Alfa Romeo Forums banner
21 - 31 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
I agree. A mildly warmed over 16v with intake / exhaust will give you about 150hp. And yes, for a car that weighs under 850kg (your series 1) That is more than enough power for the street. The power to weight ratio even eclipses some modern hot hatches. If you can get the power down (sounds like you won't be having any issues) I'd say you'll do the 0-60 (mph) in about 7.5 seconds.

But I would still advise anyone going down the 'heavily modified' route to consider a turbo. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
I agree. A mildly warmed over 16v with intake / exhaust will give you about 150hp. And yes, for a car that weighs under 850kg (your series 1) That is more than enough power for the street. The power to weight ratio even eclipses some modern hot hatches. If you can get the power down (sounds like you won't be having any issues) I'd say you'll do the 0-60 (mph) in about 7.5 seconds.

But I would still advise anyone going down the 'heavily modified' route to consider a turbo. :D
hey spooty22, wat about turbo on a 1.5?? was there a fuel injected 1.5?? the plumbing for a turbo would be fairly complecated i would think, and you would need to have an intercooler somewhere... top mount?? or in front and below radiator??? this is in a sprint to, not that they differ much from a sud...would i need engine work like stronger pistons etc??

wat about SUPERCHARGING?????
anyone ever thought of a small charger??? may be easier to hook up??

cheers batesy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
498 Posts
I've also heard that a K&N filter is a noticeable improvement over the stock filter box, yielding better throttle response a few more hp.
From my experience the K&N pod does nothing, unless you run piping upto it, it's going to suffer from heat bleed from the engine bay and defeat the purpose of having a pod. Your better off keeping the airbox and setting up the cold air intake better.

Also, spooty22, I didn't really believe my brother when he told me either, but then he provided the dyno sheets. it was something like 95kw atw or something, I don't know how they "adjust" it for a fly wheel reading, maybe they factoring in average loss over an awd system? who knows.

But it was delivering max power at 7100rpm or something, 100hp before the cut out and 400rpm higher then what a standard 16v revs out to.

And there is no room for a turbo setup in a sud. because of the limited space infront of the engine, place for intercoolers is VERY limited, and you have to start thinking about top mounting things, and you start loosing engine bay space quickly once you start doing that, and factoring in piping.

My sud engine bay is packed enough as it is, just with the 16v...

By all means though, if you had a 33 16v, they'd lend well to a turbo. Lots of room up infront of the radiator.


lenus.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
501 Posts
By all means though, if you had a 33 16v, they'd lend well to a turbo. Lots of room up infront of the radiator.

lenus.
Well, not a huge amount - depends a lot if you want to keep your airconditioning too!

Instead of intercooling, one could use a charge or water cooler instead. These can be quite compact and sit inline between the turbo/supercharger and throttle bodies. Incidentally, there may be problems with boosted air being pushed out through throttle shaft seals, as was the problem with running boost through carburetors. Then there is still the problem of having a radiator relocated elsewhere to do the air cooling of the charge coiler! Reworking on of the 33's aircon condensors might be worth looking at.

A successful turbo set up at the end of the day will always cost a significant amount of money though... (and risk of blowing something up)

~Benjamin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
I wouldn't recommend turbo'ing a carb car. That is too much work for marginal results. If you want to turbo a carbed sud, get some IDF fuel injection throttle bodies (they bolt straight on in place of the carbs) and hook them up to an aftermarket computer.
Or install a later fuel injected motor.

There is alot of plumbing involved in installing a turbo in a boxer engined car. But one of the most famous turbocharged cars in the world is a boxer. The WRX. It can be done.

Of course you can fit a turbo to a sud. It has been done many times before.
Two companies did back in the 70's and 80's - wainer and bell and colvill. There have been many other conversions since.

As for intercooling, I'm sure you could fit something up front with some work. The import crowd do it all the time on far smaller cars! Or you could top mount, like subaru do, although a scoop would be necessary. (It can be done tastefully)

A supercharger is something that has been done perhaps even more often than turbo's on suds. It is an excellent idea. Probably less work too.

And of course, if you go nuts with the boost, a turbo will blow something. They can be set up reliably however. Many modern cars have turbos, even reliable, boring diesels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
yeah i reckon a supercharger might be the go if i can sort out my rust issues.......depending on cost of course.... i cant imagine that capa or someione similar would make a bolt on kit.... nothing is ever easy is it...

cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
498 Posts
IMHO. a 16v is a better option, to x-charging a 1.5. As somebody said earlier, a reliable low boost charge option gives around 20-30% power gain, which is already offered over the 1.5, in a 1.7 16v.

It would also be cheaper as you wouldn't have to dyno it or anything. Dyno tuning = $$$.

And spoot, the import crowd does it to smaller cars all the time, but they are still built with a bit of room to move.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
There's this thing about the Alfa 33 that makes you happier as the rev goes higher. I believe forced induction will rob this aspect. And turbo charged engines have a shorter life span.

I know of this dude that turbo charged his 147. It's very fast. Standard pistons gave way very soon after. Spent thousands on Forged pistons. Total job cost nearly 10K. And I've got this strong feeling his glory won't last long.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
Discussion Starter · #29 ·
I agree with Serpent 33. Anyone have ideas on a crossover vs. standard exhaust for the 16V? I thought it was better to match the cylinder outputs via the crossover and that Alfa simply matched the cylinders on the same size to save money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
Lenus mentioned the P4 crossovers which are of unequal length. CSC Marmite makes tuned length crossovers but the ground clearance is bad. It's similar to the 146/145 boxers ones but in those cars, the engines are mounted higher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
501 Posts
There's this thing about the Alfa 33 that makes you happier as the rev goes higher. I believe forced induction will rob this aspect. And turbo charged engines have a shorter life span.

I know of this dude that turbo charged his 147. It's very fast. Standard pistons gave way very soon after. Spent thousands on Forged pistons. Total job cost nearly 10K. And I've got this strong feeling his glory won't last long.
Fitting forged pistons solves one problem, but often creates another. Forged pistons require a slightly larger clearance in the bore (4 thou isn't uncommon, and those are the specs I have for my forged pistons that I'm yet to utilise), so you must carefully warm up the engine until you start driving hard so that the pistons are not slopping around in their bores. Just another factor that takes away a turbo car from being a daily driver.

While turbo charged daily drivers are quite common (WRX, Astra turbo etc), I dare say these cars will also need turbos replaced after 200,000km (or less), due to the constant heat up / cool down. Don't forget cooling issues with water / oil flows, as well as the seals associated with these aspects of a turbo charger.

Don't get me wrong though, I would love to see a successfully turbod 16v engine in a 33, I think it would be a rocket if done properly - but reliability and cost will always be the drawbacks. As others have mentioned already, 150hp in a car that weighs under 950kg is a lot of fun to begin with :)

But, maybe this would be a good idea - fit a 16v turbo engine in to the *rear* of a 'sud or sprint - but that is a whole new engineering challange not for the faint hearted!

~Benjamin
 
21 - 31 of 31 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top