Alfa Romeo Owners Club of Australia Forum

Technical => 160 Series (90, 75, 164 Sedans) => Topic started by: Beatle on February 24, 2012, 11:25:37 PM

Title: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Beatle on February 24, 2012, 11:25:37 PM
I assumed all 3L 75s were 'Potenziatas', but now I'm not sure.

If not, what does the Potenziata have over the stock 3L car?
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Duk on February 25, 2012, 09:01:13 AM
The Potenziata had the Digital Motronic 4.1 engine management system based on the 60-2 crank angle sensor.
Some say that the Potenziata's had different camshafts.
I believe the compression ratio was higher at 9.5:1
The Potenziata's had the 3.73:1 diff ratio instead of the taller 3.55:1.

Apart from the Motronic, the CR, the diff ratio and maybe the cams, there is nothing else, as far as I can tell that is different.

For me the biggest improvement is the diff ratio (tho I've not driven the earlier cars) as everything else can be upgraded to or made even better than the Potenziata.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: shiny_car on February 25, 2012, 10:13:57 AM
Cams are definitely different, and I believe are the same profile as 164Q cams. They are still considered 'mild', but can be an upgrade for the L-Jetronic (pre-Potenziata) engines.

An alfabb.com thread I've bookmarked: http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/milano-75-1987-1989/28155-potenziata-facts.html

:)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Beatle on February 25, 2012, 11:47:01 AM
Cheers fellas.  Clears it up ...... somewhat.   

So was the Potenziata an additional model sold alongside the rest of the range, or were all the V6 75s Potenziatas after a certain date?
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Anthony Miller on February 25, 2012, 01:24:38 PM
Potenziata was released in 1990 with 192bhp @ 5800 rpm replacing the existing Ljet 3.0l and it's 188 bhp @ 5800 rpm
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: VeeSix on February 25, 2012, 01:35:16 PM
Yes all correct plus cosmetically they had different wheels and black seats and doorcards where as the regular 75 V6 3.0 had the grey seats with vinyl end covers, they were basically Australias top of the range 75 but as mentioned everything mechanically can just be upgraded, i still have my original two owner Potenziata, my second car i ever had, i traded my first car a 1982 GTV on it, do not think i could ever part with it

I think 75s are in that lull now and if you want one now is the time to grab one, there are some great examples out there, a average condition Potenziata in Queensland went on e-bay the other day for buy it now $500, i was almost tempted to grab her but my stable is just so full, maybe someone on the forum purchaed her, she went on on the morning and was sold that night, 75s are my second favourite Alfa Romeo after the classic GTV6, just wish you could raise the drivers seat like on a 90, 75s seats are too low for my liking, maybe i could swap the seat frame from a 90  ??? ??? ???
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Beatle on February 25, 2012, 03:34:37 PM
Aren't 75 seats mounted in the same manner as the Alfetta?  If so, simply shim the seat up with alternate spaces/washers.   Just be sure the mounting bolts remain in-safety.  If not, go buy longer bolts of the correct grade
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Beatle on February 25, 2012, 03:43:45 PM
Does the Potenziata have a Potenziata badge on the tail?    How could you pick one at a glance without looking inside or under the bonnet?
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: VeeSix on February 26, 2012, 11:52:40 AM
No, there is no Potenziata badge, this was just the name given to them because they had extra power over the standard 3 litre, i think Potenziata means power in italian, if the Potenziata is still stock you can tell just by looking at them via the wheels and black seats, if wheels have been replaced the black seats are the only clue otherwise externally they are the same as a standard 3 litre, they actually came with a green cloverleaf badge on the rear where as the standard 3 litre did not but alot of them seem to be missing this by now.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: bteoh on February 26, 2012, 12:25:28 PM
Hi VeeSix,
I am a little intrigued with the amber reflectors you have in your front bumper. My Potenziata doesn't seem to have those. Are those front calipers brembo reds or Girodisc ?
Car looks very nice indeed :)

Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: 1969read on February 26, 2012, 06:37:56 PM
The rear badge work is on the other side on late model 3.0  75 Jason
Also glass is from a different supplier
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: 1969read on February 26, 2012, 08:52:04 PM
Also post 1990 3.0 litre cars have the roof drivers side hanging strap handle deleted, with this is also from a different supplier than the 3.0 1989 model. (minor differances) Aswell the wipper arms have the word Fiat stamped on them where 1989 3.0 had alfa romeo.
cheers Jason
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: 1969read on February 26, 2012, 08:54:01 PM
The photo provide above looks like a state side model which was posted on the Alfa B B site Jason
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Beatle on February 26, 2012, 09:05:41 PM
When did the V6 get the grille with the 'fat' bar along the top?  I had an '89TS for a short while with that grille.   Does the fat grille align with the 3.0L engine, the Potenziatia, or is that part unrelated?

Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: 1969read on February 26, 2012, 09:35:36 PM
(Revised Grill) is 89 onwards twin spark and 3.0, Auto had flat grill as well as 2.5 Jason
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: aggie57 on February 27, 2012, 02:56:10 AM
Auto's had the early 2.5 style grille with non-impact bumpers.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: 1969read on February 27, 2012, 09:33:27 AM
autos state side had 3.0 bumpers with early grill as well
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Anthony Miller on February 27, 2012, 10:54:00 AM
All U.S. 75s had Impact absorbing bumpers AKA "America" bumpers, only us antipodeans call them 3.0l bumpers, even the 1.8l turbo has "america" bumpers, this change was accompanied by the relocation of the fuel tank from under the floor of the boot to behind the rear seat. 1988 saw, in Australia, the 2.5L v6 replaced by the 3.0l and the twinnie with both sporting the upgraded aerodynamics package ie wheelarch flares and lip spoiler and gauzed grill.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: aggie57 on February 27, 2012, 01:51:23 PM
Sadly the auto here had the wheel arch extensions and boot lid spoiler but kept the small underfloor fuel tank.  At least that's what I recall - if my memory is wrong I'm sure someone will correct me.  Reason I have that memory is that the range was woeful.  Small tank, 3-speed transmission, small engine.  It should have had a 3-litre with 4 speed but at the time I was told the available 4-speeds would not fit under the floor and the 3-speed would not handle the larger engine.

Now that's all likelyhood a theory of course and sorry for taking the thread more off topic........
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: VeeSix on February 27, 2012, 02:57:46 PM
Hello Bteoh

That is not my Potenziata, i thought i would just throw a picture in for interest, that one is actually a American model with the extra safety lights, now our Australian Potenziatas Bteoh did not come with blinkers in the front of the bumper but the sides did come with the side marker lights cut out, we just recieved blanks instead of the lights, out of interest you can actually remove the blanks and purchase and insert the side marker lights, amber in the front bumper and red in the rear  ;)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: DaveB on February 28, 2012, 01:21:06 PM
In part summarising the comments above, and altho I'm no expert, bringing my 13 years of 75 ownership:
(bought my first 3L in 1999)

Compared to the 3L 75, the Potenziata has:

Motronic ECU with crank angle sensor, different compression, more open exhaust manifolds, 164 cams & probably different head flow. (More power)
Water pump pulley bolted on not pressed, no cold start injector.
LS Diff, lower gear ratios, heavier rear drive axles.  
More coils in the back springs, possibly heavier front torsion bars, 15" teledial wheels. (Better ride)
The cloverleaf badge on the LHS rear, with white on red or red on red indicators.
The potenziata grille is as a late model TS. Some 3L grilles have v6 3L chrome script on the bottom RHS.

Inside, the cloth is darker, the front seat back wings give much more chest support and the headrests are fixed.
There are a factory stitched leather steering wheel and gearstick handle, in standard 75 style.
The instrument panel and overhead switches are white with green illumination.
The Potenziata borrows much from the late model TS.

Also:
JimK seems to be of the opinion that Alfa underquoted the Potenziata power.
There are certainly similarities with the UK Cloverleaf 75 and the USA Milano Verde, but I can't be sure.
I read that the UK Cloverleafs mostly have sunroofs, like our 3L.  I have only heard of one Au Potenziata with a factory option sunroof.

I am told that less than 50 Potenziatas came to Australia, and only about 10 remain registered.
Confusion arises for 3L owners who have been told they have a Potenziata.
_______________________________________

IMHO the ultimate DIY 75 will be a twinspark for lower gear ratios & LSD (as found in the Potenziata), fitted with an inboard 3L petrol tank, & 164 motor (3L 75 crank & modified engine mount points required) & big brakes.  Or a 3.5L AHM upgrade (http://www.ahmotorsports.co.uk/3500conv3.htm) or a Greg Gordon supercharger (http://www.hiperformancestore.com/superchargerkit.htm#Supercharger%20kits).

Of course, when the factory went racing they turbocharged a 4 cyl (not TS) nord, and experimented with multiple valve layouts.
It seems that, after about 275 HP, the guibos start to fail, and when that is cured (use braces or solid BMW or Corvette style guibos) the front gets torn out of the transaxle & diffs fail.
The IMSA race cars were massively reinforced in this area.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Anthony Miller on February 28, 2012, 01:47:38 PM
Hey Dave, I'm glad you've joined this thread because I wanted to ask you why the twinnie over the Potenziata but if I asked in your For sale thread I'd get a spanking from the Moderators. Most go the other way from twinnie to 3.0l and from what I've seen here and on the English forum you've been a champoin of the V6 for quite a while. Just curious
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: DaveB on February 28, 2012, 02:01:33 PM
Hey Anthony

Glad to hear you cruise AlfaRomeo75

The TS makes more sense for me since I got my new job.  I drive a ~7 klm triangle every day.
Home - work - town / school.  A V6 needs regular highway / freeway kilometres / alfa tuneups.

For me, the TS is better at the short trips, and now I have 6 cars, I have family & their time to consider.
IMHO, the TS handles far better than a 3L, but only a little better (in the really twisty stuff) than the Potenziata.

HTH, David
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: VeeSix on February 28, 2012, 02:27:32 PM
Hello DaveB

Great Potenziata information there, i will check your mentioned mechanical stuff in the next few days comparing it to my regular 3lt

In refernce to your other comments -

My Potenziata came with red on red tail lights, my favourite anyway, really good on a red vehicle, continuing colours, she also came with a factory sunroof but as you mentioned this may have been a option, any Potenziatas out there with no sunroof???  ???

I DaveB also have a regular 3lt 75, it is not a Potenziata and came with the white paint green illumination switches and solid headrests and i can not see any differences between them and the Potenziata seats other than the cloth colour, grey regular 3lt black Potenziata

Chrome script on front grille, no way, definantly wrong never ever seen it, never seen any chrome script on any 75 front grille ever  :)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: DaveB on February 28, 2012, 02:37:36 PM
Hi VeeSix

The red on red tailights look great, I agree.
Interested to hear you have a 3L with green / white instruments & the late model seats in different trim.
What year is this?

All the Aus 3L I have seen have sunroofs, but not on Potenziata.  Think a solid roof helps stiffen the body.
My 1988 3L had the grille script. I took a year to find it in in Adelaide, and it was very original, bought it from the 2nd owner.

Have you heard anything about how many potenziatas there are or were?

DB

Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: VeeSix on February 28, 2012, 02:48:20 PM
Hello Dave B

Yes i think the red on red is the ultimate choice in 75 tail lights, then the white on red of course and i think the first series 75 tail lights are ghastly

You must remember Dave B that as with the 75 Twin Sparks there were two series of 75 regular 3lt, the first series had the orange dials and switches and the second series Twin Spark and 3lt had the white dials and switches, also to note my regular 3lt is a second series 3lt and it has a sunroof but it is a aftermarket one, it did not come with one from the factory, it is a 1989 model

Yes more solid i guess without a sunroof but there is nothing like crusing the country and mountains in a 75 with a open sunroof and windows and nice sounding exhaust

Your grille intrigues me, you will have to upload me a photo please!!!!!!!

No unsure about Potenziata numbers, would love to know offical numbers, colours and sunroofs with or without

How many Potenziata owners are on the forum and what colour is your Potenziata???  ???
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: VeeSix on February 28, 2012, 02:59:35 PM
So Mr Beatle are you still Alfaless? You say you have had a Twin Spark do you think you may convert to a Potenziata?
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Duk on February 28, 2012, 03:02:17 PM
My Potenziate doesn't have a sun  roof.

The Yanky market Milano Verde's sound very similar to the pre-Potenziata 75's. They only sold until 1989 there and no Motronic system made it into Milano's from the factory.

I doubt that the Potenziata's had better ports in them unless the pre-Potenziata's were particularly awful, 'cuase the ports in my heads are not well finished at all. The inlet runners were even worse. If Alfa were interested in making these more powerful, they could have done a lot more by attending to the quality of the head manufacturing.

My torsion bars measure 22.8mm which is standard for the V6 cars.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: DaveB on February 28, 2012, 03:05:24 PM
Yes indeed, early and late versions of the 3L, not surprisingly with the late 3L sharing with the late TS.

Its unlikely any photos survive of my 1988 3L grille, it was pre digital cameras and the car has been dismantled to make a 3L GTV6.
It was however a late series style grill.

I enjoyed the sunroof car too, especially cruising in the moonlight out west, but it takes constant work to keep it closing & opening properly.
A potenziata register would be great, & not take up too much space  ;D

It does seem that the cars evolved over time, it would be interesting to know when the dark interior first appeared here.
It was seen in Europe much earlier, in the 'specials', IIRC, like the turbo Evo.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: VeeSix on February 28, 2012, 03:14:03 PM
Yes intersting Duk, i can not remember my header pipes being any different from regular headers, the Potenziata may have been a way to dress up the final 75s to clear them out, still love mine anyway, alot of fun and you can easily make a Potenziata up from any other 75, but there is nothing like having a original one and why not they are so cheap now, easily affordable for any budget, love the tranaxle Alfa Romeos in V6, same applies to a GTV6 Grand Prix i guess but they are much priceier, i purchased a $1000 GTV6 with a cream interior and a Grand Prix bodykit for $400, nothing different i guess except the purchase price, but great to have the original  :)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Duk on February 28, 2012, 03:22:31 PM
In all honesty, I wouldn't get overly excited about the Potenziata engine. I recon most of the improved performance comes from the lower 3.73 diff ratio and a small improvement in power. You could easily make any 3 litre engine better with just some attention to detail in the heads, inlet runners, compression, extractors, camshafts and programmable computer.
The Potenziata's air flow meter was the same tiny Bosch vane/flap contraption that was used in the 2.5 litre engines (same body and flap, any ways). The original air flow meter in my MR2 was damn near the exact same size but my 105KW worth of air flow had that thing at full scale by about 5000 rpm, peak power quoted at 6400 rpm. The Alfa's are quoted as around the 130KW and more, so I'd put money on the AFM being a flow restriction and a power limiter.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: DaveB on February 28, 2012, 03:23:23 PM
Certainly, when I went to replace a cracked Potenziata header the regular header was very different
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Duk on February 28, 2012, 03:26:59 PM
Quote from: DaveB on February 28, 2012, 03:23:23 PM
Certainly, when I went to replace a cracked Potenziata header the regular header was very different

If someone can post photo's of the regular 3 litre engine exhaust manifolds, I can put photo's of my Potenziata manifolds.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: DaveB on February 28, 2012, 03:44:13 PM
Since mine is an orange dash manifold, I'll leave it to a white dash 3L  manifold owner to post up their pic.
I know the early 3L manifold is different to the Potenziata, but that is inconclusive when it comes to late 3L Vs P10 .
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Beatle on February 28, 2012, 05:39:30 PM
Quote from: VeeSix on February 28, 2012, 02:59:35 PM
So Mr Beatle are you still Alfaless? You say you have had a Twin Spark do you think you may convert to a Potenziata?

Yep, still Alfaless.

I only had the TS for short while, but sounds as though I should have kept it.  I was in the NT and had recently advertised looking for Alfas.  a guy had stopped at a servo in Katherine the week before and filled up,then the car wouldn't start.  He;d driven the car to Darwin from Alice Springs in an attempt to trade it in, but no-one wanted to touch it.

Anyways, he rang me and told me it was mine for $800.00.  I gave him $400 and picked it up on my trailer.  A new fuel pump (available locally in Katherine!) fixed it and she was running perfectly four days after I picked it up.

Paint was peeling on the bootlid but the rest of the car was in excellent condition and all I did was clean the leaves out of the plenum, fit a screen, and reattach the sunroof drains.

Back to the thread though, I was glad I'd posed the question regarding Potenziatas (and no DaveB, it wasn't related to yours popping up for sale... :)) but now I'm as confused as ever!!  But that's the joy of Alfas I guess  ;)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Duk on February 28, 2012, 06:36:24 PM
Quote from: Paul Bayly on February 28, 2012, 05:39:30 PM
now I'm as confused as ever!!  But that's the joy of Alfas I guess  ;)

It really is easy, 1990 onward V6 is a Potenziata.
Looking at the engine will tell you. There is the crank angle sensor on the right hand side of the harmonic balancer and also the 60-2 tone wheel (toothed wheel for the crank angle sensor) on the harmonic balancer too. Apart from the high tension ignition leads, there is no wiring going to the distributor. There is nothing inside the distributor other than a rotor button.
Pealing back the carpet in the front passenger's foot well will reveal the computer. The Motronic computer has Motronic stamped in the outer cover and is easily visible.
If someone has put a 164 engine in a 75, unless they managed to get their hands a Potenziata wiring loom, the 164 wiring loom won't be as neat as it should be.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: shiny_car on February 28, 2012, 09:54:37 PM
My 1989 (non-Potenziata) 3L has no sunroof, btw. It did come with the red over white taillights, which I love, but don't know if a PO fitted them. They aren't that scarce if you source from overseas; I often see them on ebay, including NOS.

Quote from: Duk on February 28, 2012, 03:26:59 PM
If someone can post photo's of the regular 3 litre engine exhaust manifolds, I can put photo's of my Potenziata manifolds.

I only have a photo of the L-bank manifold:

(http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL97/467659/23841191/397607888.jpg)

:)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: bteoh on February 29, 2012, 01:44:37 AM
Mine is a 1990 red Potenziata which has a sunroof. All instruments and switches are white but strangely, the sunroof and window switches on the headlining are in amber. Tail lights are red with white indicators. Also I am assuming the previous owner painted the front grill all red. Most others I have seen have the honeycomb section in black or grey...... Will post a picture of it soon. I actually quite like the front grill all in red ......
I wonder how many Potenziata owners there are in this forum? Shall we do a count.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: 1969read on February 29, 2012, 07:43:30 PM
I have a grey 1990 Build but Aust  Comp Stamp  says 1991
Jason
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Anthony Miller on February 29, 2012, 07:55:51 PM
3.0l header pipes are as rare as (insert euphemism), can only find 2.5l pipes now
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: bteoh on February 29, 2012, 11:53:41 PM
Here's mine - I wonder if all the Potenziatas in red were Alfa paint code 130 ??
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: shiny_car on March 01, 2012, 07:27:37 AM
I've seen them in at least the dark metallic grey too; but not black or white but no reason they don't exist.

:)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: VeeSix on March 10, 2012, 02:21:18 PM
The bulk seem red but i have seen them in grey and black in Australia  :)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Domenic on March 22, 2012, 11:38:42 AM

Hi guys,

I have a Potenziata that i have to change the water pump on. The one that was on it had thew belt in the wrong spot on the crank pulley and I'd like to have it back to original

Anyone have any suggestions where to get one, I've tried all the local guys, and they either send me a normal 75 water pump and the belt doesn't line up, or a 164 pump with 164pulley and the belt doesn't line up.

Can someone that has a Potenziata be able to take a picture of the water pump and pulley for me so i have an idea of what i need to look for?
Any help would be great.


Thanks
Domenic
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: shiny_car on March 22, 2012, 09:47:38 PM
Duk is selling a new one: http://www.alfaclubvic.org.au/forum/index.php?topic=8536.0

The quickest way to distinguish WPs is: earlier models have the black pulley pre-attached to the unit; Potenziata versions have a pulley you can unbolt.

When you buy the Potenziata WPs new, I believe they come without the pulley, so you have to reuse the old by unbolting and rebolting. I don't know the details regarding belt alignment, but presuming it's a pump designed for the Potenziata, it should fit, unless something else on the engine has been modified.

:)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Duk on March 22, 2012, 10:48:38 PM
Quote from: shiny_car on March 22, 2012, 09:47:38 PM
Duk is selling a new one: http://www.alfaclubvic.org.au/forum/index.php?topic=8536.0

Ah, no he isn't  :P. That was the earlier type I bought by mistake and it's sold anyway.
I emailed IAP in America but they never got back to me about the 164 pumps, so I figure it was too hard for them to measure the spigot diameter that locates the pulley ::).
http://www.okp.de/xtc2/index.php have the http://www.okp.de/xtc2/75/Milano/10-Engine/Cooling/Water-pump-2000-3000cc-V6-164-75-after-89::15661.html water pump, and they say it's also suitable for the 164. Logically the Potenziata and the 164 should use the same pump but different pulleys.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: shiny_car on March 23, 2012, 04:02:59 AM
Ah, my bad - sorry!

@ Domenic: do you think you have the earlier-model WP? Like this, which is mine (replacement vs old): http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL97/467659/23891866/399541896.jpg

From a google search, the Potenziata should be like this:
http://i39.tinypic.com/1iy2pv.jpg
http://home.wxs.nl/~evdbeek/qvpomp1.jpg

:)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Duk on March 23, 2012, 08:43:57 AM
Quote from: shiny_car on March 23, 2012, 04:02:59 AM

From a google search, the Potenziata should be like this:
http://i39.tinypic.com/1iy2pv.jpg
http://home.wxs.nl/~evdbeek/qvpomp1.jpg

:)

That's how my pulley and pump look.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: AikenDrum105 on March 23, 2012, 05:55:18 PM
Jim K. made this interesting point in the thread mentioned earlier - in case you can't find a Potz Pump :)

One of the most significant engine differences is the removable (3 screws) water pump pulley, to allow for crank pulley removal to replace the seal. You will not care or notice this until you find a leaky seal! As a matter of fact, in the engine I'm installing in my 75 this week, I used a NOS old style water pump! However, to make it fit and clear the crank toothed ring I had to carefully remove the pump pulley (requires special fixture, no 3-legged pullers!) put it on a lathe and gring off ~2-3mm from the rear lip (hitting the teeth). Ok, I could simply put the grinder to it but I wanted a perfect job! Now you know. Most stores carry the old style pumps, not the Pot. ones!
Another thing, don't take the CD info for absolute truth, they're infested with mistakes/omissions. Double check the info you see with other sources like older microfiche files.
Jim K.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: shiny_car on March 23, 2012, 08:20:16 PM
The Potenziata 'version' pumps are on ebay. I presume most WPs you buy these days are 'OE-spec', and not original NOS parts. I think most people are happy to use OE-spec parts.

:)
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Duk on March 23, 2012, 10:57:02 PM
Domenic, I need to get a water pump too. If you're keen, I'll order 2 from http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/330539446263?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649#ht_2896wt_960 and we can split the international freight costs.
If anyone else want to jump on board for new pump, that will get freight costs down even further.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: bteoh on March 24, 2012, 02:13:44 PM
Put me down for one too :):)
Cheers,
Brian
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Domenic on March 26, 2012, 11:00:12 AM

Hi Duk,

Thanks for the offer, but i can get a 164 water pump here for less than that.

The problem i face is that i need the actual pulley for a Potenziata. The water pump isn't the problem.

Someone previous to me had a 164 pulley on the water pump and the belt used lined up on a different section of the crank pulley.
I apologise, i should have made it clear to everyone that i was after a pulley. I know it will still work the way it is, but i would rather have it back to original and the belt for the water pump in the right spot on the crank pulley.

Once again I'm sorry if i confused anyone by not being clearer in my original post.

If you're interested in a water pump let me know.

Looks lie I'll have to find someone to make up a pulley for me.

Cheers everyone

Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: oz3litre on September 12, 2012, 08:45:49 PM
I have two Potenziatas. The first is an early 1990 in grey, with no sunroof and factory woodgrain dash and console inserts. It is sadly now a parts car due to an engine fire three years ago. My current driver is a black, late 1990, with sunroof. Duk's car must have had the wrong airflow meter fitted, because the ones on both of my cars are  much bigger than the one on the standard 1988 3 litre car that I also have. I have also compared it to a 1989 3 litre car and it is definitely bigger. The fuel pressure regulator is also higher. Jim K says that the Potenziata engine is exactly the same as the SZ engine, minus the SS headers, which means that it is also the same as the 164Q. They definitely have the Q cams. They are not a standard 164 engine. I have a 164 and there is no way they are the same.

I know of five Potenziatas on the road in Adelaide, (including Duk's), plus my two. I too would love to know how many there were altogether.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: bteoh on September 13, 2012, 12:17:26 AM
Hi Rhys,
Is there a Bosch part number on your air flow meter? i"ll check and see if my potenziata is the same. Btw, how can one tell what cams are on the car after taking off the cam covers? Any casting marks or numbers?
Cheers,
Brian
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: oz3litre on September 13, 2012, 12:36:21 AM
I will have a look tomorrow and let you know. Hopefully I have succeeded in attaching a pic of the cams from Jim K. If not, I will try again later. This is what he says about them:

"These 10.4mm jobs have 230* at .050" intake.
Exhaust valve lift is 9.16mm with 226* at .050". Factory spec duration is 287* IN/277* EX. (33-74-67-30) At this point I'm starting to wonder what the hell an 'S' cam really is!!
Jim K."
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: Duk on September 13, 2012, 05:04:48 PM
Quote from: oz3litre on September 12, 2012, 08:45:49 PM
Duk's car must have had the wrong airflow meter fitted, because the ones on both of my cars are  much bigger than the one on the standard 1988 3 litre car that I also have. I have also compared it to a 1989 3 litre car and it is definitely bigger.

This is a possibility.
If it was replaced with an earlier/small AFM, then maybe the culprit grabbed the top of the air filter housing from an J Letronic car too, as the hole in the top half of the air filter housing that the AFM bolts too, is/was the same size as the AFM's inlet.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: festy on September 20, 2012, 10:07:29 AM
Quote from: oz3litre on September 12, 2012, 08:45:49 PM
Jim K says that the Potenziata engine is exactly the same as the SZ engine, minus the SS headers, which means that it is also the same as the 164Q.
Yep - same engine as the SZ (but different cams?), and same ECU.
The SZ and Potenziata both used the Motronic ML4.1 0.261.200.141 ECU, whereas the 12v 3.0 164 had either the 0.261.200.117 or 0.261.200.130 ECUs.
There are two "chip" versions that I know of for the '141 ECU:
1267355737 - used mainly in the 75
1267356097 - This is a dual personality chip, and was used in both the SZ and a few Potenziatas.
The personality is determined by the wiring harness, i.e. grounding a specific ECU pin selects one or the other map sets.
This second chip has a higher rev limit than the '737 and from memory a slightly more aggressive tune in "75" mode... but that's nothing compared to the SZ mode!
If anyone has a Potenziata with the 737 chip (aka 9AE3) and wants to switch to the 097 chip, I've got a few spare.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: oz3litre on September 20, 2012, 10:48:23 AM
My September 1990 Potenziata has the 097 chip. Do you know what the differences were in the two maps on those chips?

The SZ and Potenziata have the same cams and the slight power difference, if it is to be believed, is down to the stainless steel headers on the SZ. I think it was one of the Dutch SZ guys who said that the SZs were a bit variable in power output, so there may well be no difference. The SZ headers are very hard to come by these days. I believe that years ago there were a few still available new. I don't know if anyone has tested an engine with and without those headers, so we may never know how much difference they made.

By the way, the number on my AFM is 0280202205
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: festy on September 20, 2012, 11:00:30 AM
Quote from: oz3litre on September 20, 2012, 10:48:23 AM
My September 1990 Potenziata has the 097 chip. Do you know what the differences were in the two maps on those chips?
Here's an example of two fuel maps - one is the 75, the other is the SZ.
You can see that the SZ map is a good deal richer - and not very smooth which indicates the map probably didn't go through the same long-winded tuning development process as the more production orientated 75 version.
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: bteoh on September 20, 2012, 03:52:56 PM
Thanks for the info. Will check out what I have in mine.

With regards to finding out which chip I have, do I have to remove the ecu housing to check the chip? Or should it be labelled somewhere on the outside?

Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: festy on September 21, 2012, 09:42:12 AM
If you're lucky, your ECU might have the chip number or ID on it.
It will have the ECU hardware # (0.261.200.141) but the chip numbers/IDs would be one of:
1.267.356.097 or BF43
1.267.355.737 or 9AE3
(or it might just have something like "356-097" or "737" etc.

Failing that, you've got 3 options if you want to find out which chip you have.
1) Open up the ECU (http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/engine-management/190352-what-stock-75-ts-motronic-can-cannot-do-24.html#post1117986), or
2) A $15 ebay diagnostic cable (http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/engine-management/190352-what-stock-75-ts-motronic-can-cannot-do-38.html#post1178553) and read the chip ID with a laptop (this cable will also let you read/clear error codes, datalog, read sensors etc) - or
3) Run a wire from ECU pin 11 to ground, go for a quick drive and see if there's a dramatic performance increase ;D
(This switches the ECU to the "alternate car personality" which in the 097 chip is the SZ configuration - you'll know pretty quickly if you have this chip!)


Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: brook308 on August 02, 2014, 03:06:04 PM
Quote from: festy on September 20, 2012, 11:00:30 AM
Quote from: oz3litre on September 20, 2012, 10:48:23 AM
My September 1990 Potenziata has the 097 chip. Do you know what the differences were in the two maps on those chips?
Here's an example of two fuel maps - one is the 75, the other is the SZ.
You can see that the SZ map is a good deal richer - and not very smooth which indicates the map probably didn't go through the same long-winded tuning development process as the more production orientated 75 version.

Featy just curious as to where you got this info from?
Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: festy on August 05, 2014, 07:24:36 PM
Quote from: brook308 on August 02, 2014, 03:06:04 PM
Featy just curious as to where you got this info from?

I spent a year or three reverse-engineering the ML4.1 Motronic system - working out what they do, how and why they do it.
From there I was able to write some definition files for a program called Tuner Pro, which is what I was using to display those fuel maps.



Title: Re: 75 3.0L Vs Potenziata
Post by: brook308 on August 17, 2014, 07:46:44 PM
Quote from: festy on September 21, 2012, 09:42:12 AM
If you're lucky, your ECU might have the chip number or ID on it.
It will have the ECU hardware # (0.261.200.141) but the chip numbers/IDs would be one of:
1.267.356.097 or BF43
1.267.355.737 or 9AE3
(or it might just have something like "356-097" or "737" etc.

Failing that, you've got 3 options if you want to find out which chip you have.
1) Open up the ECU (http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/engine-management/190352-what-stock-75-ts-motronic-can-cannot-do-24.html#post1117986), or
2) A $15 ebay diagnostic cable (http://www.alfabb.com/bb/forums/engine-management/190352-what-stock-75-ts-motronic-can-cannot-do-38.html#post1178553) and read the chip ID with a laptop (this cable will also let you read/clear error codes, datalog, read sensors etc) - or
3) Run a wire from ECU pin 11 to ground, go for a quick drive and see if there's a dramatic performance increase ;D
(This switches the ECU to the "alternate car personality" which in the 097 chip is the SZ configuration - you'll know pretty quickly if you have this chip!)

OK so I measured pin 11 of my potenziata ECU and it already has an earth on it.
I measured at the connector with the ecu disconnected.

So unless this potenziata loom was modified at some stage it  is always in "alternate personality mode".