The Evil Dr. Diesel may have a point

Just got AutoItalia and been checking out the specs.

The 2.4JTD puts out 200bhp @ 4000rpm and 295 'torques' (of the lb ft variety) at 2000rpm.

I think I may have to get myself a test drive.

Reply to
SteveH
Loading thread data ...

Seems diesel technolegy is advanceing in leaps and bounds now, proberbly because all research before hand was focused upon econemy rather than performance I suppose.

I was quite impressed when the bmw diesel almost kept up with the petrol model around the top gear track.

Reply to
REMUS

Still sound like trucks though and wear out twice as fast even WITH twice as many oil changes... And lots of low rpm is great in town in traffic but they run out of steam when you rev em...

Reply to
Burgerman

I hear spell checker technology has come on in leaps and bounds recently, too.

Some of us rarely need them, though.

Reply to
SteveH

That's about as many torques as a fair few n/a V8s. :-) :D

Reply to
AstraVanMan

Aye, all other things equal, dervs will never equal petrols on performance terms, due to physics.

Reply to
AstraVanMan

But they go on to make more power as you accelerate, rather than just more noise/smoke etc...

Reply to
Burgerman

s/physics/transmissions/.

The problem is the gearbox - do away with the current type, and things become a lot different. Pity it's so hard to make CVT work..

cheers, clive

Reply to
Clive George

It'll be a chore to drive. Powerful diesels just run out of puff all to fast in each gear. Speaking from vast experience of having driven 1 modern performance diesel, Mondeo TDCi 6 spd - i'd imagine the Alfa would be better than that tho. Although to be fair, it did pull well - shame about the interior.

Reply to
DanTXD

Yeah, I'd much rather have an LPG fuelled V8. Had a few in BC, much better I reckon, not just because it's cheaper. Oil lasts longer, all that crap.

Reply to
conkersack

Volvo S60 D5 - 185bhp / 295lb ft - chips to 225bhp and 339 lb ft.

I know where my money would go!

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

Me too, you've got two engines, one Volvo and one Alfa, that in standard form have identical peak torque figures, and the Volvo engine has 15bhp less peak power. Both are probably chippable to a similar degree, making the Alfa the more capable engine. I'd go Alfa.

Reply to
AstraVanMan

Yes... but you buy Renaults amongst other things.

"I rest my case, m'lud"

Reply to
JackH

I was thinking that, too.

Plus, I'd want something that looks nice and handles. That's the Volvo out of the question, then.

Reply to
SteveH

But alfas are italian junk.

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

Rather than American trash?

Reply to
SteveH

GM

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

I aways find the ability to complete the journey is an essential characteristic of a motor vehicle - hence Alfa not being in my garage...

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

Fail to see the link here, given that GM don't have any input into the

159 JTD. GM use Fiat / Alfa JTD lumps, in exchange Fiat get bare blocks from GM to build the JTS engines. There's no financial links between the two.

Whereas Volvo are entirely owned by the blue oval.

Reply to
SteveH

On a T5?

James

Reply to
James Grabowski

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.