turbo the killer of revs-.-

 

I suppose it all a question of what you are after. The new(ish) down sized Fiat/Alfa engines makes lots of sense to me in daily use.
I replaced my 156 2,0 TS nearly 1½ year ago with a Fiat Bravo 1,4 TJet 120 HP. The Bravo is 100 kg heavier (thanks to a much stiffer body) and I haven't jet felt that I have to little power. It produces 206 Nm at around 2000 RPM; the 2,0 TS 189 Nm at 4000. It kick a*s at from 1500 RPM and goes to 6000 strongly, the 2,0 TS kick a*s from 3300 and goes strongly to 6500.
If you want more power the 1,4 MultiAir produces even much more torque and 170 HP at 6000 RPM. The Giulietta 1,4 170 HP is much quicker the the old 156 2,0 JTS, both acceleration and top speed. All consuming much less fuel .
Erik

 

It's probably too soon to say if they are rubbish or not. We don't know how long they last. I haven't taken one apart, and I don't know anyone who has.

That said, the 1.4's low redline isn't really a bad sign. While I agree that 6500rpm isn't that high, it just doesn't need to rev that high because of the turbo. This thing has a maximum boost of 18psi and it pulls pretty hard from 2500rpm!

I don't agree that the Alfas of old reved all that high. The 2.0 Nord engines in injected Spiders have redlines of about 6000rpm, the 3.0 is at 5800rpm. There were a few engines that had higher factory redlines, but most were about 6000rpm +/-300. That's certainly not high. There were American V8s in the 60's with 6000rpm redlines, and Fiats with 7000.

I think the question we should be asking about the 1.4 turbo is why does it only have 160hp. In normally aspirated form it has about 100. They added 18psi, easily enough to double the power, yet only got 160. I think the reason is that boost drops off as the RPM rises. It's set up to use all that boost to get a strong mid range punch, but they have the boost drop off as rpm rises to keep the peak horsepower down.

Greg,
Silicone Hose Kits
OKINJECTORS--Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Injector Cleaning Services + Remanufacturing in Oklahoma

 

I think the question we should be asking about the 1.4 turbo is why does it only have 160hp. In normally aspirated form it has about 100. They added 18psi, easily enough to double the power, yet only got 160. I think the reason is that boost drops off as the RPM rises. It's set up to use all that boost to get a strong mid range punch, but they have the boost drop off as rpm rises to keep the peak horsepower down.

Greg,
Silicone Hose Kits
OKINJECTORS--Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Injector Cleaning Services + Remanufacturing in Oklahoma

I know your forte is supercharging but maybe you could come up with a kit to correct this.

 

local magazine drove one Giulietta 60tkms and took the Multiair engine apart, it was like new. Havent heard yet any negative comments/reviews, but this is still quite a new engine.

 

Well, all new it isn't. It a development of Fiat's FIRE 1000 engine, first seen in small Fiats in the mid '80, later enlarged to 1368 cc and fitted with 16 valve DOHC head (mid '90s).
Since 2007 with turbo (TJet 120 and 150HP) and later TwinAir (170HP).
Its true that Alfa engines of yesterdays wasn't particular fast revving, they didn't need to be as they had superior breathing and multi choke carburetors or injection, overhead cams etc.
I see the benefits of high revving race engines but fail to see the benefits of very high revving streets engines. If and engine's power peak is at say 7500 RPM and peak torque is at 5000+ PRM it will not develop much torque below 4000 RPM; at which a street car's engine is 90% of the time.
Erik

 

If and engine's power peak is at say 7500 RPM and peak torque is at 5000+ PRM it will not develop much torque below 4000 RPM; at which a street car's engine is 90% of the time.
Erik

That's absolutely true in the case of a normally aspirated engine. However in the case of this specific engine allowing it to keep 18 psi all the way up to 7500rpm could allow a huge increase in horsepower up top without sacrificing one ounce of torque anywhere in the RPM range. Such is the beauty of forced induction!

Greg,
Silicone Hose Kits
OKINJECTORS--Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Injector Cleaning Services + Remanufacturing in Oklahoma

 

Some interesting thoughts/ideas floating around here....

Buy the idea of forced induction/limiting revs but why wouldn`t Abarth in their Essesse kit - from memory 140 to 165bhp about - simply let the engine rev a bit more rather than doing something else? Reason, my 500c reved same in standard form and SS form; I was hoping the latter would improve things....

As far as Alfa `Nord` engines are concerned, the 2l was never a rever, stick to 1300/1600/1750 for that.

Richard

 

Some interesting thoughts/ideas floating around here....

Buy the idea of forced induction/limiting revs but why wouldn`t Abarth in their Essesse kit - from memory 140 to 165bhp about - simply let the engine rev a bit more rather than doing something else?

Richard

I don't know for sure, but I think it's because in the current version the turbo boost is dropping off at higher rpm, so more rpm by itself won't mean more power. I need to drive one and pay more attention to the boost gauge to know for sure.

Greg,
Silicone Hose Kits
OKINJECTORS--Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Injector Cleaning Services + Remanufacturing in Oklahoma

 

The standard euro 1.4 MultiAir is 170hp. I have no idea why they shaved off 10 hp for the Dart. Differences in fuel quality, perhaps?

According to the boost gauge in my Giulietta, the boost drops only ever so slightly when you're in the vicinity of the redline. Boost maxes out at about 5.700 - 6.000 rpm. At around 5.000 rpm, the engine feels very "on the edge", and just a slight accelerator movement is enough to make the whole 1350 kgs shoot forward.

I have the non-MA 120 hp "tax version" though, so the normal 170 hp may have a different envelope.

And how a 6.500 rpm redline translates to "rubbish engine" is beyond me. The little engine has a lot of character, and I can recognise it a block away when the missus comes driving in the G. Even with the standard exhaust.

 

According to the boost gauge in my Giulietta, the boost drops only ever so slightly when you're in the vicinity of the redline. Boost maxes out at about 5.700 - 6.000 rpm.

Well, in the U.S. spec 500 they are doing something to hold it's power down to 160. If it's not reducing boost at higher rpm (Mitsubishi does this with certain EVOs) it could be they are pulling out a lot of ignition advance, or they may be using the multiair system to alter the valve timing in such a way it chokes off power.

I don't know how they are doing it, but I do know, there is no way a well designed engine with 18 psi can only a 60% increase in power unless there is something intentionally holding it back.

Greg,
Silicone Hose Kits
OKINJECTORS--Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Injector Cleaning Services + Remanufacturing in Oklahoma

 

Yes, I was thinking of a normally aspirated engine.
In the case of a turbo engine you run the risk it'll destruct it self if its allowed to run 18 psi all the the way to 7500 rpm; unless of course its designed and build to do it, but the cost would be prohibitive for a normal street car. For a race car its another matter, cost of any winner is high and rebuilds frequent.
Erik

 

We are getting sandbagged in the U.S.
Not only is the horse power less on the Abarth but the regular 500 gets less mpg than the euro counter part, why?
Euro magazines have tested the 1.4 Multiair 100 HP at over 50 mpg highway while here it is rated at 38 mpg.

 

We are getting sandbagged in the U.S.

Maybe it's tempting to think so, but I think not. The variations in fuels in the US is much greater than in Europe, thus AR probably don't want to market it with the same hp rating in the US as over here. Maybe. It's just a theory.

And as Erik says, a gallon isn't always a gallon. Besides, liters per 100 kms (l/100 km) is how it's written in the rest of the world. A liter is always a liter

 

I think the lower mpg is due to lower weight of Euro model, NA car is better equipped.

 

British gallons are 4.55 L, US gallons are 3,78 L.
Erik

 

Ok, that would still be over 40 mpg. Besides the magazine I was referring to was a Swiss one and it was converted from the L/100 km formula.

 

Yes, the US versions of the Fiat 500 and Abarth 500 is quite different from the European ones. The main reason for not using the MultiAir in the Euro Abarth 500 is likely that it was not available in 2008 when it was launched. Maybe we'll see it in a later model.

The US MultiAir Abarth 500 has the same hp rating as the upgraded euro Abarth 500 esseesse, so in reality every US Abarth buyer saves a couple of thousand dollars on the "normal" to SS upgrade kit.

In any case, the Fiat 500 is available in a thoroughly bewildering array of variants and configurations. Selling yet another 500 variant exclusively for the US probably isn't too much of a logistical challenge, and it's always nice for car buyers to hear "special version just for you"

Whatever one think of FPT's FIRE/T-Jet engine family, it has proven itself as a very flexible and rugged engine for lots of different applications. Just the thought of squeezing 200 usable, everyday, low-ish maintenance horsepower out of 1368 ccm (in the Abarth 500 Assetto Corse) is awe-inspiring!

 

Hmm. I recently scrapped my 8-valve 1108 Punto, and it only had two head gaskets replaced in about 220,000 miles (360,000 kms). That is, if the service history was correct. The rust got to it before the engine had any plans of dying. The month before leaving for the eternal highway, its fuel consumption was 52 mpg on the daily commute.

And, as you say, very cheap parts I kinda miss the hair-raising little tin can ...

 

The 999cc and 1108cc ones don't seem to suffer as much as the 1242cc ones and it's only the 8 valve ones too, the 16 valve 1.2s are fine! I told the Missus we should get a 16 valver but she wouldn't listen.

I enjoy mine too, great little car. I get 54 mpg out of it.

 

The 16V 1242s are highly sought after over here, to transplant into all kinds of Corsa Italiana racers. The Coppa Mille Tre Cento (below 1300 ccm class) guys call them "big block" With a bit of know-how, you can have 100 hp dragging a 700 kg (1550 lbs) car around!

 

I have heard of 2 Giulietta 1750 QV having problems with the turbo, but other than that its a big nothing on the engine front when it comes to reliability of the engine.
Regarding the comment about it being rubbish that it´s not reving to more than about 6.000 rpm... well i noted it to on my Giulietta QV and on the 170 Multiair i tried, it can be taken care of by a tuner, at least some of it, but in the daily life i don´t miss anything.
There are some graph´s here of the power on the G, text is dutch though.

Giulietta 1,4 TB Multiair: Giulietta 1.4 16v Turbo MultiAir 170 pk, Alfa Giulietta - Squadra Tuning

Giulietta 1750 TBi QV: Giulietta QV (235 pk), Alfa Giulietta - Squadra Tuning

 

I'm coming up to 42,000 kms (around 26,000 miles) on the Giulietta now, done in 18 months. No issues on the engine, driveline or suspension. It doesn't even have the typical Alfa suspension squeak in damp weather, nor does anything rattle or vibrate. The turbo squeals and whines a bit when you step on it, but they apparently all do that No leaks, no disappearing coolant, no oil consumption, no freak electrical issues, no overheating, no anything. Starts just as easy in +30C as in -20C temperatures.

This is a car which is punished daily on 75 kms (45-46 miles) of Norways worst commute route, with speeds varying from zero to very fast. The car computer tells me 6.9L/100 km (34 mpg) on average, and I'm not doing anything to save fuel.

One pyrotechnic belt tensioner and a faulty third brake light have been replaced, both under warranty. I've done two oil changes plus the 30,000 km service (which includes an oil change).

The fun part? Getting the tail out is fairly easy since there is close to no oversteer even when you push your luck. Just tap the brake to shift the weight, flick the wheel, wait for the tail and drag it through the corner ...

 

Getting the tail out is fairly easy since there is close to no oversteer even when you push your luck. Just tap the brake to shift the weight, flick the wheel, wait for the tail and drag it through the corner ...

That's part of the driving test over there isn't it?

 

Some more good press for the Giulietta, 36000km now with no problems other than a few small trim issues - top of the gear knob coming off (fixed with a little glue) and the drivers side mirror vibrating - fixed under warranty. The only other issue was getting a speeding ticket for overtaking two trucks...Maybe I should have gone for stealth grey instead of Alfa red!!

I am still surprised by the fuel economy in the QV, when not pushing hard (and in N)I can get about 800km out of a tank...this is hwy driving on reasonably flat roads. And I still love the kick in the back when the turbo comes on boost in "D"....... , through a roundabout/corner or in a straight line.

 

My Bravo TJet 120 HP has now 78000 km/ 49000 miles on the clock and is spinning like new. Apart from usual services and change of brake pads it has never needed any attention.
I've just returned from an extended visit to the US. It was nice to see the baby Fiat 500s on the streets of NY and other big cities - most drivers were women. However, in Hill Billy/Gun Anny country I never saw one. I guess the jump down from a 5000 pound truck to a 500 is too big for the Annies
Erik

 

"I have no idea why they shaved off 10 hp for the Dart"

I imagine that most of the Dart II's sold in the US will have automatic transmissions, and because of this, it has been common for manufacturers to reduce the hp with those in order to better protect the transmission (keep it from overheating?), compared to the manual transmission.

One older example was the Merkur, where the car with the manual had something like 20-30 more hp than the automatic. It was said that this was indeed to protect the automatic transmission.

 

The Dart II 1,4 Multi Air only comes with manual gearboxes, either stick shift or dual dry clutch, which shifts the gears electronically, but its still a manual box.
Why the engine is quoted at 160 HP and not 170 HP (as for all other markets) I don't know. The quoted torque is the same as for other markets, 250Nm.
As some others at this tread have written, it the same for the Fiat 500 MultiAir Turbo.
Erik

 

I'm willing to bet that for the US, the Dart will end up with mostly an automatic transmission, as that's what 98% of American's want.

 

Sure, but as of now only the two versions with 2,0 and 2,4 are available with prober auto boxes, the Multi Air Turbo is either with pure manual 6 speed box with normal clutch or dual dry clutch.
Erik

 

What is in the US version of the 100 hp 500 for the automatic transmission? It is a 6 speed.

 

I drove the Dart with an automatic. It's slow, but I don't know of a faster sedan that gets 40mpg. It's also quite comfy and has a lot of nice features.

Then I drove the 500 Abarth. Dang, that was fun. I bought it! I now own a shiny new red Abarth. Ironically another member of the local Alfa club bought a red on on the same day.

I think the engine is awesome. It sounds great, pulls hard, gets good fuel economy, I love it. I am highly confident it will hold up well.

Greg,
Silicone Hose Kits
OKINJECTORS--Gasoline and Diesel Injector Cleaning, Rebuild, Overhaul, and Testing Services