn't in its powerband for very long. My verde doesn't start to pull until around 4K...which leaves you 1.8K rpm until fule cut-out! If I had a higher redline, not only would I be able to develop higher horsepower for longer, but the engine will be at a higher RPM in the next gear as well. I remember my father's 164L pulling pretty hard from 2.8K on up...entirely due to the longer, torque producing intake runners and later engine management. Not to mention the 164 redlines at 6.5K, not 5.8.

There's a trade off though, I might not be as quick at the track, even though my 0-60 is likely to improve with the 164 engine under my hood. The 164L doesn't pull as hard to redline as a Verde or a 164S. I'm mainly hoping to improve daily driving anyways. I'll let you know how it goes...in 4-6 months

Forum member Nizam has done this swap on one of his milanos (more?) and verified what I thought would happen using motronic and intake plenum from 164 in the Milano.

[DonBeeson]

Well the Verde pulling at the end of her revs is part of the reason I want to take on a megasquirt project this xmas break
I'm glad that its not just me who noticed the 4k and then power, I was kind of wondering if it was just my car that seemed to pull like this

[ar95]

I am a new member and was acquiring a debatable reasoning? What kind of power does this car achieve stock/ modified? whp to weight ratio,,, any trap speeds,,, 1/8th and 1/4 qtr mile speeds. is there a huge aftermarket on these really cool and fun driving cars? is there any electrical errors? reaoson im asking is that i recently found a 95 Alfa Romeo 164 for a steal of a price. 62787 original miles and the body is perfect and no rust.... i would like to acquire this car as my next exotic/ rare/ unique project? any suggestions on getting this car to achieve a 13 sec qtr mile with its very dependable and overwelming steering? oh did i meantion i was quoted at 3400$! is that to much?????? please advise me as i really want this car... i like a whole lot =]