Alfa Romeo Forums banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have an 105 series twin plug engine with this Number

AR 00502a 19024

Can anyone identify it ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,203 Posts
Hello,

your engine is coming from a GTA.

but my book (FUSI) list engines until number 18988. (year 1967):|
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
816 Posts
Hi
The GTA information in Fusi is somewhat mixed up, so it doesn't surprise me that there is an engine number outside of the range that he lists. The cars and engine numbers were produced out of order, probably to fool the FIA about how many cars had been produced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,718 Posts
GTA engines

Hello Gekki,

It may help if you share a photograph of the actual engine number stamping?

I can report with some confidence that the published "Fusi" engine number ranges are often almost meaningless when we compare them to actual observations of actual engine numbers in cars both today and in official documents of the past. In a way, the actual number may not matter terribly to the perceptions of "originality" that some aspire to have for their cars? These cars did not normally have ID plates that reported engine numbers. Any engine numbered "00502/A" in its prefix is nominally a "GTA" engine.

I have not made a huge effort to collect GTA engine numbers but, checking quickly now, I have recorded perhaps twenty at a minimum, more than half from historical documents. Most are for cars built 1965 and 1966. The serial numbers recorded thus far range from 18563 to 19695. It is my (somewhat) informed opinion that any of these engines might have been delivered in a car built and delivered 1965, 1966 or 1967. It is only circumstance (including perhaps some special level of preparation?) that made a specific engine become available for use in a certain car.

I doubt that Alfa Romeo was concerned with fooling the CSAI/FIA in this instance as they were clearly building a car that, in series production form, conformed to the GT racing category rules of the day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
Hallo IIcar John,



I doubt that Alfa Romeo was concerned with fooling the CSAI/FIA in this instance as they were clearly building a car that, in series production form, conformed to the GT racing category rules of the day.



The GTA was homologated as `touring car `, not as GT!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,718 Posts
"GT" versus "Touring" versus "Production" versus "Bsedan" etc. etc.

Hallo Ulrich GTA,

You are correct in a strict linguistic sense. I was thinking of the 1950's when I wrote my flawed posting. However ...

The Touring Car Championship (sometimes called "Production" and sometimes using other names) was clearly an outgrowth of the true intent of GT (Gran Turismo) racing when it was formulated in the 1950's. Rules and labels evolved constantly. You need look no farther than the legendary Ferrari "250 GTO", a car that made a mockery of the "GT" category by being a closed racing car that somehow became accepted (homologated) as a "GT" when it really was not. And yet, despite being an obvious "cheater", it has become one of the most iconic and coveted cars of all time. One can argue that Ferrari would have made additional examples if there had been the customer demand to justify it. It fulfilled "the spirit" of the category if not the specific requirements. The racing GTA is a similar case. And they are not alone.


It also depends a bit on where you are (were) in the world as of 1964/65/66 ... and later.

It depends on the event and the level of preparation of the car, as well as the rules of the specific event ... and how closely the organizers adhered to the rules.

Sometimes it depended on who else was running (and what was running) as to how a class structure was interpreted or a finish result assigned.

These cars were raced in several categories. Not only "Touring" or "GT" or "Production" or "B-Sedan". Are you aware of the "Prodified" (modified production) category that existed for a time as a racing class in the USA?

Even today, with greater ease in tracking "history" even as it is being made, we do not know all the various permutations of how certain exceptions are being made in order for a friend to allow another friend to race with a car that is more or less "correct" according to the rules of the implied class structure.

As with the "GTO", Alfa Romeo (through Autodelta), would have built additional examples of the racing GTA if there had been enough demand in the marketplace. In that sense, the car complied with the intent of either the "Touring Car" category or the "GT" category, where it sometimes raced. The reality of "how many" were actually built might have made any racing GTA ineligible for either category. The CSAI/FIA homologations recognized that certain changes from "standard" made for more interesting (and sometimes "safer") racing.

We are perhaps lucky that we do not live in the precisely "correct" world where intent cannot be judged as being part of the reality that is desired?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
homologation

Hallo ijohn,
i agree with your opinion about correct world. i dont agree in your comparisme with Ferrari GTO.

The great events for GT cars ended about 1960 , from there, the much more popular touringcars events intended Alfa Romeo to build the Giulia TI Super , later the GTA as a touring car with 4 seats in a production line of minimum 500 examples( not on demand!!!) ! The Sprint GT was to heavy to compete again Lotus Cortina , a real 4 seater. From the beginning 1965 , the GTA was homologated and raced as touring car with FIA AR 29 to rise the selling of the GT. The intention was , that the people see their cars winning races. So , the outer shell was strictly the same as the Sprint GT . The homologation as GT was , i think 1970 with FIA number 625 , 5 years later, as the the glory of the GTA was just decreased. Ford was protesting more than one time against the homologation as touring car, so Alfa changed for example the dimensions of the rear seats to enlarge the distances from the bottom to the roof.




The Ferrari 250 GTO was always a special form from a 250 GT build in a few examples with 2 seats! The outer shell was a new made from Alegretti , handbuild from aluminium, but not the same as a 250 GT.

To the numbers: Portellore is right, the later GTA had 00532......and frontcovers from aluminium.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,718 Posts
My point was perhaps lost?

Racing rules evolved constantly.
Cars were built to maximize the possibilities allowed by those rules.

At times, some intent of the rules (sometimes in order to honor another portion of the intent?) was ignored when classifying some cars that everyone wished to see become part of the spectacle of racing. Italy often had a lot of creative and emotional input to the process. But Italy was not alone in building cars that stepped over the line in building cars that did not quite comply to the original intent of a racing category.

The "Touring" category of the 1960's was created largely in an attempt to return to the original intent of the GT category. By doing so, it departed from the former intent of the "Turismo" categories. Please forgive me if I think (and write) "GT" at times while thinking of a car that has "GT" as a portion of its name.

John
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top