Re: 2.0 V6

[Keith Strini <keith.strini@domain.elided>]

On 5/9/02 3:02 PM, "George Graves" <gmgraves@domain.elided> wrote:

> on 5/9/02 11:07 AM, alfa-digest at owner-alfa-digest@domain.elided wrote:
> 
>> Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 08:33:58 -0400
>> From: "John Hertzman" <johnhertzman@domain.elided>
>> Subject: Re: 2.0 V6
>> 
>> George Graves, responding to a further comment on the 2.0 V6 Turbo, writes
>> that ""The 2 liter V-6 just has a shorter stroke, I believe. Same weight,
>> size, etc." as the 2.5. Small quibble, a shorter stroke AND smaller bore, 80
>> x
>> 66.2 mm against the 88 x 68.3 of the 2.5 and the 93 x 72.6 of the
>> three-liter.
>> Pretty close to the bore/stroke ratio of the 116 Giulietta 1.3 (80 x 67.5)
>> and
>> the 78 x 67.5 of the Junior version of real GTA.
>> 
>> Not meant as nit-picking, just adding data in the spirit of more-is-better,
>> which it is in some things.
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> John H.
> 
> Thanks for the info. I've never seen specs on the engine, I was just going
> by what I remembered reading once.  My point was that while the little Mazda
> V-6 is a tiny jewel of an engine, the 2.0 liter version of the Alfa V-6 was
> the same block as the 2.5/3.0 liter version. One thing that I always
> wondered: the Mazda engine was universally praised when it showed up in the
> MX-3 coupe. Why did Mazda not drop it into the Miata? Now THAT would have
> been a car! Opinions, anyone?


Could not the same be said about dropping the 2.0 V6 turbo Alfa engine into
a spider?

Keith Strini


--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Eagles Nest, and is
believed to be clean.
--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to majordomo@domain.elided