Alfa Romeo Forums banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Ok. I have three types of bushes, for 105 series. I want to fit them on a Giulia super or for a Berlina 2000. Both three have exact the same overall dimensions, while the first left is clearly softer. Frome the photos you see from the left the first one suppose is for the upper wishbone, the inner one(engine bay). The other two while look different, is for down wishbones. The questions are:
1. May I use the second types as an upgrade for the first?
2. The others than the first left are of dif shape for what reason? for dif types of 105's?
3. Does the green line color on the photo means something?

ps. I bought 10 of the hard ones for near 50$, Original and new. The third on the right looks old but is unused.
Thanks
 

Attachments

·
Administrator
Joined
·
3,852 Posts
The first bush with the open ends / sides is a silentbloc bush, these are normally used in Alfa production suspensions, like the rear trailing arms and front upper wishbone.

The second and third bushes with the closed ends are for the front lower wishbones, these are special suspension bushes and the inner "tube" is not a straight piece of pipe, but rather a forging with a ball shaped middle, surrounded by a nylon or polypropylene bush. The purpose behind this was to allow the inner "tube" to have a relative degree of movement in both a vertical & horizontal plane to cater for slight deviations from square in the building tolerences of the bodies. Basically it allows the suspension to go up & down, while rotating out of square without inducing undue stress into the front suspension mountings. You need 4 per car.

The green line is where a thick felt washer was fitted & only on one side, as a dust shield, especially on the early 105's, where the suspension did not have caps over the nuts like the later cars. Some of the later bushes had the washer on both sides. Alfa kept evolving the part as the 105 remained in production.

Alfa did things for a reason, for a road car, I would not substitute the lower control arms bushes for the upper control arm bush the difference in durometer, (hardness), will increase the transfer of NVH, (noise vibration & harshness into the body). A race car is another issue entirely.

Hope this helps
Ciao
Greig
Sunny South Africa
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thanks Greig,
Well, as for the hard bushes for the lower wishbones I had a thought if I can use them also for the upper wishbone, for a mixted role, track and fast road. But again there is also the poly issue. Why not to use polys?
Today I was near to buy 2 bushes for the upper wishbones ( these which connects the castor rod)...original Ricambi NOS. Looked closely and found out that even between 10 items, they were ALL scrap! Thus, Yes I will put on Polys, dont care for some stiffness. In a side alfabb thread , they noticed that,too. They are absolutely right. I don't want to change every year that silly bushes.

Now something real strange for me. As you know there is a bar which supports carbs in Euro series, having a bush on the other side (engine mount). Does anybody knows if the distance between the holes from the carbs side and the center of the bush is the same for ALL the 105s? Or there are options depents from the dif engines? I'm asking this 'cause in my 2l Berlina (completly stock) the center of the bush is not coaxial but eccentrically located (photo), while in my Giulia ( converted to 2L eng from Alfetta) is centered and...after repaired the carbs mounts, found out that there is almost 1cm gap between the bush hole and the engine mount hole! What is wrong here, please advice...
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,303 Posts
On the carb support:

The 2L engine is about 1 cm taller than the 1600. there is a different carb support rod - I think Centerline has both - for each engine. If you used the stock 1600 carb rod it will be (as you describe) too short to reach the bolt hole in the engine mount bracket.

I cut mine and welded in a spacer, but eventually replaced it with a new 2L one from CL.

Robert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks Robert,
Actually the PO converted the 1300 engine from a Giulia Super to 2L from an Alfetta. Spoting my mind there for some time, I thought something similar. It looks like the PO had no relation with the car, but what about the mechanic who put the new engine on? Finally, the short bar both with the close inner wall touch of the carbs system, gave the whole carbs support a damned silly situation (rubers were OFF, really off). I repair everything and the only issue was this short bar...Since, I threw off the two Bonaldi servos, staying now with just my foot, I wondering if I must also get of the vacoum valve located on the left of the manifold. Not tapped like I did, but have a screw instead of.
Thanks again
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,303 Posts
..Since, I threw off the two Bonaldi servos, staying now with just my foot, I wondering if I must also get of the vacoum valve located on the left of the manifold. Not tapped like I did, but have a screw instead of.
Thanks again
My original Duetto manifold had the vacuum port drilled and tapped, but the car was manual brakes only. The port was closed off with a bolt and the copper washer that is in the head kit for use with the vacuum valve.

Finding the right bolt is tricky. You want a short (about 1/2 inch long) shoulder bold so there is a good flat for the washer. Larry at APE might have one from an old manifold, or one of the alfa "junk" collectors. Use some thread lock.

BTW, the 105's used two different brake MC's - one that was 20 mm for manual brakes, and one that was 22mm for use ith the servos (at least in the single brake configuration). If you had booster, you probably have the larger MC, which will make the un-boosted pedal pressure a bit high.

Looking at your post, if you had dual boosters, then you had the 1750 era dual brake circuits. Good for safety, but troublesome to bleed ( thousands of posts on the BB on that one!). There was only one size MC for this system. It also has the rear brake pressure limiting valve.

Robert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Thanks again Robert. As for the Vacuum Valve, the point is, while un-connected to servos, is it still working,even if it is externally tappered? And if is working, does affect anything on 4th back inlet of the manifold?
As for the system brakes of the Giulia, yes it has the 1750 era system with many many brake lines! Normally all 105s from the 70's I guess use a big MC in a tandem brake system. But, for RHD cars they leave the old system with the floor pedals. Can you send me an alfabb thread for bleeding that brake system? I finally found the wrong supporting bar made all the mess. And it looks like the 2l engine fits right in Giulia's bay. Thus, I left the idea to get a custom big air filter, after using today the normal air filter canister to see if now there is enough gap between the filter and the inner fender ( for that reason I made myself a supporting plate for the carbs, it is in the photos). And yes, there is a safe gap! After that, I did something I was always wanted to do on this nice filter system. I had drilled as many as possible holes on the inside cylinder of the filter system in my alfas, but I wanted to have somehow empty the system, without the inner cylinder and the filter element. Today I made it. Trying to split the front part of the big black cylinder I was impressed of the join quality. Normally, and after dozens of ...kicks, it could be dismantled to scrap. But no, the operation succeded ( photo). Then I depainted the cylinder (I might leave the bare metal color, It looks nice) and placed it vice versa on the bowl, since just behind I have the good old Sparkrite ignition (just helps the spark). And I connected it with this red big filter just behind the now empty inner right headlight, for a cooler and bigger air flow.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,303 Posts
You do need to remove the vacuum valve. It's a check valve and will suck air into the #4 intake, ruining the fuel/air ratio.

Nice job on the intake, but the filter now draws warm air from inside the engine compartment. One of the other models with this air filter has a long front snout that connects via a large flex hose to an intake in front of the radiator. Cooler intake air.....

Robert
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
3,852 Posts
I agree with Robert on all points

Regarding the carburettor mounting bush, the inner tube should be in the middle of the bush, they tend to collapse when they are soaked in oil for long periods and then subjected to under body heat - easy to press out & press in a replacement.

Upper wishbone bush for the front link - agree 100%, poly is the way to go here, the originals were soft & always collapsed.

Regards
Greig
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,303 Posts
The castor link bushing is probably the single most significant piece to upgrade to improve an alfa's handling (105's anyway). Some racers use a solid aluminum bush (such as sold by Spruel)!

Next most significant is front end alignment -- max castor, neg camber (2 - 3 degrees, sometimes more depending on tires and a few other issues). Takes adjustable upper arm to get enough neg camber.

It's hard to improve on the nylon unibals in the lower a-arms. Rose joints are more precise, but wear like mad in road use (and need to be inspected every race). Likewise for the upper iner bushing. Replace worn tie rod ends and lower ball joints. Adjust or o/h the steering box for minimum play, o/h the idler arm bushings. After that the steering is so tight the body can flex where the steering box and idler mount on hard driving -- racers often weld stiffeners here; cracks in the sheet metal are common.

Poly's are good for the sway bar bushings and end fittings for tighter action.

Then springs and yellow Koni's on medium, adjust ride height and fiddle with "bump-steering" if you get fanatical.

Then match all this with a complete rework of the rear suspension.

And engine and transmission and......

;)

Robert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Thanks for the advices both of you. Yes, I have in mind about all of these. I cut the bar and then welded 1cm away. I will go to polys anyway, since as I mentioned before, even some new originals were out of work!
Today, a prooved good supplier, told me to use for tie rods the ones from a Mercedes 123 type being exactly the same and in a superior quality,too. So, I bought the two 123's bars with the four tie rods hoping he is right. On the other hand the 4 balls cost only somewhere US 40$ and they look great. But don't know which of the total six needed are the four I get. Do you have any info on this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,197 Posts
Today, a prooved good supplier, told me to use for tie rods the ones from a Mercedes 123 type being exactly the same and in a superior quality,too. So, I bought the two 123's bars with the four tie rods hoping he is right. On the other hand the 4 balls cost only somewhere US 40$ and they look great. But don't know which of the total six needed are the four I get. Do you have any info on this?


It's very useful to know this. Please let us know if the 123 tie-rod ends fit OK on your car. There was some discussion on the board awhile back about Alfa replacement rod ends being of lower quality than the OEM items which are no longer supplied by Alfa.

Once thing Mercedes is known for is keeping spares on hand for their cars so perhaps we'll have a lasting supply of rod-ends.

Thanks for posting this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
The seller has a big supply company and told me he sold many of them for the 105 series in the past.I was also surprised and more over when I took them, quality is just TOP. Now the point is to see it they fit, in real to share the results with you. Asking at the Mercedes, too, found plenty of them. Why tie rods for Alfas (while at lower quality) must cost double or even triple than the Mercedes?
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top