2.2 JTS
 

Where has the JTS option gone on the 159?? alfa romeo website car
configurator offers the 1750 tb as the only petrol option now!

I would have thought that the 2.2 JTS would be much torquier and relaxed
drive than the 1750 turbo and similar BHPs.

When did this happen and why wasn't I informed!!

2.2 JTS
 

GT > wrote:

> Where has the JTS option gone on the 159?? alfa romeo website car
> configurator offers the 1750 tb as the only petrol option now!
>
> I would have thought that the 2.2 JTS would be much torquier and relaxed
> drive than the 1750 turbo and similar BHPs.
>
> When did this happen and why wasn't I informed!!

The JTS engines were co-developed with GM and are largely regarded as
'not very good'.

Having had a 1.8 turbo (in a Passat), I'd say you need to try one - you
get lots more torque and a much more relaxed drive from a modern turbo
than you used to get from 1980s laggy monsters.
--
SteveH

2.2 JTS
 

GT wrote:
> Where has the JTS option gone on the 159?? alfa romeo website car
> configurator offers the 1750 tb as the only petrol option now!
>
> I would have thought that the 2.2 JTS would be much torquier and relaxed
> drive than the 1750 turbo and similar BHPs.
>
> When did this happen and why wasn't I informed!!
>
>

Didn't you sell out? ;)

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS GT 3.2 V6
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

2.2 JTS
 

"SteveH" > wrote in message
. ..
> GT > wrote:
>
>> Where has the JTS option gone on the 159?? alfa romeo website car
>> configurator offers the 1750 tb as the only petrol option now!
>>
>> I would have thought that the 2.2 JTS would be much torquier and relaxed
>> drive than the 1750 turbo and similar BHPs.
>>
>> When did this happen and why wasn't I informed!!
>
> The JTS engines were co-developed with GM and are largely regarded as
> 'not very good'.
>
> Having had a 1.8 turbo (in a Passat), I'd say you need to try one - you
> get lots more torque and a much more relaxed drive from a modern turbo
> than you used to get from 1980s laggy monsters.

Just been reading about it - you're right - sounds like a different beast
altogether. BHP figures:
2.2JTS - 182bhp
3.2JTS - 256bhp
1750tb - 200bhp

Torque figures are very interesting:
2.2JTS - 230Nm @ 4500rpm
3.2JTS - 322Nm @ 3800rpm
1750tb - 320Nm. @ 1400rpm (how so low revs??)

Does the turbo work at a low revs then? I wasn't aware that such a thing
existed - I thought they needed decent exhaust gas pressure (higher revs) to
work?

2.2 JTS
 

"GT" > wrote in message
...
> Where has the JTS option gone on the 159?? alfa romeo website car
> configurator offers the 1750 tb as the only petrol option now!
>
> I would have thought that the 2.2 JTS would be much torquier and relaxed
> drive than the 1750 turbo and similar BHPs.
>
> When did this happen and why wasn't I informed!!

I have a 159 2.2 JTS and apart from a rogue "check engine" message on start
up - all is well with it.


--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

2.2 JTS
 

GT wrote:
> "SteveH" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> GT > wrote:
>>
>>> Where has the JTS option gone on the 159?? alfa romeo website car
>>> configurator offers the 1750 tb as the only petrol option now!
>>>
>>> I would have thought that the 2.2 JTS would be much torquier and relaxed
>>> drive than the 1750 turbo and similar BHPs.
>>>
>>> When did this happen and why wasn't I informed!!
>> The JTS engines were co-developed with GM and are largely regarded as
>> 'not very good'.
>>
>> Having had a 1.8 turbo (in a Passat), I'd say you need to try one - you
>> get lots more torque and a much more relaxed drive from a modern turbo
>> than you used to get from 1980s laggy monsters.
>
> Just been reading about it - you're right - sounds like a different beast
> altogether. BHP figures:
> 2.2JTS - 182bhp
> 3.2JTS - 256bhp
> 1750tb - 200bhp
>
> Torque figures are very interesting:
> 2.2JTS - 230Nm @ 4500rpm
> 3.2JTS - 322Nm @ 3800rpm
> 1750tb - 320Nm. @ 1400rpm (how so low revs??)
>
> Does the turbo work at a low revs then? I wasn't aware that such a thing
> existed - I thought they needed decent exhaust gas pressure (higher revs) to
> work?
>
>
I *think* that looks like a misprint. Have you got more than one source?

I mean, it depends on how heavy your turbo is, but you'd certainly
expect more torque higher up the range than that.

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS GT 3.2 V6
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

2.2 JTS
 

Catman > wrote:

> > Does the turbo work at a low revs then? I wasn't aware that such a thing
> > existed - I thought they needed decent exhaust gas pressure (higher revs) to
> > work?
> >
> >
> I *think* that looks like a misprint. Have you got more than one source?
>
> I mean, it depends on how heavy your turbo is, but you'd certainly
> expect more torque higher up the range than that.

That'll be right - the VW 1.8T engine produced peak torque from similar
revs - allegedly, they continue to produce this peak figure through most
of the rev. range. Certainly feels like it, anyway. Almost like a TDI
that revs.
--
SteveH

2.2 JTS
 

SteveH wrote:
> Catman > wrote:
>
>>> Does the turbo work at a low revs then? I wasn't aware that such a thing
>>> existed - I thought they needed decent exhaust gas pressure (higher revs) to
>>> work?
>>>
>>>
>> I *think* that looks like a misprint. Have you got more than one source?
>>
>> I mean, it depends on how heavy your turbo is, but you'd certainly
>> expect more torque higher up the range than that.
>
> That'll be right - the VW 1.8T engine produced peak torque from similar
> revs - allegedly, they continue to produce this peak figure through most
> of the rev. range. Certainly feels like it, anyway. Almost like a TDI
> that revs.

Blimey. I wonder how the turbo can be even barely spinning at that kind
of speed. It would give a pretty much linear pwoer curve up the rev
range though.


--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS GT 3.2 V6
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

2.2 JTS
 

Catman > wrote:

> > That'll be right - the VW 1.8T engine produced peak torque from similar
> > revs - allegedly, they continue to produce this peak figure through most
> > of the rev. range. Certainly feels like it, anyway. Almost like a TDI
> > that revs.
>
> Blimey. I wonder how the turbo can be even barely spinning at that kind
> of speed. It would give a pretty much linear pwoer curve up the rev
> range though.

Just checked - the Passat was putting out 210Nm at 1750rpm - but this
was a 150bhp low pressure turbo, rather than the 200bhp+ 'full fat'
version.
--
SteveH

2.2 JTS
 

SteveH wrote:
> Catman > wrote:
>
>>> That'll be right - the VW 1.8T engine produced peak torque from similar
>>> revs - allegedly, they continue to produce this peak figure through most
>>> of the rev. range. Certainly feels like it, anyway. Almost like a TDI
>>> that revs.
>> Blimey. I wonder how the turbo can be even barely spinning at that kind
>> of speed. It would give a pretty much linear pwoer curve up the rev
>> range though.
>
> Just checked - the Passat was putting out 210Nm at 1750rpm - but this
> was a 150bhp low pressure turbo, rather than the 200bhp+ 'full fat'
> version.

So where does the full fat peak its torque?

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 GTV TS GT 3.2 V6
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk