Re:164L or S and Speed AD #764

[C M Smith <cmsmith@domain.elided>]

Some readers are touchy. Hey, I know I'm right so, if you say I'm wrong,
you must be wrong, right? 

To Rich Wagner , could you e mail me your earlier post about gearing
directly, I can't find it though I remember reading it? After reading your
recent post I concluded we were saying much the same thing so you must be
right. I agree that a 6 speed gearbox on a car with an electronically
limited top speed does seem a bit bizarre (BMW produces such a beast for
Europe).

I was most intrigued by the post from the hotshoe who actually took his S
up to maximum speed and proved my mathematics was correct but my idea about
the S having the same top speed as an L was likely hooey. Nothing beats
actual fact. Not too many roads available which are clear of the usual
hazards and the cops at the same time so these important experiments can be
conducted. Being a great one for clinging to the wreckage of my opinions
even when shot through with holes and sinking fast I did wonder if the S
was stock and had stock wheels and tires, undersize tires throw off the
accuracy of the tach and speedo by the same amount, common when going up
using the plus 1 or 2 concept. However, the S driver had his speedo
verified  and the tach/speedo and published factory gearing all correspond,
no doubts about it, that S was flying as God intended.

To the S owners who thought my point was that the S was inferior or ugly or
whatever please accept my assurance that I would be happy to be caught dead
in a 164 S, preferably alive though and doing 150 mph with the smile on my
face that would bring. I have not seen an Alfa I would be unhappy to drive
and be seen driving. Even the 1750 Berlina has it's particular purposeful
charm, and drove like a dream from my information, and that's probably the
least styled Alfa ever.

To those curious about coefficient of drag versus total aerodynamic
resistance remember that the coefficient is just a number reflecting the
relative air resistance of an object to that of a flat plate of the same
cross sectional area in the same airstream. Coefficient is meaningless
unless you also know the effective cross sectional area of the car. For
example, the version of the Porsche 924 equipped with the 944 engine was
faster than the 944 with the same engine even though the coefficient of
drag was equal or even favoured the 944 body, because the wheel flairs on
the 944 substantially increased the effective cross sectional area. In
similar fashion the cleaner L body will suffer from less total drag than
the bespoilered S, at any speed.

Finally, I can't resist poking a little fun at Rich in return for his
suggestion that I might somehow be wrong. Every car I ever drove was
capable of reaching it's terminal speed, even when a little down on power.

Michael Smith
Calgary, Alberta
Canada
91 Alfa 164L, White, original owner 

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

End of alfa-digest V7 #765
**************************