Board logo

Alfa 2.0 engine
dnmalc - 14/1/06 at 12:08 AM

Just been offered a 2.0 Alpha twin cam for free does anyone have knowledge of these. What should I be looking at. Am I right in thinking that the use a trans axle if so how do I convert it to match a type 9 box

gazza285 - 14/1/06 at 12:40 AM

Yes, I had one. They are tall, ugly, not that powerful, thirsty, RWD gearboxes are a fortune (unless you make your own bell housing), not particularly reliable, and worth peanuts. If it came with carbs then sell these seperate on eBay and stick the engine on as well. Use the money to buy a proper engine.

mookaloid - 14/1/06 at 01:20 AM

quote:
Originally posted by gazza285
Yes, I had one. They are tall, ugly, not that powerful, thirsty, RWD gearboxes are a fortune (unless you make your own bell housing), not particularly reliable, and worth peanuts. If it came with carbs then sell these seperate on eBay and stick the engine on as well. Use the money to buy a proper engine.


Not a lot going for it then?

CGILL - 14/1/06 at 06:44 AM

gearbox to use is from a 105 berlina etc, they are 'normal'.
They are also aluminium and you can tickle them to get good power, better option than a pinto if you get a 105 box. twin cam chain drive, sound great.

cymtriks - 14/1/06 at 12:45 PM

The Alfa TC was usially regarded as a good engine, I'm surprised by the comments above.

The Twin Spark was especially highly regarded and has a nice sporting sound. The 2.0 made 155 bhp and was easily tunable above that.

The Alfa engine is closely related to the Fiat Twin Cam, I'm not certain how close, it may be identical!

The comment I absolutely agree with is height. It's a long stroke engine, basically it's the 1.6 made taller until it gets to 2.0. Now that most engines are twin cam units the difference between it and other engines is probably not that great.

akumabito - 14/1/06 at 04:08 PM

quote:
Originally posted by cymtriks
The Alfa TC was usially regarded as a good engine, I'm surprised by the comments above.

The Twin Spark was especially highly regarded and has a nice sporting sound. The 2.0 made 155 bhp and was easily tunable above that.

The Alfa engine is closely related to the Fiat Twin Cam, I'm not certain how close, it may be identical!

The comment I absolutely agree with is height. It's a long stroke engine, basically it's the 1.6 made taller until it gets to 2.0. Now that most engines are twin cam units the difference between it and other engines is probably not that great.


True!

zetec - 14/1/06 at 06:44 PM

My wife has a TS 2ltr GTV 1998. Its done 40K and I wouldn't fit one in a kit for all the tea in China. the variator rattles like a diesel (according to the Alfa trade they all do) I've replaced the air flow meter recently £150 and a new set of plugs (8) over £100....and they drink oil, even Alfa say check the oil every other tank of fuel! My local Alfa man says he has lost count of the number of 156 TS engines he has replaced.

My '94 zetec gives out 20 more BHP cost for parts is peanuts (as is an engine) and not a rattle or oil leak in sight.

gazza285 - 14/1/06 at 09:06 PM

quote]Originally posted by CGILL
gearbox to use is from a 105 berlina etc, they are 'normal'.
They are also aluminium and you can tickle them to get good power, better option than a pinto if you get a 105 box.



I thought that 105 production stopped nearly 30 years ago.
I did look into putting an Alfa twin cam in my Locost, but found the search for a good RWD Alfa box too much hassle, and decided if I wanted an alloy engine that used head gaskets at a prodigious rate, warped heads and used oil by the gallon I might as well put a K series in the bloody thing (Warning, some of that might be made up). I sold the carbs on eBay, got £20 for the engine as well, and put the 1300 crossflow out of my Escort in it and sold the rest of that on eBay as well.

While I'm not a big fan of the Pinto, except in SWB Transits, you can get one to deliver reliable power easily, parts are available everywhere, and so are gearboxes, aftermarket performance bits are cheap, and the heads don't warp every time you are stuck in traffic for longer than five minutes.

I still quite like Alfas though, even going as far as to have had two, a Cloverleaf Sprint, and an '80s Gulietta. I've still got the oil stains on my drive to prove it. Both dissolved.

dnmalc - 14/1/06 at 09:58 PM

Thanks guys I take it that the recommendation is to stick with the Pinto
Cheers

Mark Allanson - 14/1/06 at 10:09 PM

My first car was a 1969 1300 GT Junior (105), considering that Ford of the time had just ditched side valves, the DOHC, 2 twin dellortos, 5 speed box, 110 bhp was VERY exotic. A marvellous machine and wish I still had it now. I got myself into and out of more trouble than I car to admit even to this day!

gazza285 - 14/1/06 at 10:32 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
My first car was a 1969 1300 GT Junior (105), considering that Ford of the time had just ditched side valves, the DOHC, 2 twin dellortos, 5 speed box, 110 bhp was VERY exotic.


And for slightly less money you could buy a Mk2 Lotus Cortina, I know you don't get five gears, but you did get DOHC, twin Webers and 105hp, only one behind the Alfas 106 (for the 1570 engine, the 1300 had 89) and the optional extra of rustproofing. Or you could buy an Escort Twink with the same.

gazza285 - 14/1/06 at 10:34 PM

Reminds me of the old Supermirafiori adverts where the Cortina turns into an Italian rotbox. For the older members that one I fear.

Mark Allanson - 14/1/06 at 10:43 PM

And for slightly less money you could buy a Mk2 Lotus Cortina.....


SLIGHTLY LESS!!! The Alfa cost me £130 in 1979, a Lotus Cortina at the same time would have been about £2000!

Johnmor - 14/1/06 at 10:45 PM

I can not believe you can compare an Alfa twin cam with a Pinto.!!!
The alfa is simply miles better, all alloy twin cam 8v produces 150bhp. The16v is based on fiat twin cam block, one of the toughest engines produced and will pump out 160 easy.
The Alfa 8v is about 110kgs, a lot less than the pinto and will do many more miles if looked after. The 8v has chain driven twin cams and it will not snap and destroy the interior.
The height of the engine is about 17" from the center of the cank to the top of the plenum chamber on an twin spark 8V.
Same if not shorter than a Pinto.
As for geaboxes , well that is a problem but surley thats what building your own car is all about. Coversion plates and bell housings are possible.
If you want it easy buy a Caterham.
Having had many Fords, Citroens,Fiats and Alfas over the years i would go with an Italian engine , French suspension and American running costs.


There, rant over.

gazza285 - 14/1/06 at 11:06 PM

I wouldn't use a Pinto either. If I didn't already have the Crossflow I'm using I'd probably go for a Toyota or a Pug Mi16 and I'd definately go for a Zetec or XE before considering the Alfa.

gazza285 - 14/1/06 at 11:07 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
And for slightly less money you could buy a Mk2 Lotus Cortina.....


SLIGHTLY LESS!!! The Alfa cost me £130 in 1979, a Lotus Cortina at the same time would have been about £2000!





That's Italian depreciation for you.

Mark Allanson - 14/1/06 at 11:12 PM

quote:
Originally posted by gazza285
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
And for slightly less money you could buy a Mk2 Lotus Cortina.....


SLIGHTLY LESS!!! The Alfa cost me £130 in 1979, a Lotus Cortina at the same time would have been about £2000!





That's Italian depreciation for you.




But that Alfa now in decent condition would be £5000 (and the Lotus significantly more)

gazza285 - 14/1/06 at 11:18 PM

One slight problem with good nick Alfas,





For some reason they are hard to find.

Mark Allanson - 14/1/06 at 11:36 PM

Love the Ziebart sticker in the front screen, still all that tin worm would only be a days work to clear up, may need a new screen though - not the easiest to remove in one piece

gazza285 - 15/1/06 at 01:00 AM

quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
Love the Ziebart sticker in the front screen


I thought it was nice too.

It's because I was getting a bit sick of welding up scrap Mk1 Escort shells that I thought I'd give this Locost thing a lark. I'd seen the book and thought nothing of it, it was only when I was selling some Crossflow goodies on eBay that I got interested. Uncle Fista (Tony Bond) contacted me about some question or other with a link to his site and that really got me thinking. Never bought the bits though, the bastard.

alfaman - 15/1/06 at 01:51 AM

I had better comment going by my user name!
To try and fit an alfa 2.0 twin cam into a locost type chassis could be tricky due to its height and gearbox options.
The alfa twin cam when set up properly is a really nice engine but poorly set up or tired engines can be a bit of a pain(the carburettor engines especially)
I woudnt be too hard on the alfa twin cam as its roots I believe go back to the late fifties in 1300cc form and an all alloy block and head with twin carbs was light years ahead of the competition at the time.
The next generation fuel injected twin spark 8v engines are beautifully responsive (alfa 155 pre widebody and alfa 164) all alloy with variable inlet cam timing would be the ones to go for.
I have two of these engines 1.8 (138 BHP)and 2.0 (148 BHP)one of which I will eventually fit into my car mated to a type nine box.
The later 16v twinspark engines Im not so sure of but I think they were a cast iron block(heavier)and the 2 litre engines had balancer shafts closely related to Fiat Tipo 16v/Lancia Thema 16v engines of the time which made them less throttle responsive

But to be brutally honest I personally woundnt bother trying to fit one of the carburettor alfa engines into a seven type
chassis when you have the options of the zetec ,vauxhall 16v, toyota,rover etc the hassles involved just wouldnt be worth it, 20 years ago maybe but certainly not now
but as I said earlier the 8v alloy fuel injected twin spark engine is nice engine and would be worth a try just to be different.

gazza285 - 15/1/06 at 02:59 AM

It's not really the height thats the problem, as mentioned by Johnmor earlier its about the same from the crank centre to the top as a Pinto, it's the depth. The sump bottom is about 4" lower than a Pinto and the sump is the widest part of the engine.

To clarify,
I like Alfas to the extent I have owned two (I obviously didn't learn the first time.).
I like the engine when its good (which is rare as they tend to suffer slight teething trouble to make Alfa ownership that bit more interesting.).
Unless you find an Alfa box to put on the back of the thing be prepared to make a bellhousing, which is all part of the fun of building your own car, says the man who buys a ready made chassis.
It's massive. It's easily two foot tall with the standard sump.
It will leak and burn oil.
It will missfire on tickover.
It will sound nice, until the backbox drops off.

Here's one I sold earlier.
Gazza's old Alfa engine on eBay.

Loverly thing.

[Edited on 15/1/06 by gazza285]

gazza285 - 15/1/06 at 03:07 AM

And here is a quality pic of my old Guiletta. The wife was not impressed.


JB - 15/1/06 at 09:28 AM

The early Alfa twin cams (the ones discussed here) are not related in any way to the Fiat Twin cam engine. They are completly different.

However, as already mentioned, the later Alfa16V twin spark is very similar and interchangeable with the Lancia Integrale and earlier Fiat Twin Cam engines. Some of the blocks on the later 16V Alfas were alloy, as these were considered the top upgrade for the Fiat twin cam to lose a bit of weight.

John

alfaman - 15/1/06 at 09:59 AM

JB
Its interesting to know that the later alfa 16v twin spark engines went back to alloy blocks
are these the engines used in alfa 156,s and 147,s and do you reckon they mate onto the front wheel drive fiat/lancia gearboxes
(integrale,thema,tipo,croma etc.)?

but going back to the old alfa twin cam its the sump depth that is the real problem if the engine is from the alfetta/giulietta
range of cars
I measured mine on my old gtv and was surprised at how deep it actually was, 200mm from crank centre.

[Edited on 22/1/06 by alfaman]

[Edited on 22/1/06 by alfaman]

Johnmor - 15/1/06 at 11:10 AM

When I tried to defend the Alfa engine I was realy comparing it to the Pinto or early Ford DOHC, if faced with the choice of a Zetec or Toyota then it becomes more difficult. One thing we should consider, is the cost of tuning an engine to aquire the desired power and response. As previously mentioned Alfas rust, big time , so the mechanical parts become very cheap. Eg 1991 Alfa 164 2.0l 8v Twin spark £100 .(entire car) That provides 150 Bhp as it comes, with reliability of mass production, Fuel injection, and standard parts.
How much would it cost to develop 150bhp from a DOHC?
As we said gearbox and transmission is a problem but if the conversion to a Type 9 or T5 is carried out at even £500, then that has to be balanced against the cost of tuning a DOHC.
The front whell drive Alfas have shoter sumps than the rear whell drive and are now far more common. That may aleviate some of the sump depth problem.
The 16v engine has reliability issues , the clearence from valve to piston is so low that small end wear can result in contact, so i would avoid that particular version.

I have to hold my hands up and say I bought a pre built chassis (dam he noticed), I have always messed with engines, and expierence has taught me that if get engine selection, tuning or maintenence wrong then I will be left at the side of the road.
If I get chassis construction wrong getting stranded or wet may be the least of my problems.
I am at the moment try to fit an Alfa V6 in my chassis and trying to mate the engine to a type 9 so I reserve the right retract everything I have said in a month or two.

owelly - 15/1/06 at 03:44 PM

My Alfa V6 is in and running.
It sounds marvellous but I still need to fit the chimneys!!

Johnmor - 15/1/06 at 06:40 PM

Thats great news.

How did you get on with the clutch, which friction plate did you use?

That is going to be a seriously quick machine!!!!

JB - 15/1/06 at 07:54 PM

quote:
Originally posted by alfaman
JB
Its interesting to know that the later alfa 16v twin spark engines went back to alloy blocks
are these the engines used in alfa 156,s and 147,s and do you reckon they mate onto the front wheel drive fiat/lancia gearboxes
(integrale,thema,tipo,croma etc.)?

I am unsure of the exact details, but a guy I knew with a 16V Fiat engine in his Minor mentioned it to me. I have contacts in Austrailia who will also probally know.

I would expect the block to bolt upto any of the Fiat gearboxes.

More research is required!

John

Bob C - 15/1/06 at 09:18 PM

I used a 1750 version of this engine (from the 1750 berlinetta saloon) in a home made lotus elan (of all things). I thought the engine was great at the time - certainly very different from the cast iron boat anchors from BL, ford & vauxhall. The construction was a novelty, wet liner cylinders slipped into a big aluminium bucket with 'o' ring seals round the bottom. The sump was a big finned al casting with a labyrinth of baffles cast in the inside. The cylinder head was hemisheric & you could see right through from intake out of exhaust during top overlap. Cam pulleys were full vernier & the exhaust valves sodium filled(!). The box that came with that car was one of the first 5speeds available to joe public with a step-up 5th.
OK it leaked oil & I could never get the valve shims right & you had to pull the camshafts right off to adjust 'em & once I got the intake cam a tooth out & bent 4 valves...
but it went alright & sounded good!
Bob

dnmalc - 15/1/06 at 09:53 PM

What have I started??
Yes the Alpha will strtch my talents but given that I am already building the chassis, scuttle panels and bones from scratch the Alpha may mean another year on the build. Given my lack of experience with any alpha compared with a reasonable knowledge of fords and the fact that £500 spent on the pinto in the garage (ie cam, 45s, exhaust and vernier pulley) will give me 150 bhp with only an engine build I think the answer is clear.

Johnmor - 15/1/06 at 11:12 PM

I have to agree with everything you say, If you have little or no expieence with alfa or Fiat/lancia engines then Ford is the way to go,as you say, its what you know.

The best way to look at these engines is as an alternative , not better or worse but different ( diversity training yeugh##)

The best way to stir up opinion is to slag of somebody elses pride and joy, thats why I check this site every night,

Alfas are still the dogs bol##cks though!!!!