I
This explains why it's such a balanced engine! Such a beautiful master piece!
Musically they are balanced, but physically they are not. That's why they have an offset weighted flywheel and crank pulley.
They have the same piston behaviour as a straight 6 engine and so, they have the same even 120* between exhaust events.
Quote from: sportiva on May 11, 2016, 03:27:12 PM
It was such a well designed engine even Cosworth Engineering took an interest in it. I wonder what Cosworth would have done if F.I.A.T. had taken them up on their offer to buy the design and production the engine still had life left in it. It was the partnership with G.M and their engine sharing and led to the Busso's early retirement. The final balancing of the crank and flywheel is what makes the engine so free revving and the smoothness gives the impression of a lot of torque not many other engines had these qualities in the 1970's.
By the time FIAT had hopped into bed with GM, the bassic Busso design was a dinosaur.
Look objectively at the engine and compare it with what other manufacturers have done in the last 10 years.
And I don't see how its smoothness gives the impression of lots of torque. Having a very heavy engine flywheel, a constantly attached to the engine tailshaft and an overly heavy clutch flywheel give the whole car (not just the engine), a large store of power and so the suggestion of considerable torque for its capacity.
But at the same time, for their power to weight ratio, all of that rotational inertia gives some pretty poor acceleration numbers.
It's bit like having a large tank of compressed air, but with a small air compressor. Large amounts of air can initially be used, but as soon as the pressure drops enough and the compressor has to start to try and maintain the pressure, the compressor can't actually meet the demand of air usage and so the working pressure drops and drops.
I like the engine too, but their day was done years ago. They are definitely worth having, but in a modern context, they just can't keep up.
I agree with most of that. I have had more than 10 cars with that engine and currently have a GTV6 with a 3.2 engine I have fitted. Alfa would have sold a lot of cars had they ever offered a rear wheel drive with that engine. But I also agree that in terms of modern performance they are not up there. My current 4 cylinder turbo out performs it in every respect, but I still like hopping in the Alfa for something different
The engine could have evolved more, but ultimately it would need to start with an all new block.
More cubic capacity would have helped and it would have been nice if Alfa had been more determined to achieve some pure horsepower by getting their Porsche on and dragging the engine's capacity out to a much bigger number.
4 litres sounds nice. With a longer stroke crank (about 9mm longer than the 3.2 litre crank) and a 100mm bore.
Hence the want for an all new block (taller deck height and wider crank case) to make sure the conrods are still long enough. Chuck in a closed deck design at the top of the block and a bedplate designed bottom end of the block.
But I always think they could have made the basic TA chassis evolve too.
Move the front axle line further forward, the rear axle line further rearward, but without making the car longer. Make the car substantially wider (atleast 50mm, but more like 70+).
A much more rigid chassis design, with actual coil springs (how novel :P ) for the front suspension and suitably wide DeDion rear end, but without the silly inboard rear brakes.
Move the engine back a bit and have a tough 6 speed transaxle. All very Alfa Romeo-esk, but turned up about 250 notches.
Imagine if Alfa Romeo had created a propper 100 hp/litre, 4 litre NA engine in great, compact rear wheel drive platform and kept the weight closer to 1250kgs???
well imagine that in the 1951 alfa with a 1.5 ltre engine alfetta (yes f1)
produced 425hp at 9300rpm thats around 283hp per litre
IN 1951
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alfetta_159_engine.jpg
and of course the other great engine is the v8 2.6 montreal (77hp per ltr)
oh hold on the DOHC 4cyl and yes the straight 6 dhoc
in fact every engine up until the GM idea was the best in the business
No mainstream car manufacturer came close
NOw we have Guilia finally a car worthy of the garage
Quote from: carlo rossi on May 12, 2016, 05:23:26 PM
well imagine that in the 1951 alfa with a 1.5 ltre engine alfetta (yes f1)
produced 425hp at 9300rpm thats around 283hp per litre
IN 1951
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alfetta_159_engine.jpg
and of course the other great engine is the v8 2.6 montreal (77hp per ltr)
oh hold on the DOHC 4cyl and yes the straight 6 dhoc
in fact every engine up until the GM idea was the best in the business
No mainstream car manufacturer came close
NOw we have Guilia finally a car worthy of the garage
I could write a decent list here, but:
Honda's NSX engine when it first hit the scene.
BMW E36 M3 engines.
Toyota's, Mitsubishi's, Nissan and Honda's 160hp NA 1.6 litre 4s from the late 80s/early 90s.
The Nissan RB26DETT.
I'm not sure how you define the best in the business.............. :o
cheers DUK
there are watershed moments of particular engines that sum up an era
what I was referring to was that alfa was producing motors that produced
very high outputs for their capacity or technical brilliance
Really in the pre FIAT era where their designs was world leading
the rb nissan you refer too produced 110hp per litre in the 90s
and really did not utilize anything that was new or innovative 4 valves dohc turbo.
(the alfetta 1.5 2 valve supercharged 283hp/ltr in 1951
47 wins out of 54 starts )
not saying Nissan/Renault doesnt produce great motors
But they dont really define an era in the World(maybe Aus)
the NZX certainly did
but again only 93hp /ltr with variable geometry cams certainly a great car
and it arrived as Alfa was taken by Fiat and in decline
BMW M3 a great car plagued by German Brilliance it did everything perfectly
TOO perfect for me 152hp/ltr
what I really am saying take the 80s
toyota corolla 1.2 pushrod at 52 hp and at the other end a corolla 135hp 1.6 DOHC
you could not buy an Alfa with pushrods it was a purist manufacturer to its own detriment
these other manufacturers produce base mundane cars and few great ones
Alfa produce great cars and some exceptional cars in 1980 the Alfetta GTV 2.0ltr was one of the fastest production cars in Australia YES 15km/h faster than a 351(5.8ltr) falcon or a 5.0ltr torana then the BUsso arrived faster again
the mighty HO was as fast as the stock MOntreal but 1.4 sec slower to 100 than the monty 5.8 vs 2.6ltr
Im not saying there are not other great cars out there of course there is
BUT Alfa punched well above its weight for along time sadly I think we are looking at the end of an era
petrol is dead long live the KIng
Quote from: carlo rossi on May 13, 2016, 10:57:48 PM
cheers DUK
there are watershed moments of particular engines that sum up an era
what I was referring to was that alfa was producing motors that produced
very high outputs for their capacity or technical brilliance
Really in the pre FIAT era where their designs was world leading
the rb nissan you refer too produced 110hp per litre in the 90s
and really did not utilize anything that was new or innovative 4 valves dohc turbo.
(the alfetta 1.5 2 valve supercharged 283hp/ltr in 1951
47 wins out of 54 starts )
not saying Nissan/Renault doesnt produce great motors
But they dont really define an era in the World(maybe Aus)
the NZX certainly did
but again only 93hp /ltr with variable geometry cams certainly a great car
and it arrived as Alfa was taken by Fiat and in decline
BMW M3 a great car plagued by German Brilliance it did everything perfectly
TOO perfect for me 152hp/ltr
what I really am saying take the 80s
toyota corolla 1.2 pushrod at 52 hp and at the other end a corolla 135hp 1.6 DOHC
you could not buy an Alfa with pushrods it was a purist manufacturer to its own detriment
these other manufacturers produce base mundane cars and few great ones
Alfa produce great cars and some exceptional cars in 1980 the Alfetta GTV 2.0ltr was one of the fastest production cars in Australia YES 15km/h faster than a 351(5.8ltr) falcon or a 5.0ltr torana then the BUsso arrived faster again
the mighty HO was as fast as the stock MOntreal but 1.4 sec slower to 100 than the monty 5.8 vs 2.6ltr
Im not saying there are not other great cars out there of course there is
BUT Alfa punched well above its weight for along time sadly I think we are looking at the end of an era
petrol is dead long live the KIng
Ummmmmmm, I think you'll find that the
"alfetta 1.5 2 valve supercharged 283hp/ltr in 1951" engine had a strict diet of methanol and has zero relevance to an actual road car.
But if you want to compare hugely expensive and very well looked after race engines, then how about the last years of the original turbo era of F1? Around 1000hp from 1.5 litre engines? Honda, Renault, Ferrari, BMW.
The Gibson Motorsport Group A GTR's had impressive reliabilty from their 600+hp 2.6 litre engines.
DJR's 600+hp Cosworth 2 litre (300hp/litre).
The Group B rally monsters.
The NSX was locked into the Japanese agreed limit of 280hp.
And so did the likes of the 3 litre Supra RZ and the 2.6 litre GTR.
The hotrod STi WRX's and Evolution Lancers also had to comply with that limit, but did so with 140hp/litre 2 litre turbo engines.
Toyota made a quad cam, 48 valve 5 litre V12. Guess what, legal output was stuck at 280hp.
And what E36 M3 had 152hp/litre??? The current 911 GT3RS has 125hp/litre and the Ferrari 458 Speciale achieved about the same.
I would be quite happy with the 2.0L TS motor in the 156s that raced in the the Italian and European Touring Car Championships in the late 90s and early 2000s - they managed to wring up to 228KW out of that little beauty...
hi DUK I dont think we will ever see each others point of view
But the point Im making is simply that in an ERA of pushrods and sidevalves
Alfa was building DOHC some with forced induction remember the alfa 2,0ltr alfetta motor was designed in the 1951
and went through to 1987 some 36 years probably one the longest serving motor other than Lycoming (Cessna_)
You have to compare eras! without companies like Alfa,Jaguar,BMW,maserati Mercs and Ferrari
to name afew the others would be still selling you these antique whipper snipppers
Yes these days the list is endless and now ALfa has a 500hp from a 3.0ltr road CAR
where does it End? you can have 1000hp if you reallly want but the one thing that makes car a sports car and not transport is
the feel and how it makes you feel
I can drive a SUpra from the 1983 down the street almost invisibly and early WRX 300zx even m3 and I have
but drive my OLd GTV down the street its almost as good as walking a puppy with attention it gets
You are on this forum so no doubt you have been bitten by something
analyse why are you on this forum and its probably the same reason I have mentioned
Its the wonderful joy you get from driving one of the worlds great cars!!!
BUT we digress the reason why the BUsso engine is so good was the 60 deg configuration
so that it fires evenly not like 90 deg v6 of ford and GMH
90 deg give great torque but not the smoothness of 60 deg
Carlo, I've basically been taking apart this comment:
Quote from: carlo rossi on May 12, 2016, 05:23:26 PM
in fact every engine up until the GM idea was the best in the business
No mainstream car manufacturer came close
Which I obviously don't agree with as I believe that there are many excellent engines out there regardless of there brand and history. This is all in good faith that 2 people can have a discussion and have different opinions while remaining civilised about those different opinions.
So sayeth the lord, amen!
https://youtu.be/3qgBs00Lsfs
has to been seen
sportiva Ill test you next week on this
what a sound
NO wonder clarkson and May from TOP GEAR said BEST EVER ENGINE
was the Busso v6
http://petrolicious.com/the-top-ten-classic-six-cylinders-ever (http://petrolicious.com/the-top-ten-classic-six-cylinders-ever)
And finally, #1... the Alfa Romeo Busso V6 –There are engines that were produced for longer or in greater numbers or with better performance. But the Busso (named for designer Mr. Giuseppe Busso) V6, which began development in the early 1970s and has been built in a variety of displacements (we prefer the 2.5L), is simply the most glorious sounding six cylinder ever. You should be so lucky as to drive a car equipped with a Busso V6 just so you can listen to the song when you downshift. It is symphonious and really don't we all just want a car to sing?
Might have to take my 2 V6's out for a drive sometime.
PI in July could be a good drive, 4.5km at a time.
Quote from: Neil Choi on June 01, 2016, 10:28:58 PM
http://petrolicious.com/the-top-ten-classic-six-cylinders-ever (http://petrolicious.com/the-top-ten-classic-six-cylinders-ever)
And finally, #1... the Alfa Romeo Busso V6 –There are engines that were produced for longer or in greater numbers or with better performance. But the Busso (named for designer Mr. Giuseppe Busso) V6, which began development in the early 1970s and has been built in a variety of displacements (we prefer the 2.5L), is simply the most glorious sounding six cylinder ever. You should be so lucky as to drive a car equipped with a Busso V6 just so you can listen to the song when you downshift. It is symphonious and really don't we all just want a car to sing?
Nice list, and all deserving except for the Buick 3.8.... Why??? 25 million sheep can't be wrong?
I'm coming out of the closet....
I had a VT commodore wagon with a Buick V6 and I have a grudging respect. I bought the car when I was rebuilding/remodelling a house as an owner builder. I ended up keeping the car five odd years. Great towing engine with awesome economy for the capacity. In fact, on the highway it gave better fuel economy than the Forester we also had at the time.
If you revved it over 3500 rpm, it sounded like the rods were going to jump out at you through the firewall. And it developed a water consumption fault in the inlet manifold.... just drive it with the temp light on to the next petrol station a give her a drink. Optional water cooling! Try that with a lot of engines!
Why is the 265 hemi 6 pack not on the list?!?
But agree the Busso reigns supreme!
I had two 245 hemi valiant wagons and they were brilliant, bulletproof and pulled like a train. Unfortunately, the rest of the cars rotted around them ....
Still, my 71 VG Safari Wagon was a fantastic way to travel from Perth to Melbourne and back, even though I had to replace the diff, radiator and transmission at different points on the trip
I feel like I have been unfaithful....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdU0T7r5zcQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdU0T7r5zcQ)
That Kugelfischer was the sh*te!
Quote from: Neil Choi on June 01, 2016, 10:28:58 PM
http://petrolicious.com/the-top-ten-classic-six-cylinders-ever (http://petrolicious.com/the-top-ten-classic-six-cylinders-ever)
And finally, #1... the Alfa Romeo Busso V6 –There are engines that were produced for longer or in greater numbers or with better performance. But the Busso (named for designer Mr. Giuseppe Busso) V6, which began development in the early 1970s and has been built in a variety of displacements (we prefer the 2.5L), is simply the most glorious sounding six cylinder ever. You should be so lucky as to drive a car equipped with a Busso V6 just so you can listen to the song when you downshift. It is symphonious and really don't we all just want a car to sing?
Looked up the list of ten... Some very august company there but so agree on the enjoyment and the song! Every drive in my 90 (2.5 L Busso) is sheer delight, especially that lovely buildup in 3rd year!
Hi Sportiva,
Excellent finish on the engine bay, the only way to do an engine swap.
Thanks for the tip on oil pump priming. Did you use a 90* drill attachment to cut the hole in the glove box?
jm
Getting the hard to get nut off in the first place on the inside is the biggest challenge. From memory, you can only turn it a 12th at a time with a spanner (blind).
Recently, I changed the booster on my car, the dang thing was stiff virtually all the way along the thread. Took me about 3/4 an hour to undo just that nut.
Grrrr!
Yup: Nice wheels Glenn :)
Quote from: LukeC on June 02, 2016, 10:11:07 AM
I'm coming out of the closet....
I had a VT commodore wagon with a Buick V6 and I have a grudging respect. I bought the car when I was rebuilding/remodelling a house as an owner builder. I ended up keeping the car five odd years. Great towing engine with awesome economy for the capacity. In fact, on the highway it gave better fuel economy than the Forester we also had at the time.
If you revved it over 3500 rpm, it sounded like the rods were going to jump out at you through the firewall. And it developed a water consumption fault in the inlet manifold.... just drive it with the temp light on to the next petrol station a give her a drink. Optional water cooling! Try that with a lot of engines!
Why is the 265 hemi 6 pack not on the list?!?
But agree the Busso reigns supreme!
Had a manual VN Wagon. Engine was about the only good thing on it. Great towing & efficient for many hours of country driving. Aircon was on par with the ALFA 116. Apart from the time I was about to enter a busy roundabout in Torquay and put the clutch in to change down & the engine stalled, killing the power steering. Went from dozy one fingered steering to immovable object running in to the roundabout. Thank god it restarted when I woke from the shock and released the clutch and engine started again.
I'd say it was a good engine but wouldn't rate it as a great one.
That thing made the 116 look top quality.
Great idea. What did you do at the back of the engine?
I've made little platforms with castors to move mine around, but they do slip on them.
Steve
Adelaide
Like all truly great advances in human history- simple, effective and leaves you muttering "why didn't I think of that".
Love your work.
Cheers
Steve
Adelaide.