i need a bit of help...
between my dad and i we own a 83 GTV, a 84 GTV6 and a 78 GTV.
now, the 78 is going to be a track car so thats out of the question. but i need a daily driver and couldnt choose between the gtv6 or the GTV.
the GTV is red and has not one spot of rust or body damage, the paint is great and interior is mint, the car recently (before we bought it) had a crash and the front end was replaced with brand new corello headlights and a new grille. it has relays on the headlights and it has volvo 4pot calipers, konis all round and bilstien rear springs, not to mention new bushes through out the front and rear end! so basically its a fantastic car ;D
and the GTV6 has body damage from a crash, a few spots or rust, bad interior, clunky front suspenion, and most the electrics dont work, the grille is craked, the headlights are dull and full of water, no lights work only one brake light, its all standard but in very poor state and needs a full re-spray, and a fair bit of $$ spent to get it up to an ok condition.
so we have decided we want to put the v6 engine and gearbox, de dion onto the 4cyl GTV, and wreck the GTV6. so can someone please tell what is required to transfer a v6 engine and gearbox into a GTV body shell??
Cheers, Brad :)
HI there
i have done this conversion and it sounds simple but the 2000 is a differant body shell to the GTV6, the engine mounts are in differant postitions and sizes, the other problem was the gear shift at the gearbox was hitting the floor nothing but a oxy couldnt fix to the floor. The car works well now up and running. hope this helps.
thanks for the info,
engine mounts and body modification is very easy for us,
what gearbox did you use? v6?
what about driveshaft/propshaft?
was there any modification needed to the tunnel?
cheers, Brad
Hi Brad
It was a twinspark box no mods to the box mounts just need to give the gearshift mechanism area to move.
the tailshaft and drive shaft were v6 no mods, tunnel was all ok.
thanks very much :)
so the rear engine mount/bellhosuing lined up in the standard position?
our plan is to install the standard 2.5 v6 and then in the next couple of days pick up a 164 and install the 3.0 8)
anyone know if the gtv6 gearbox will work with the 2.0 speedo?
cheers, brad
The gearchange clearance is most likely a pre and post isostatic issue. Is the V6 isostatic or not? They changed over around September 1984 so your 1983 GTV will be pre (the original simple mechanism). Meaning, if the GTV6 is isostatic you'll need to change over the complete gearchange including the gear lever (it's a different length) and the floor in the later cars has an indent just in front of the rear seat to clear the isostatic mechanism. Both easy changes.
Also don't forget that the wiring looms are different and on 4-cylinders (at least the early ones) the engine loom is an integral part of the main loom. Can't say if that's true of GTV6's but regardless you'll need to use some of it.
Personally, given the number of reasonable GTV6's that come up for sale I'd question the sense of doing this. Especially as it sounds like you have a very nice GTV that will end up as a bitsa.
thanks choderboy,
yes that is my plan, does anyone know if i can simply drille out the spot welds on the gtv6 mounts and weld them into the gtv body?
i could be totally wrong but would the engine be on a angle, then when it torques it twists straight? so the driveshaft is alligned square?
sorry for all the questions but i would like to know excatly what i need to do before pulling both cars apart, and plan for each issure not discover them as i go ;D
hi wankski,
i have considerd the twinspark conversion and almost bought one, but it neede a rebuild and the gtv6 came up and it was to cheap to pass up.
the gtv6 bonnet will deffinalty be re-sprayed and put on, one to clear the plenum and two because it look killa ;D as will the v6 hubs and re-dedion and some 17x7 147 wheels.
ive considerd the dash, but fear it might be a fair bit of electricaly work?? does anyone know if its a pretty straight forward conversion??
yes the TS has about 150hp, but a 164 3.0 v6 has about 35hp more than that ;)
cheers, Brad
hi aggie,
yer the v6 is isotalic and the 4cyl is not, but ive heard i can use the isotalic gear lever with the non isotalic linkage, which can be modified to fit the isotalic gearbox.
im hopeing i can use the motorinc injection from the 164, does anyone know if it can be used with a front mount gtv6 dizzy and not the camshaft driven dizzy on the 164??
it will be a lot of work, but nothing that hasnt been done many times before and it will be worth it in the end :)
Quote from: BradGTV on January 20, 2011, 12:06:33 PM
hi aggie,
yer the v6 is isotalic and the 4cyl is not, but ive heard i can use the isotalic gear lever with the non isotalic linkage, which can be modified to fit the isotalic gearbox.
im hopeing i can use the motorinc injection from the 164, does anyone know if it can be used with a front mount gtv6 dizzy and not the camshaft driven dizzy on the 164??
it will be a lot of work, but nothing that hasnt been done many times before and it will be worth it in the end :)
You'll seriously be much better to find a decent GTV6 as a base. Especially now that you're talking about motronic as well; better to skip that altogether and put in an Autronic system........on a 24 valve engine. Then you'll have a great car.
i simply do not have the money to go out and buy another gtv6. the one i have is in terrible condition we only bought it because it was so cheap. trust me id love a quad cam, one day...
i hear what you guys are saying about re-sale value and making the car a mix match. but it doesnt really bother me, i hope to never sell this car and i doubt i will. even witht he v6 in, its still possible for me to return it to 4cyl if need be, the only hard bit is changing engine looms.
aftermarket is an option, i would build and install a megasquirt, simply because its darn cheap and is a good product, and there are plenty of maps for alfa v6 engines ;) or retro fit the delco system from a commodore and have it re-mapped, plently of options.
Hi Brad
The isostatic gearlever will not fit in an 83 GTV. I have a 83 GTV with a TS gearbox with isostatic and tried to fit it but the gear selector rod can't connect with the isostatic gear lever because the cross member that the torsion bars fit into gets in the way. Most people I have spoken to just use the original gear lever and the original linkages attached to the new box. I want to use the isostatic linkages because mine are in great condition so I am going to see if I can modify the length of the gear lever enough to give room for connection whilst still providing the range of motion required for the isostatic linkages.
And the TS engine is a better conversion in my humble opinion. It provides close to the power of a 2.5 but without the weight so similar performance but it has motronic (very smooth) and keeps the perfect weight distribution. It is also a very simple conversion. It doesn't have that sound however...
Hi,
i was under the impression that i could, because my 85 gtv has the isotalic but i guess that is a gtv6 body. in a way its good because the non isotalic shifter i have is cut down and modified for short throw :) when converting from isotalic to non-isoltaic what is required at the gearbox end??
id do the twinspark conversion if i could get one for the price im paying for the 3.0, when i have everything ready to go from the gtv6 which will be wrecked anyway i cant see the point in getting the twinspark for ease of instaliation and better handling maybe if it was a race car, but its not, i like a challange and it will be a good learning curb and a short term project to keep me busy ;D i know some of you will think its not the write thing because its such a good original car as it is, but im not fuessed if its not original, it will be made to suit my desire, if the new road rules permitted me to drive a turbo it would have an sr20det in it right now...
Quote from: BradGTV on January 20, 2011, 12:31:19 PM
i would build and install a megasquirt, simply because its darn cheap and is a good product, and there are plenty of maps for alfa v6 engines ;)
+1 - I ran my GTV6 on MS-II - perfect !
Brad - the isostatic cars also have a different floor pan, the torsion bars are shorter and mount directly to cross members under the floor rather than the heavy cast removeable cross member your GTV has. This is not a GTV6 vs GTV thing, the same changes were made to later GTV's and all 75's and 90's where built like that.
To change an isostatic gearbox to a non-isostatic you need to pull the front of the gearbox casing off and replace the input shaft. Not as hard as it sounds. By memory the clutch slave also works in reverse on GTV6's - it's a pull rather than push - so you'll probably need to swap that over as well. Oh, the half shafts are bigger on a GTV6 as well and again by memory they bolt up with larger socket head bolts at both gearbox and hub. But maybe that's an early / late car thing.......
thanks aggie,
so i guess i will be using the non-isotalic shifter then ;D
i will be putting the whole dedion and transaxle assembly from the gtv6 in the gtv, so wont need to worry about the half shafts ect. the clutch shouldnt be too much of an issue. so will i need to put the gtv clutch set up on the v6 box or can i just use the v6 clutch system from the gtv6?
one thing i need to know is if the gtv6 gearbox will work with the gtv speedo??
cheers, Brad
Quote from: GTVeloce on January 20, 2011, 03:17:48 PM
Hi Brad
The isostatic gearlever will not fit in an 83 GTV. I have a 83 GTV with a TS gearbox with isostatic and tried to fit it but the gear selector rod can't connect with the isostatic gear lever because the cross member that the torsion bars fit into gets in the way. Most people I have spoken to just use the original gear lever and the original linkages attached to the new box. I want to use the isostatic linkages because mine are in great condition so I am going to see if I can modify the length of the gear lever enough to give room for connection whilst still providing the range of motion required for the isostatic linkages.
And the TS engine is a better conversion in my humble opinion. It provides close to the power of a 2.5 but without the weight so similar performance but it has motronic (very smooth) and keeps the perfect weight distribution. It is also a very simple conversion. It doesn't have that sound however...
To get the non isostatic shift rod to connect to the isostatic shift lever you need to bend the shift rod in order to clear the cross member. You also need to open up the end where it connects to the shift lever. It is a fantastic mod that really tightens up the feel of the gearbox.
Quote from: BradGTV on January 20, 2011, 10:54:28 PM
thanks aggie,
so i guess i will be using the non-isotalic shifter then ;D
i will be putting the whole dedion and transaxle assembly from the gtv6 in the gtv, so wont need to worry about the half shafts ect. the clutch shouldnt be too much of an issue. so will i need to put the gtv clutch set up on the v6 box or can i just use the v6 clutch system from the gtv6?
one thing i need to know is if the gtv6 gearbox will work with the gtv speedo??
cheers, Brad
I'm pretty sure you'll want to use the complete GTV6 gearbox/clutch assembly but you'd also want to make sure the clutch is single plate (75 style) rather than the original GTV6 twin-plate. Or make sure the twin-plate system is in good working order before you put it in. If it was me I'd be opening up the gearbox as well and checking / replacing the synchro rings and sleeves as needed.
Can't comment on the speedo sorry. Never had that problem.
thanks again guys, i will sort the shifter out when i have the engine out and see what fits a what doesnt,
i wont be rebuilding the gearbox, the gtv6 gearbox does not crunch gears and the clutch doesnt slip. so i cant see the point.
Hi Brad,
If you do go the megasquirt option let me know - i have a 95% complete (passed the stimulator test stage) megasquirt v2.2 (i posted an ad here a while ago with deets) - can be upgraded to II - spark and fuel by removing chip and installing MS II daughter board.
I also have the low-z injector flyback board and alu case for it... I will ditch it all waaaay below cost to a fellow alfisti - i would perfer to see it live as intended in a gtv6 rather than in my closet.
(sorry for the spam)
Cheers,
Joe
QuoteThe isostatic gearlever will not fit in an 83 GTV. I have a 83 GTV with a TS gearbox with isostatic and tried to fit it but the gear selector rod can't connect with the isostatic gear lever because the cross member that the torsion bars fit into gets in the way. Most people I have spoken to just use the original gear lever and the original linkages attached to the new box. I want to use the isostatic linkages because mine are in great condition so I am going to see if I can modify the length of the gear lever enough to give room for connection whilst still providing the range of motion required for the isostatic linkages.
quote]
I used the isostatic on my 76 Alfetta GT, pretty easy mod. The isostatic lever needs to be shortened and a kick put in it to clear the mount under the center bearing. The rear floor as someon mentioned previously does require a 15cm diamter (ish) cross section to be removed from where th floor kicks up (be very carefull not to cut through your brake lines....). You will be rewarded for your efforts with quite a nice shift.
QuoteAnd the TS engine is a better conversion in my humble opinion. It provides close to the power of a 2.5 but without the weight so similar performance but it has motronic (very smooth) and keeps the perfect weight distribution. It is also a very simple conversion. It doesn't have that sound however...[/
Anyone who has driven a steel bumper Alfetta GTV or sedan will know that the V6 makes for a MUCH more entertaining package than the twinspark...due to the toque of the thing. It changes the car from peaky to punchy and sideways out of corners ifs only a prod of the accelerator away...and that noise....oh so sexy. V6 all the way, thicker torsion bars and liberal right foot and you can drive around a little more weight in the nose...steering will get a little heavier though. For ultimate balance...yes, twin spark is nice, but it's not really a cheap conversion, I'd bolt a supercharger to the stock single spark motor before I went down that path.
cheers, Mike,
good to hear the v6 will be a wise choice ;D
u havnt had a chance to test the manifold flange, yet have you? just checking cause im getting my mate to draw me one, if you already have done one it will save a bit of time...
cheers, Brad
I think you should strip the gv6 and then you will have no choise to just do it and and just play it as it goes.
yep thats the plan, and if not i will just put all the running gear up on a rack in the workshop ready for a rainy day ;D but im 99% sure this conversion is going to happen ;)
Personally I believe that any benefit from the isostatic system is brought about by the longer lower half of the shift lever. I don't think I have ever felt an isostatic system that's any better than a well set up 'original system', but i will add that I have never played with one that has been new or 100% refurbished. If you look at the isostatic linkages and watch them work it's pretty much a complete abortion as far as i'm concerned. Usually the rollpin holding the main part of the sytem onto the selector shaft has way too much play. Add all the play in the individual components and it turns out to be worse than the original selector arm that's bolted solid onto the splines of the selector shaft. Just my opinion, but use the original selector shaft and modify the selector rod so that it works with the isostatic gear lever. I have set up a few like that on my own cars and I have never felt a better linkage set up in any other transaxle alfa.
Also, most of the play that is felt is actually inside the box and is just a function of the selector rings and their mechanism.
Edit: I was thinking about this in the middle of the night (very sad I know) and came to the conclusion that the isostatic system did achive some of its intended goals in the sense that it refined the feel of the gear change/gate by removing the weight/springyness for people with bitch arms. This is apt as the GTV6 is a much refined car compaired to an early GTV. What it didnt do was remove the old spoon in a bowl.
QuoteEdit: I was thinking about this in the middle of the night (very sad I know) and came to the conclusion that the isostatic system did achive some of its intended goals in the sense that it refined the feel of the gear change/gate by removing the weight/springyness for people with bitch arms. This is apt as the GTV6 is a much refined car compaired to an early GTV. What it didnt do was remove the old spoon in a bowl.
I think he's trying to say I have bitch arms :-)
Fair call about the gearshifter shifter length/pivot point, I also noticed this, cuts down the throw which is nice. I think you must have been playing with fogged out isostatic shifters though, as mine has no looseness (I did remake one bush) and consequently feels very good....still i have not tried the combo you suggest, but I'll put it to you that Alfa must have felt that simply putting in a longer shifter was not enough and that the extra expense of a isostatic linkage was worth it....
Personally I like MD's approach, piss of the linkage and run a shaft in bearings inside the car....that'll fix it!
Lol Mike .....No I didn't mean you. Just people who complain about that nice heavy mechanical feel in general. Alfa may well have engineered the isostatic linkages under good intention, but that's not to say they got it right. There are several things on the alfetta, as with any car, that one has to shake their head at and wonder why. I was looking for the fuse for the central locking on the delta today.... Found it under the gear shift. Of course that's where it would be! I'm so stupid. Lol.
Yes so stupid....under the shifter is a new one that's for sure! Well I would stop short of saying Alfa knew what they were doing when it comes to electrics...I guess it's not the electrical departments fault they assumed that earths would be attached to metal...not some oxide.
hay brad if i could get my hands on a complete running alfa 74 twin spark you intrested in any parts ?
I spent the weekend playing around with the original alfetta gearlever and I managed to make it work with the isostatic linkages merely by grinding away at some of the surrounds, allowing the necessary extra throw. I now have a fully functioning system that didn't require any modifications to the gearbox.
Hi guys, ive been busy latley ;D
my dad and i have bought a 164 which came with x2 3.0 engines and a 2.5 engine,
and we bought a 2.0 twinspark today.
because we got the spare 2.5 it has all the parts for a rear wheels drive 3.0 conversion. so the gtv6 will be untouched. and the gtv will recive the 3.0 engine and twinspark gearbox.
is the twinspark gearbox a bolt in type conversion? and the twinspark has new dounts - do 75 twinspark donuts go onto a gtv driveshaft?
cheers, Brad
Quote from: BradGTV on January 30, 2011, 08:26:57 PM
is the twinspark gearbox a bolt in type conversion? and the twinspark has new dounts - do 75 twinspark donuts go onto a gtv driveshaft?
Perhaps the question you should be asking is does a gtv driveshaft go onto a V6 flywheel....
perhaps ;D
i just ashumed it would, does it?
thanks choderboy,
do you know if the shafts are the same lenght? (gtv and gtv6)
is the reason they dont fit the donut pcd?
worst case senario i make a totally new shaft like MD's design.
cheers, Brad
ok ill start again ;D
so your saying a 4cyl donut will not go onto a v6 flywheel, yes?
what i want to know is if i have a 3.0 164 v6 up front, with a twinspark gearbox at the back, what *options* of driveshaft do i have?
cheers, Brad
Brad - do we assume you have the GTV6 flywheel? You'll need to use that on the 164 engine, along with pretty much evrything else apart from the block and heads. Including changing the oil pump, the distributor drive, the water pump, the sump, the ..... Well, everything other than the block and heads!
You'll also need to have a 4mm spacer made up to fit between the flywheel and the back of the crank (164 and GTV6 blocks are different lengths), open up a number of mounting holes in the sump and so on.
Alister
If you plan on running an engine management system with a crank angle sensor keep the 164 water pump and front pully. The toothed 164 crank pully will not fit unless you have the 164 water pump. Very annoying.