Alfa Romeo Forums banner
41 - 60 of 82 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,086 Posts
Following additions were added to the homologation 1557 of 1300 GTA Junior
Only in bold presented in the homologation below. And I can suspect that some sheets is missing from the list. So we do not have a complete information to judge the car identity based on the homologation sheets (variants of supply and evolution)

P.S. As I understand by 576 mentioned 1576 or 1750 GTAm Gr 2


1/1E 02/11/1968 CYLINDER HEAD

2/2E 02/04/1969 INLET MANIFOLD

3/1V 02/04/1969 LIMITED SLIP, WING EXTENSION
(partially suppressed by 576)

4/2V 02/05/1969 SEAT

5/3E 02/10/1969 DIMENSION, WING EXTENSION
(partially suppressed by 576)

6/3V 02/01/1970 WINDOW, STEERING

7/4V 02/01/1970 BODYWORK, TANK, GEARBOX SUPPORT, SUSPENSION, WHEEL, BRAKE
(partially suppressed by 576)

8/5V 02/04/1970 BUMPERS (suppressed by 576)

9/6V 02/01/1971 CYLINDER HEAD (suppressed by 576)

10/7V 02/07/1971 BRAKE

11/8V 02/01/1974 CYLINDER HEAD, DRY SUMP (suppressed by 576)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
276 Posts
1000 cars? By the Fusi book only 447 cars built. By Tabucchi - 167 from 1969 to 1975 without any numbers for 1968. How Alfa could start to built them from October 1967 if the production by Fusi started in early June of 1968.
  1. I didn't say AR actually build 1000 cars, I said they had to built 1000 cars (if they played nicely with the FIA rules).
    Even if they only built 447 cars, all those 447 cars had to comply with FIA Homologation doc. 1557 and certainly if it was a race car.

  2. Nor FIA nor me did say that AR had to start in October 1967, they were just allowed to start production. As long as they reached 1000 cars before 1969 it was OK.
I suspect the homologation sheet is not complete or another homologation exists for the cars with injection and other mods. Where are 4 valve head, double ignition narrow head, spica/lucas fuel injection and other parts? 1300 GTA has been used actively in competitions till 1977 with the most advanced Autodelta parts but they are not on the homologation sheets.
Maybe they were intended for the Group 5 racing class?
Or an evolution of Gr. 2... In the early '70's FIA had implemented new rules which they later on retracted, see also the history regarding the racing Alfetta's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
276 Posts
9/6V 02/01/1971 CLUTCH
...
11/8V 02/01/1974 CLUTCH, DRY SUMP
A "Culasse" is not a "Clutch" but a "cylinder head" (see also the translation of the first modification).

PS: None of the modifications were homologated in 1968... this should be at least 1969.
PS2: The 16v head - homologated in 1974 - doesn't show up in detail in FIA doc. 1557 although it is mentioned on the last page (probably because it was retracted by the FIA later on (FIA made a note: "Supprimée J76"), see also my previous message).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,086 Posts
A "Culasse" is not a "Clutch" but a "cylinder head" (see also the translation of the first modification).

PS: None of the modifications were homologated in 1968... this should be at least 1969.
PS2: The 16v head - homologated in 1974 - doesn't show up in detail in FIA doc. 1557 although it is mentioned on the last page (probably because it was retracted by the FIA later on (FIA made a note: "Supprimée J76"), see also my previous message).
Perfect, I will change my original post (I copied translation from the FIA web site). Is it J76 or 576? 576 could be 1576 or GTAm. Or appendix J of 1976?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
435 Posts
Discussion Starter · #45 ·
How about we let this thread go and let the buyer do their own checking
Pete
I think you are quite right.
We fulfilled the purpose of this platform, mentioning and documenting the car and raising our concerns.
The objective reader will be able to take his conclusion.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
625 Posts
Perfect, I will change my original post (I copied translation from the FIA web site). Is it J76 or 576? 576 could be 1576 or GTAm. Or appendix J of 1976?
Max, don't worry, you mentioned all the existing extensions of the 1557 homologation, and you did a thorough and precise job, with the right conclusions.
With the approval act 1557, Alfa Romeo did NOT homologate the racing car, but simply a VERSION of the model already in production (GT 1300 Junior, FIA homologation 5148, CSAI homologation 36). Why they did it is not the subject of this forum. All the cars were produced in a "road" version, and some were developed as a "racing" version during the production period, according to market demand. Appendix J of the FIA code, which regulated the mechanical condition of sports cars, was used (and respected) as the basis for permissible changes. Within these permitted changes, the hydraulically operated clutch was also allowed since it was supplied by the factory and already used on the basic version of the model (extension of homologation 5148/7/3E, and I do not repeat the quote from the article, but the one I mentioned in the previous post remains). Regarding the restoration of historic cars, there are various degrees of restoration and various intentions for use of the restored cars, and based on this, Renc's car is perfectly admissible, but not historically correct because it differs from its original appearance (see FIVA regulation, Art. 3.2, class 1, 2, 3, and 4).
For PSK:
Your opinion is right and correct. I was referring to legal value of issued documents, that could be used for official purposes.
P.S. For me this topic is closed.
Handwriting Font Rectangle Material property Parallel
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
625 Posts
Just to complete Max's investigation and explain the nature of his error in translation from the English text in the FIA archive.
Actually, looking for the FIA 1557 homologation act using English as the search language, in the list of extensions, the French word "culasse" which refers to the cylinder head, is translated as "clutch" for both extensions, incorrectly indicated such as 9 / 6V and 11 / 8V, strangely missing in the extension sheets shown. Given the English word "clutch" and without the possibility of consulting the documents, it was easy to arrive at the wrong conclusion. The documents in question, on the other hand, are 10 / 6V (concerns the "narrow head"), homologation valid from 01.01.1971, and 12 / 8V (concerns the head with 4 valves and dry sump), valid from 01.01.1974, which are not present in the FIA archive. If anyone asks, I can post pictures of the missing cards. My mistake was to indicate the number of registered cards as 11, after checking there is also the card N ° 12, issued only in 1974
Font Screenshot Electric blue Brand Logo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
276 Posts
With the approval act 1557, Alfa Romeo did NOT homologate the racing car, but simply a VERSION of the model already in production (GT 1300 Junior, FIA homologation 5148, CSAI homologation 36). Why they did it is not the subject of this forum. All the cars were produced in a "road" version, and some were developed as a "racing" version during the production period, according to market demand. Appendix J of the FIA code, which regulated the mechanical condition of sports cars, was used (and respected) as the basis for permissible changes. Within these permitted changes, the hydraulically operated clutch was also allowed since it was supplied by the factory and already used on the basic version of the model (extension of homologation 5148/7/3E, and I do not repeat the quote from the article, but the one I mentioned in the previous post remains).
No, no, no... The GTA 1300 Junior (type 105.59) is a completely different car then the GT 1300 Junior (type 105.30)!

That's just the reason why they give it a different type number (105.59), engine number (559), Italian IGM number (5786) and FIA homologation number (1557).
The same applies for the Sprint GT vs Sprint GTA, Giulia Ti vs Giulia Ti Super, 1750 GTV vs 1750 GTAm... completely different cars, hence the different type, engine, IGM and FIA numbers.

FIA Appendix J, ed. 1969, Title IV (art. 257 - 260) applies to the "Touring cars" with limited production (min. 1000) of Group 2, being the racing class of the GTA 1300 Junior.
The modifications allowed are stated in art. 260. Transmissions are listed under letter 'k'. Is your statement that one can change the mechanical clutch for a hydraulic one, based on this rule?
Letter 'k' says:​
"The replacement of a manually [foot] controlled clutch by an automatic one [command] Is authorized, whatever Its operating system may be."

In my eyes, you are allowed to change the way the clutch is operated but not the type of clutch itself. In other words, all changes to the clutch pedal are allowed (the French text is more clear on this issue) but the final link to the clutch itself must remain mechanical as original (in the case of the GTA Jr.).​

Furthermore, Group 2 cars may also be modified like Group 1 cars, but Title II, art. 253, letter 'f' doesn't speak about changes to the type of clutch, it only speaks about allowable gear ratio's and the possibility to use an automatic gearbox.

Suppose that a hydraulic clutch was allowed in 1969, why has this car then been rebuilt with a mechanical clutch?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
625 Posts
I don't know where is that you want arrive with your explanations and you are free, you and those who follow you, to believe what you want. In order not to waste too much time, I lent the text from Wikipedia (so far not contested after years of presence) that talks about the topic. For me it is fine. That the GTA Junior and the GT are different cars is obvious and incontrovertible, but they start from the same base:
“History of the model
The Giulia GT would have replaced the Giulia Sprint 1600, a Giulietta Sprint with a 1.6 engine from the Giulia Ti, of which it maintains the general layout of the bodywork and also the classic engine and front gearbox location with rear-wheel drive. The bodywork, the work of a very young Giorgetto Giugiaro at the time employed by Bertone, [3] was mounted on the floor of the Giulia Ti sedan with a shortened wheelbase from 2510 to 2350 mm and was a sleek 2 + 2 sports coupé.
The curious front "step" that characterized all the versions produced up to 1968 and part of those produced up to 1971 was due to a rethinking between the approval of the design and the production of the car. Originally it was supposed to be an air intake, then abolished to contain costs, which, leaving room for the "step", defined an important (and recognizable) stylistic figure.
Thanks to its lines and excellent road qualities, this car became one of the most sought-after cars of the period. [2]
Several versions of Giulia GT were produced in the various series that can be classified into: Sprint GT, GT Junior, GTC, GTA, and GT Veloce.”
For interpretations of Appendix J and the FIA code, perhaps it is better to accept as they are written. For cars of Group 2, (Turismo Speciale), anyone could use "part or system existing on the basic version and produced (or normally used) by the factory", as an integral part of their car intended for competition. Since the mere automatic control alone (on the pedal or on the knob, does not change) does not exist and has never existed, it remains that mechanical gearbox and automatic gearbox are two very different things. The problem does not arise in the case of the GTA because the automatic transmission was never contemplated, but (in theory) the hydraulic clutch control could be mounted, since it existed on the GT 1300 version. Being much easier to adjust (free space, pedal height and so on) the mechanical control was much preferred. It is not certain that the existence of the support for the hydraulic pump means that the car in question was equipped with a similar mechanism. I have already said that in the engine compartment of the GTA Js produced since 1969, there were various useless supports, and sometimes tolerated despite being superfluous. Personally, I consider the mechanical "three-finger" clutch to the hydraulic system superior for sporting use, but this is a personal opinion without any objective confirmation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
276 Posts
For interpretations of Appendix J and the FIA code, perhaps it is better to accept as they are written. For cars of Group 2, (Turismo Speciale), anyone could use "part or system existing on the basic version and produced (or normally used) by the factory", as an integral part of their car intended for competition.
Where is that written? Appendix J? Which article?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
435 Posts
Discussion Starter · #52 ·
What strikes me, is that there are no pictures of the car just before restoration took off...

Pictures of a GTA in the "as found" condition are the most important ones as these can prove the racing history of a car.
should we guess why… 😬😅
 
  • Like
Reactions: Koenraad

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,913 Posts
Just to complete Max's investigation and explain the nature of his error in translation from the English text in the FIA archive.
Actually, looking for the FIA 1557 homologation act using English as the search language, in the list of extensions, the French word "culasse" which refers to the cylinder head, is translated as "clutch" for both extensions, incorrectly indicated such as 9 / 6V and 11 / 8V, strangely missing in the extension sheets shown. Given the English word "clutch" and without the possibility of consulting the documents, it was easy to arrive at the wrong conclusion. The documents in question, on the other hand, are 10 / 6V (concerns the "narrow head"), homologation valid from 01.01.1971, and 12 / 8V (concerns the head with 4 valves and dry sump), valid from 01.01.1974, which are not present in the FIA archive. If anyone asks, I can post pictures of the missing cards. My mistake was to indicate the number of registered cards as 11, after checking there is also the card N ° 12, issued only in 1974 View attachment 1719711
Hello ARGTAReg,

All these extension documents can be found in the 2nd edition of "Alleggerita" except for extension 8/5V.
In the 2nd edition of "Alleggerita", the sequence of FIA 1557 homologation extensions is as follows:
1/1E - 1 page
2/2E - 1 page
3/1V - 1 page
4/2V - 1 page
5/3E - 1 page
6/3V - 1 page
7/4V - 5 pages
9/5V - 1 page Bumpers
10/6V - 1 page Cilinderhead
11/7V - 1 page Brakes
12/8V - 1 page Cilinderhead 16V.

So in "Alleggerita", the number of extensions is 11.
Extension 8/5V however does exsist in the GT 1300 Junior file.

Ciao, Olaf
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
17,292 Posts
Okay I can explain, after going through the restoration photos, the rear bulkhead being different as it was removed and replaced with an alloy one. If these cars originally had an alloy rear bulkhead, why was this done?

There is also a photo of the spare wheel well in the removal process and to me, there looks like more grinding than drilling to get it out. Now if rivetted in, surely you would just drill out ... but my eyes are not what they used to be, so not sure.

You can also see holes OR drill marks on the rear pillar/windscreen surround. Love to be able to blow the photo up to confirm if holes or spot weld removal ...

Note there was green paint on the edge of the bulkhead which matches one of the historic photos
Pete
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
435 Posts
Discussion Starter · #55 · (Edited)
Just as an example, putting rivets for “decoration”. Also the row of rivets marked in green is just “in the air”, the fixation point far more outside…

Hood Motor vehicle Automotive tire Automotive design Bumper



what do you want to rivet on this place 😉
Automotive lighting Automotive tire Hood Motor vehicle Tire


no rivet row for decoration…
Boat Watercraft Automotive lighting Hood Automotive tire
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
435 Posts
Discussion Starter · #58 ·
My 1971 1750 GTV is different in that area Marcel and has reinforcement for the boot lid opening springs. Did the early shells not have that?

Pete
The rear seat / booth structure is different between 1300 and the later 1750/2000. For example the shelf cover of the 2000 is a few centimetres shorter than from the earlier cars.

On this comparison,white car is from the offer, red is mine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
915 Posts
My 1971 1750 GTV is different in that area Marcel and has reinforcement for the boot lid opening springs. Did the early shells not have that?

Pete
GTAs do not have that reinforcement as they do not have the spring mechanism, just a hood style prop.
Regarding clutches, it is interesting to note that the GTAm 's built '70 to '71 still employed the old spring and finger mechanical clutch of the 1600 GTA, not the hydraulic version of the production cars. I'm assuming that the hydraulic/diaphram clutch problem of breaking rivet straps around 7000+ rpm had not been solved yet.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
625 Posts
Hello ARGTAReg,

All these extension documents can be found in the 2nd edition of "Alleggerita" except for extension 8/5V.
In the 2nd edition of "Alleggerita", the sequence of FIA 1557 homologation extensions is as follows:
1/1E - 1 page
2/2E - 1 page
3/1V - 1 page
4/2V - 1 page
5/3E - 1 page
6/3V - 1 page
7/4V - 5 pages
9/5V - 1 page Bumpers
10/6V - 1 page Cilinderhead
11/7V - 1 page Brakes
12/8V - 1 page Cilinderhead 16V.

So in "Alleggerita", the number of extensions is 11.
Extension 8/5V however does exsist in the GT 1300 Junior file.

Ciao, Olaf
Hi Olaf, the list is complete and correct. Yes, the sheets are 11, but the last issued number is 12. "Famous" unobtainable extension sheet N°8/5V, (as it results from French list of extension sheets), seems to be N°9/6V that deals with bumpers, whilst 9/6V from French list, is in reality 10/6V as consultable from deposed sheet. Evident error, and number is really 11, but I wanted to respect formal numbering as presented officially.
 
41 - 60 of 82 Posts
Top