View Single Post
  #14  
Old April 25th 04, 09:22 PM
SteveH
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hellraiser > wrote:

> > Bear in mind that mine's a 'narrowbody' so doesn't have the enhancements
> > (better driving position, neater handling) that the 'widebody' cars got.
> > However, the ideal combination of older Alfa 8v TS engine and 'widebody'
> > chassis is very rare (only available for 6 months), so I'd settle for a
> > narrowbody any day over a 16v widebody.

>
> Now that's weird - everyone I've spoken to reckons the 16v engines are
> better than the 8v, so why the narrowbody/8v preference? The 16v has more
> umph apparently, or does it suffer from the usual lack of bottom end torque
> most 16vs have?


16v has marginally more BHP, but more weight. I'd love a widebody 8v,
but try finding one!

My preference for the 8v is that it's an all-alloy engine (helps the
balance of weight distribution against the iron-block Fiat-based 16v)
and is proven to be a totally bulletproof lump - 8v, camchain, Bosch
injection. Not much to go wrong there!

Whereas the 16v suffers from problems with the timing variator, and also
needs the belt replacing every 40k-ish miles. Ignore this at your own
risk.... they're also, should we say, a little 'thirsty' when it comes
to oil, too, and many haven't been looked after by enthusiast, so will
have run low on oil, which effectively means you're sitting on a
time-bomb.

It's all personal preference, of course, but I know and trust the 8v
engine.


--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - Alfa 155 TS Lusso - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
Ads