Re: 164 S v. 164 L

[Berlina71@domain.elided]

Have any of the 164s v. 164 L debaters ever driven or owned both cars?

The 164 S is definitely the more fun and faster car of the two. The L has 
slightly greater low end torque, but does not have the high end power of the 
S above 4000 rpm. If you want to use it as a grocery getter or everday car 
the L may be better, but the S is definitely more sporting in feel.

If order two make an L into S spec you would need to change the pistons, oil 
pan, camshafts, catalytic converter, afm, final drive, steering rack, master 
cylinder, center exhaust, chip, clutch bearing and etc. It would cost you far 
more to modify an L than to by a stock S. 

The LS versus the Quad. is not as hard debate. The only real difference in 
these two car is the size of the intake runners and the gear ratio. The 24V 
cars should cost less in maintenance with direct ignition and hydraulic 
valves. Obviously, the 24V raise the performance envelope a little compared 
to the 12V cars.

I hate the cars with the standard L gearing. Too low for performance. The 
gearing of the L is not unlike the tall gearing in the Milano Verde.

Bottom line with 164's is too buy the best one you can afford. 

The 164 S or Quad electronic suspension can be replaced with standard 
Bilstein or Konis so there is no greater cost there. The handling of the cars 
wouldn't be an issue to buy an S, L, LS or Quad. They are all too soft and 
benefit greatly from mild suspension tuning including wheels and tires

Louis Franklin,

92 164L 
91 164S Modificato.

------------------------------