cygnusx1 Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfa_Romeo_GTA I have always loved the sound of the Alfa motors. Even in the early 60's they had, Double Overhead, Crossflow, Hemi Combustion, Sodium Valves, Cast Iron Headers, All aluminum. I had a 2000cc Berlina but it rotted away. This GTA would be my dream mistress next to a Z. The GTA was a lightweight variant of the GTV series. Built for racing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlderThanMe Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 wow...170hp in a 1.3!!! I saw that body style alfa romeo in a book somewhere when I was like 12 and was never able to find out what it was...until now...I really like the body style on that car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim240z Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 Those GTV-6 Alfa were the thing to beat back in the home country in the late 70's, early 80's! Very fast, very good handling cars! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olie05 Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 Ill take a 510 instead, and beat your alfa at laguna seca Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted June 12, 2006 Share Posted June 12, 2006 Ill take a 510 instead, and beat your alfa at laguna seca On a technicality because the Alfa's tank was too large... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKWIKZ Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Not really a technicality. The Alfa tank was not merely "too large", it had a hidden trap door to allow it to hold enough fuel to skip one final pit stop. Because after all of the other races, both Alfa and BMW realized the only way they could beat the 510 was to cheat. Alfa and BMW both made spectacular cars, but for all their technological superiority, they were found wanting on the track. And let's not forget, the 510 missed the first 2 races of the season and still won the championship. It was almost pure luck that kept the Alfa in contention up to the last race of the season. It was like giving someone a 2 second head start on a 1/4 mile drag race and still running them down. Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veritech-z Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 http://www.euronet.nl/users/in004021/Pages/1969/1969%20Cars.html http://www.sddriver.com/palmsprings.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest l28et Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Very cool cars indeed. Its cool they used on in the XM radio commercial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forrest Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 My dream mistress: Adrienne Janic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted June 13, 2006 Share Posted June 13, 2006 Not really a technicality. The Alfa tank was not merely "too large", it had a hidden trap door to allow it to hold enough fuel to skip one final pit stop. Because after all of the other races, both Alfa and BMW realized the only way they could beat the 510 was to cheat. Alfa and BMW both made spectacular cars, but for all their technological superiority, they were found wanting on the track. And let's not forget, the 510 missed the first 2 races of the season and still won the championship. It was almost pure luck that kept the Alfa in contention up to the last race of the season. It was like giving someone a 2 second head start on a 1/4 mile drag race and still running them down. I'm not much of a Datsun historian and I don't want to get too far into this as it is kind of a thread jack, but check this out: http://www.datsunhistory.com/transam1.html According to this, the Alfa didn't actually use any of the extra fuel that their tank would hold. The Alfa finished first and took the checkered flag. To me, that's Datsun winning on a technicality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKWIKZ Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 I don't see anywhere that the Alfa did not use the extra fuel. Aside from the part where they talk about Kwechts argument, it was clear that the Alfa would not have been able to finish with a legal tank. The Alfa died less than 200 feet after the finish line. And as for technicallities, cheating is cheating. That is why top cars are torn apart after big races these days. To verify everyone is playing by the rules. The fact is that the Alfa had an illegal tank. History will never know for sure if the Alfa could have won fairly. Getting caught cheating is very different than any technicallity. If anything it hurt them more later as the Datsun team went on to annihilate them and BMW the following year. Both teams then pulled out of racing claiming the oil crisis as the reason. Maybe, maybe not. I think they just could not deal with being beaten by an "inferior" car. And from Japan no less. Moral of the story; you can't throw out accusations against others when you yourself are cheating. Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 Apparently you didn't make it to this paragraph: The ultimate irony of the disqualification comes with a math lesson. When the SCCA officials drained the gas out of Kwechs car the first time, there was about 4 gallons left in the tank. SCCA rules allow you to have a 15 gallon tank, Kwech's illegal tank took 18. 18 minus 4 equals 14. Kwech only used 14 gallons of gas in the race, one gallon short of what he was legally allowed. Horst could've finished the race without cheating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKWIKZ Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 No, I did not make it to that paragraph. My point still stands though, you cheat and get caught, you lose. And while in the end he may have had enough, there is no telling how it affected the rest of the race. I am not sure of how many pit stops are needed in a race like that, so it still may have helped him with less stops. But no matter, he cheated. And there is no way to know what would have happened otherwise. It's all speculation. All we know is what actually did happened. Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cygnusx1 Posted June 14, 2006 Author Share Posted June 14, 2006 There are SIGNIFICANT differences between a GTV and a GTA...one sells in the 10's of thousands and one sells in the 100's of thousands. The GTA was a track version that had a high aluminum content for lightness. You can usually tell them apart by the gap in the front hood. The GTA has an open slit at the top of the hood. http://www.a2zracer.com/page17.html Here is the GTA: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim240z Posted June 14, 2006 Share Posted June 14, 2006 I guess I was wayyyy out in left field, as I was referring to this one: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad-ManQ45 Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Always did like that body.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ON3GO Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Tim.. those GTA's sure are nice but man what a PITA to work on! try changing a rear brake rotor.... OMG! for those that dont know.. the rear brakes are RIGHT off the rear diff... again... WHAT A PITA!! it also had the tranny in the rear of the car, just like the C5 vette and other modern cars. very cool car! drives like a dream! mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veritech-z Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 That must be a euro thing. Aren't the E-type jaguar brakes inboard as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A. G. Olphart Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 That must be a euro thing. Aren't the E-type jaguar brakes inboard as well? Yes... Less unsprung weight, but the half shafts have to carry the braking load. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.