Author Topic: BHP and the Selespeed  (Read 1904 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SeleMatt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
Re: BHP and the Selespeed
« Reply #15 on: November 14, 2022, 11:41:19 AM »
Thanks guys,

There seems to be very little out there when it comes to enhancing the JTS. I found one thread where the owner had fitted up a GTA throttle body and opened up the air-box intake but nothing much else except Columbo Bariani cams being available...
I haven't found JTS race car anywhere.

The TS however, has had years of development which appears to be because it's raced as a class here (TS Cup) and extensively in Europe. There's loads of stuff available.

Has anybody converted a JTS to a TS?
 

SeleMatt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
Re: BHP and the Selespeed
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2022, 06:48:10 PM »
When I said converted, I meant doing an engine swap.

As I understand things, the block, sump are the same.
The selespeed bolts up to either engine.
The header tanks are in different locations - not hard to deal with.
A high performance TS wont use a standard air-box so not relevant.
I'm guessing the 2 wiring harness blocks (purple) on the firewall are not the same arrangement?
The thermostats look very similar?
Are the radiators the same?
Obviously different exhaust headers.

Any pointers appreciated.

bazzbazz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2129
    • On The Spot Alfa
  • AROCA Member #: 870
Re: BHP and the Selespeed
« Reply #17 on: December 10, 2022, 12:18:54 AM »
The header tanks are in different locations - not hard to deal with.

If you are referring to the Coolant Reservoir Tank the are both the same and in same location.

I'm guessing the 2 wiring harness blocks (purple) on the firewall are not the same arrangement?

No, they are not. Different harnesses and ECU. The biggest issue doing such a conversion is all to do with the electronics of the system.
The engine & mechanicals are the easy part, unfortunately just about everything in the electrics has to be changed. The devil is in the detail, such as don't forget things like MAF sensor & Crank Sensor are different as well.

The thermostats look very similar?

Look similar but are slightly different. Also different Temp Sensor.

Are the radiators the same?

Yes
« Last Edit: December 10, 2022, 12:26:06 AM by bazzbazz »
On The Spot Alfa
Mobile Alfa Romeo Diagnostic/Repair/Maintenance/Service
Brisbane/Gold Coast
0405721613
onthespotalfa@iinet.net.au

Craig_m67

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1221
Re: BHP and the Selespeed
« Reply #18 on: December 10, 2022, 10:08:58 AM »
As an aside, the 1.9JTD gearbox found in your 147 and 156JTD (unicorns) is the same as the GTA.. will handle the torque/BHP.

Id whack the GQV donk and gubbins in a facelift 156wagon myself.. but then I have a chronic penchant for batshit crazy gorgeous things (with curly hair).
'66 Duetto (lacework of doom)
'73 1600 GT Junior (ensconced)
'03 156 1.9JTD Sportwagon (daily driver)

SeleMatt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
Re: BHP and the Selespeed
« Reply #19 on: December 10, 2022, 05:14:09 PM »
Thank you gentleman.

I must say Craig, the more I think about the GQV the more I like it.
Notwithstanding the engineer certs, it would be cheaper exercise to achieve big ponies. Think I'll put a call into the Victorian mod engineer and see what he has to say.

bazzbazz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2129
    • On The Spot Alfa
  • AROCA Member #: 870
Re: BHP and the Selespeed
« Reply #20 on: December 10, 2022, 06:16:27 PM »
but then I have a chronic penchant for batshit crazy gorgeous things (with curly hair).

Wouldn't that make you even more "bat crap crazy" for continuously going back for more punishment . . . again . . . and again . . . .   ;D
On The Spot Alfa
Mobile Alfa Romeo Diagnostic/Repair/Maintenance/Service
Brisbane/Gold Coast
0405721613
onthespotalfa@iinet.net.au

Ascari32

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
Re: BHP and the Selespeed
« Reply #21 on: December 16, 2022, 11:55:33 PM »
Thanks guys. I accept all those practical arguments but I really, really love my Ti facelift. These things are highly subjective, but I reckon the facelift 156 is one of the sexiest cars they've ever produced.
Craig - The Guilietta QV is a styling hat full to me though it's a super fun car to drive. I'm not really a hatch guy with the exception of the Brera.

This isn't about the money but what is achievable. I'm wanting to keep it as a 156 Ti selespeed. As per my original post, I mentioned most of the weaknesses in the JTS and they are all surmountable imho.

Are there any other known weakness's like oil delivery etc?

The JTS motor in the car at the present is as good as they get in standard form with only around 35000k's on it (the engine was rebuilt with the 'upgraded' rings by the previous owner). It's light throttle response is excellent and I love how it spins up and sounds. I've put poly bushing's through the rear and fitted Bilstein B6's and Eibach springs, GT horseshoe wheels to it.
It's a fun car.
I just want an engine that you can fully sink the slipper into, is bullet proof and uses engine oil that doesn't disappear.
Time isn't an issue.
I have access to a JTS long motor with a busted timing belt and so I'm considering rebuilding this motor with the aforementioned weaknesses addressed etc.

There's no hurry.

Alfatango - It's fair enough you think the selespeed is pointless but I've had it for 4 years and maintained it as per Bazz's maintenance schedule; it's been faultless. It's an interesting piece of automotive history and I enjoy it's click-clacking and languid shifting compared to the modern twin clutch jobs. Changing it out to a traditional manual doesn't interest me for this car. I've other manuals.

Anyone else have an opinion on the JTS vs TS ignoring the cost but focusing on the outcome; which is essentially direct injection vs traditional induction?

Cheers.

There are some horrendous stories about JTS Technology in general and Alfa's version. One of the most common ones doing the rounds is the issue of inlet valves being fouled by carbonization. This, in my opinion is not a failing of the JTS system per say, more to do with the choice of valve timing. Valve timing can be used to generate "Internal EGR", which results in cylinder residue being drawn into the inlet tracts, causing carbon deposits to build up.

This is not a fault of the technology, but of the car producers that use it. I have to say, having bought a 112,000 mile 3.2 JTS Q4 159 and rebuilt the engine, the inlet tracts were pretty damned clean.

I wanted to get my hands on a 2.2 JTS engine to analyse and modify along the lines of what I have done with my 3.2 JTS. The issue surrounding timing chains seem to be similar so I would have liked to take a detailed look at it to see what could be done.

However, I have attached three  plots, simply because of the question posed, "Anyone else have an opinion on the JTS vs TS ignoring the cost but focusing on the outcome; which is essentially direct injection vs traditional induction?"

My experience with the Twin cams goes back to the early seventies, my last four potter being a 1.8 TS, which I think is the sweetest of them all, historically akin to the 1750 beauty that was in the old Berties.

But we can't go back and it is immaterial to do so as EV is the way we are all being driven. Besides there are too many Luddites in the World for my liking.

The JTS System on the 3.2 is brilliant and lends itself to serious improvement, without breaking the bank, or resorting to Snake - oil software "Enhancements". One cannot get more power from an engine unless one gets more air into it. However, one can make improvements by reducing the inherent losses in an engine's configuration. I am still waiting for claimed improvements to be backed up by before and after Dynamometer plots, by independent sources.

The 3.2 GTA has a peak torque figure which is only as good as that in the attached plot of my 3.2 JTS engine, @ 6900rpm. Break it all down, and the fundamental difference between my car an a standard 3.2 JTS is, the Exhaust System and The Colombo Bariani Camshafts. There are a number of cheaper options available to those who want to replace their headers and Exhaust system. But there are, in my opinion, no finer camshafts available for Alfa Romeos: and lots of other Marques, than Colombo Bariani.

I have spared no expense on my engine rebuild, only timescales and resources prevented me from doing all the modifications I would have wanted. The last modifications have surrounded the MAF and the NTC Sensor. A torque curve by it's very nature, will decay as limiting mechanical factors come into play at high revs.

The fact that the one attached remains substantially flat is because, in my view it is being restricted by airflow inertia through the MAF Venturi at high revs. The MAF Slatted screen is used to create Laminar Air Flow across the sensor, particularly given the turbulence that exists in "Ram - Air" inlet tracts. It works because the valve timing. The standard valve timing causes a slightly positive pressure in the plenum (Static Timing), so the screen is very effective. However, when one introduces massive Positive Valve Overlap, and the inlet tract gets considerable "Draw" from exhaust manifold depression, the net effect is to cause the Slatted Screen: see attached pic, to act as a restriction. When it is removed, the engine is able to breath better. For this reason, when I return to the Dyno Station in the new year, I expect the Torque value @ and above 7000rpm to be higher.     

Ascari32

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
Re: BHP and the Selespeed
« Reply #22 on: December 17, 2022, 12:15:40 AM »
Omitted Attachments

Ascari32

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
Re: BHP and the Selespeed
« Reply #23 on: December 17, 2022, 01:24:55 AM »
And Before and After plots of my 3.2 JTS