Alfa Romeo Forums banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
Wild guess, but they wanted a number similar to 116? And aren't our v6s 162s?

Sent from my LG-SP200 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
I have the book Alfa 75 & Milano: driven to be different by Paul Koebrugge from the Netherlands. On page 246 he indicates the 1986 & 87 Milano 2.5 V6 have VINs ZAR161161 and the 1987 & 88 Milano 3.0 V6 have VINs ZAR162B60. The 2.5 V6 Milanos were the only 75 series to have the ZAR161 VINs, all other 75 series were ZAR162. Is this the information you are looking for?
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
844 Posts
I think the question SportBiker is asking is this:

If the the GTV6 was Type (Tipo) 116 why wasn't the Milano Type 117, or Type 126, why did it skip to Type 161 an increase of forty-five. After all when Alfa finished with the 101 cars they went to 105, an increase in four. When the 105 gave way to the 115 that was a jump of a ten.

Is that your question Mr. Sport, or is it Mr. Biker?

Bye
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I think the question SportBiker is asking is this:

If the the GTV6 was Type (Tipo) 116 why wasn't the Milano Type 117, or Type 126, why did it skip to Type 161 an increase of forty-five. After all when Alfa finished with the 101 cars they went to 105, an increase in four. When the 105 gave way to the 115 that was a jump of a ten.

Is that your question Mr. Sport, or is it Mr. Biker?

Bye
Yes, exactly. Milano is on the same chassis as the earlier 116s, so why not continue the series numbering? Or, at the least, use some smaller jump a la 116->119 for the GTV-6?

Further confounding to me is my model is 161.36. Given AR reset the chassis number, why not reset the variation number as well (eg, 161.01 or 161.04, etc)?

OAS, we're all friends here, so you can call me Sport ;-)
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top