The ecotech is a good engine from what I understand but its a bit unfortunate the Alfa version looks so similar. Especially after so many years of beautiful Alfa 4 cylinders. Maybe the performance will help.
The ecotech is a good engine from what I understand but its a bit unfortunate the Alfa version looks so similar. Especially after so many years of beautiful Alfa 4 cylinders. Maybe the performance will help.
performances? the 166, that it has a mass similar to the 159, equipped of the 2000 twin spark from 150cv second the romeo alpha catch up the 100 km/h in 9,8 sec while 159 2,2 with 185 cv employ 8,8 sec.poi seem that 2,200 cc 5000 turns are died beyond i.
. the double shifters of phase have the same phase-difference (50 degree) regarding the drive shaft of the 2,400 ecotec from 177cv. probably are constructed are for the 1,9 -2,2 jts and 2400 ecotec vvt from the aisin
in Europe version to direct benzine injection of ecotec the 2.200 exists one. for a long time it comes used on Opel - vauxhall, from this motor 2,200 ecotec DGI are probably the true base of the 19-2,200 jts, must know that such motors do not come more constructed in Italy but ion Germany in plant GM of kaiserlauthen, where also come constructed the 2000 ecotec supercharger from 200 cv. unfortunately the romeo alpha does not have more an Italian sport heart. the motor that is the heart of a romeo alpha is Australian German hour or (v6)
i have spoken with some people who tried the 2.2 jts engine on alfa brera.... they were enthusiast of this engine...
you don't have to forget that the head of that engine is completely designed by alfa romeo engineers and that the technical solutions used are very superior to the last ts ones (example chain distribution, sodium cooled valves, twin phaser...)
be optimist!
i have spoken with some people who tried the 2.2 jts engine on alfa brera.... they were enthusiast of this engine...
you don't have to forget that the head of that engine is completely designed by alfa romeo engineers and that the technical solutions used are very superior to the last ts ones (example chain distribution, sodium cooled valves, twin phaser...)
be optimist!
in Italy the 2,200 jts it has been object of pioù critics or less heavy also from part of the specialized press, it thinks that we have a review who give 50 years carry out tests orchestrate them on the automobiles. According to two of the most asserted reviews the 2,200 jts inherits workings and technical refinements of the 2,200 ecotec to which they come added the double shifters of phase with field of identical operation (50 degree)to the 2400 ecotec and the injection directed in two is made, this last one real innovation in this field and completely developed from the Fiat group. Unfortunately beyond to pregies of l-850 GM new jts has also the defects and that is a insufficient speed in answering to the accelleratore and a insufficient propensione in turning beyond the 5000- 5500 turns even if then insisting catch up the 7000 turns, only positive note are a drainage perfectly realized in order to reproduce the romeo sound alpha.
in Italy the 2,200 jts it has been object of pioù critics or less heavy also from part of the specialized press, it thinks that we have a review who give 50 years carry out tests orchestrate them on the automobiles. According to two of the most asserted reviews the 2,200 jts inherits workings and technical refinements of the 2,200 ecotec to which they come added the double shifters of phase with field of identical operation (50 degree)to the 2400 ecotec and the injection directed in two is made, this last one real innovation in this field and completely developed from the Fiat group. Unfortunately beyond to pregies of l-850 GM new jts has also the defects and that is a insufficient speed in answering to the accelleratore and a insufficient propensione in turning beyond the 5000- 5500 turns even if then insisting catch up the 7000 turns, only positive note are a drainage perfectly realized in order to reproduce the romeo sound alpha.
comunque la prima frase riguarda 4r , ho fatto presente che in italia abbiamo una rivista che da 50 anni effettua prove strumentali sulle auto in commercioe questa assieme ad automobilismo sono più o meno critiche riguardo al 2.200 jts su strada
I agree. I and other a fans of alfa romeo of old date somewhat we are critics to us in the comparisons of puts into effect them political Fiat in the cares of the romeo alfa. Already there was a chorus of disappointment in the 96 with the adoption of the twin spark that condivedevano and share numerous parts in common with the 4 Fiat cylinders calls "pratola serra " from the place of production, even if motor said that the responsible planning of the Fiat group was the engineer motor head of the field romeo alpha before the purchase of the alfa romeo from Fiat part. But such family of motors was already thought in order to draw the twin spark for the romeo alpha and above all their place of production was Italy, while the new ones jts to 4 cylinders come from kaiserlaurten in Germany.
unfortunately the surveys of authoritative Italian reviews as automobilismo and the most famous one quattroruote expresses perplexity on such motors to gasoline here a comment trato from automobilismo : Romeo Alpha introduces one new range of motors to benzine to directed injection, of which the 2,2 JTS from 185 Cv it represents the means way between i 160 Cv of 1,9 JTS and i 260 Cv of the V6 of 3,2 liters. 16 valves that are strange in the guide for its remarkable availability of brace to the low regimes of spin, with a comparabile distribution with that one of a turbodiesel of the last generation in the interval comprised between the 2 and 4mila turns, where the 4 cylinders of 2,2 liters are expressed with a such force to contrast without some problem the mass found little advanced to the 1,600 kg. Dowry to which a contrappone but difficult dosage of the accelerator, that it obligates to graze hardly the pedal between the 2,000 and 3,000 turns in order to avoid excessive climbs of the regimen of spin of the motor. In the extracity distances the guide becomes instead more relaxant fluid and, with constant and profitable progressions from the low regimes until those means, in particular considering that beyond the 5,000 turns the push begins to affievolirsi and invoglia not to insist until seeing the needle of the contagiri to approach itself the red zone, in proximity of the 6,500 turns.
in practical a insufficient reactivity in the transitory ones is contested to such motors and the difficulty to turn to the high regimes, as instead it must make a motor alpha romeo.Per how much regards the previous ones twin spark and jts you must know that during the planning of the modular motors "pratola serra " the responsible of the planning of the motors of the entire Fiat group was the sig piccone that he has been opportunely responsible of the motors in romeo alpha and therefore has been a travaso of men and technologies from romeo alpha in such Fiat and however pratola serra were plan to you in order to gain of specific units romeo alpha.
Sorry but the new JTS engines are not ecotec bacause the only derived parts are the basaments, the rest of engine. the head ,camshaft,rod,etc are developed by alfa romeo .
Sorry but the new JTS engines are not ecotec bacause the only derived parts are the basaments, the rest of engine. the head ,camshaft,rod,etc are developed by alfa romeo .
tree, connecting rods, pistons, only realize to you for romeo alpha? tasks this why the new ones jts are more powerful and with more brace regarding the 2,200 ecotec? it is not therefore and it demonstrates the 2000 ecotec to it upset SIDI, you read this link:http://www.pontiac.com/divisional/newsevents/news_solstice.jsp is you will understand that in the plan base of the ecotec various piston displacements are coomprese, from 1800cc to 2400 cc and various powers leaving from the 136cv of the 2,200 mpi of the frontera until 260cv of this 2000 to direct injection and goodness knows sde will not appear 2400 turbocharger or mechanical compressor with greater powers,such 2000 SIDI it uses many you leave of the 2400 ecotec in order sopportare such levels of power and brace and therefore here where the technicians alpha have drawn part of the members in order to realize their engines,that is from additional features
it observes the strange relative coincidence to the double shifters of phase, from the first moment they appear identical and it is not improbable that the supplier is the same one:
The only GM derived engine Alfa will use is the aussie-built V6. I know of no such deal to use the 4cyl Ecotec engines. That said, they could do worse...the ecotec is one of the most advanced 4cyl engines on the market, making plentiful power and generally running 200k+ miles before any major work is needed.
I'd be suprised if GM were to sell that engine to Fiat, though....it eats into their market too much (Saab, Opel).
The V6 market is much smaller, and the choice of car is more based on styling than price and reliability.
The only GM derived engine Alfa will use is the aussie-built V6. I know of no such deal to use the 4cyl Ecotec engines. That said, they could do worse...the ecotec is one of the most advanced 4cyl engines on the market, making plentiful power and generally running 200k+ miles before any major work is needed.
I'd be suprised if GM were to sell that engine to Fiat, though....it eats into their market too much (Saab, Opel).
The V6 market is much smaller, and the choice of car is more based on styling than price and reliability.
One more thing to note: GM adopted the Fiat twin phaser setup---that was part of the technology exchange during the 5 or so years GM owned part of Fiat. I believe they also acquired the direct-injection technology. It really doesn't suprise me that the two engines would look very similar---there are only so many ways to lay out an engine, and if a certain layout works then use it...
Especially if you can source the idler pulley and other accessories from the same source---it saves a lot of money for items that aren't critical to the function. The applications are very different, though---the US market likes automatic transmissions and lots of low end power, where the Fiat applications consider manual trans and peak power more. The days of truely unique engines are gone, simply because the advent of technology sharing (and spying), and more advanced analysis and engineering have driven most engine designs toward a common theme. Simply put, a widget is a widget is a widget.
I still don't think the engines could be called the 'same', but they do look similar and I'm sure they employ quite a few common ideas. Also, the number of suppliers is becoming smaller, and they like to suggest common parts if possible. Remember, the OEM's make very few parts anymore--the main task is just to organize and coordinate all the parts being assembled.
So what truely makes a design shared? Who knows anymore...but I'm pretty certain Fiat is not buying engines directly off the GM manufacturing line...but I also bet that the Fiat engine plant looks a lot like a GM engine plant (and Toyota, BMW, ect...). It's silly to see someone else do something in a better way and not adopt it if you can. The real significant differences in modern cars are design and driving dynamics.
Why would FIAT buy the v6 and all of a sudden have a guilt attack and not buy the 4 cylinder engine?
In the end it is all about economics, that's the bottom line. If FIAT can buy engines they can close plants (as they have already done, and thus no more Alfa Romeo engine plant) and thus reduce the labour force and make more profit.
GM on the other hand can move more components. Thus they are both winning ... from a profit is everything point of view.
Thus I personally do not believe the advertising blurb that Alfa Romeo has created their own cylinder heads, etc.. Makes no financial sense ... this is just an attempt to stop people vomiting over their breakfast and refusing to ever buy another Alfa Romeo. At the very most they will have selected from a list of options what spec's they will get ... and probably spent months discussing the Alfa Romeo script on the cam cover(s).
These car companies already share many major components (as many other industries do) but car's have this personality which makes this a risky marketing thing to do ... thus we hardly ever hear about it. Naturally this was way too big to hide so they had to spill the beans. But did you guys know that the Alfa 164 floor pan was shared with Saab and somebody else (can't remember), etc. Infact there was probably heaps more of the 164 shared with others that I'll never know ...
So FIAT has been playing this game for ages ... now they also do not have to make engines too. Like I said ages ago, Alfa Romeo will become like the Ghia trim option badge on Fords for FIAT soon ... it will be the sporty FIAT model, maybe lowered with leather seats or something.
One more thing to note: GM adopted the Fiat twin phaser setup---that was part of the technology exchange during the 5 or so years GM owned part of Fiat. I believe they also acquired the direct-injection technology. It really doesn't suprise me that the two engines would look very similar---there are only so many ways to lay out an engine, and if a certain layout works then use it...
the plant of production of the 4 cylinders jts is the factory of kaiserlauten where it comes produced also the 2000 ecotec supercharger for the North American market, creed that you know such engine .Se you read to this relative annual report to year 2000 trovrai information on the direct injection and double shifters of phase, you memory that the join - lucks have been stipulated in March 2001 and clearly it has gone to various regimens months after. http://www.gm.com/company/gmability...f/Pages from Umweltbericht_72dpi_products.pdf
looking pag .42-43-44 of the reports (engines)
Why would FIAT buy the v6 and all of a sudden have a guilt attack and not buy the 4 cylinder engine?
In the end it is all about economics, that's the bottom line. If FIAT can buy engines they can close plants (as they have already done, and thus no more Alfa Romeo engine plant) and thus reduce the labour force and make more profit.
GM on the other hand can move more components. Thus they are both winning ... from a profit is everything point of view.
It has nothing to do with guilt, but you know that. Not sure how that comment is relevant.
Yes, it is about the bottom line---thus you won't sell your best engine in the largest segment of sales to a direct competitor. It would be like selling the ecotec to Ford to put in the Focus. It's a much better engine than the Z-tech and it would cannabilize sales from GM's small cars. Same with Fiat/Alfa small 4cyl cars relative to Opel/Saab (the new Saabs use a variant of the ecotec). Putting 20,000 V6's in a high end Alfa doesn't really affect Saab/Opel sales though, so it makes sense.
Frankly, you can believe whatever you want. It's not my job to convince you of anything. If my somewhat inside knowledge and perspective from working at GM Design for years isn't wanted then I'll just post elsewhere. I just thought some people here might like to know my take on it, given that I've been deeply involved in so much of this stuff.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Alfa Romeo Forums
2.1M posts
88.6K members
Since 2002
A forum community dedicated to Alfa Romeo owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, parts, modifications, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!