Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mr-mac

20V 156 Performance & Mpg

Recommended Posts

For all the nay Sayers on mpg (and i see a lot sayin low-mid 30's....

 

Did a run to Aberdeen last night... basically 80-90 leptons per hour most of way apart from town driving either end and slow downs for slow overtakes and cameras/limit changes.

 

Including a 10 mile tussle with an R8 (was delighted we got a totally empty bit of road as don't go too fast with others about).. think I actually surprised him as when he went to turn off he flashed and waved ;)

 

When I started car yellow light was already on... I drove 5mile popped in £20 and zero'd counter. So that would be 14.18 litre, or 3.11 uk gal. At end of journey yellow light just showed as coming back into my small town with 141 miles on counter.

 

So that would make it 46.6mpg.

well above that but happier to under quote rather than over quote as not brim to brim.

Now try and do 46.6 in a v6 or even a TS at 80-90 with a tussle with an R8 ain't gonna happen.

 

I don't want to get 50-60mpg though i can on a run. I want to be able to drive with a heavy foot as often as I can and in a petrol the same style of driving that gets me 400 plus from a tank in this gets me under 300 in a petrol. Often a lot under I could often get 250 or lower in most petrol engines cars I've owned. Yes I do give my cars a hard life lol.

 

and as far as performance goes any car that gets some respect from an r8 is pretty damn quick :)

 

John

Edited by mr-mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get a V6 and the R8 would have to earn respect from you :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a 2.5??? Driven a 2.5 156 and owned 2x 155 v6's the 20v is considerably quicker (ignore 0-60) imagine rolling start and its silly quick....

 

and tbh i like to surprise the shit out of people not look like top dog (or I'd ve getting 200 a tank out a gta lol)...

 

that's the way i roll pmsl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See i cant afford 20-30mpg, some can, all i mean is by having an oil burner i can drive it like Alfa intended all day long (not saying choose one over a petrol). I could own a v6 or gta but it's sit in drive (no not driving and Alfa, never mind fast, is a damn site less Alfa than burning oil

 

just disputing all the crap economy rubbish i read on lesser forums low to mid 30's lol something up with your car mate ;)

Edited by mr-mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice

Diesels do worry me tbh when I'm in the GTA they've got so much torque low down especially when remapped and all the tricks on them. They can be mega quick , and in short English roads

You need that pulling power.

But the busso just sounds electrifying at 6000 revs :D. Not bothered with mpg I burn through dinosaurs like a massssoooooooive meteor. Average on the computer is 14 I think :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have a gta if I could..

 

but console myself with great performance that even sounds good and looks a treat ;)

 

avg on computer which is close on mine is above 40

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to average 25 mpg in my 166.

Can get 40 mpg on a run in the sele, averages 32 mpg.

My 156 2.4 10v, averages low 40s, I can improve this with careful driving but low 40s is good enough for me. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

must admit if I could find one at a sensible price I would consider a 2.4 in my 147 that would give it a little something extra to the unsuspecting.

I think it would really benefit from the torque. It would certainly be quicker and a lot more economic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been driving my 147 for the last couple of days and think the twinny is a cracking engine, a good sensible spread of power, fairly economical and still capable of fun when you want it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldnt know mine obviously didnt want me to find out. I think my 164 sabotaged it in the night when I was'nt looking :Tounge:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just noticed your signature, think the garage who did my 166 should adopt it. :mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In truth I had a 2.0 sportwagon from a dealer a few years back but had so much hastle with it and the dealer I returned it it was

quite lively though.

I just have this thing for the busso it just gives you all you need in the 3.0 not had the pleasure of driving the GTA yet but can imagine that it is quite a beast. the 3.0 has much better torque than the 2.5 but on paper the 2.5 is quicker than my 3.0 0-60 but the 60 - 100 is brill in the 3.0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just noticed your signature, think the garage who did my 166 should adopt it. :mad:

 

It wasnt me. HONEST :Sleepy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the only time I made an error like that was when I put some lancia wheels on one of my 33's and hadnt noticed the bolts were too short. but I soon found out when I was in the middle of Brighton on a saturday morning and the left front wheel overtook me in the traffic :Drooling:

Lets just say I was not popular :He He:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In truth I had a 2.0 sportwagon from a dealer a few years back but had so much hastle with it and the dealer I returned it it was

quite lively though.

I just have this thing for the busso it just gives you all you need in the 3.0 not had the pleasure of driving the GTA yet but can imagine that it is quite a beast. the 3.0 has much better torque than the 2.5 but on paper the 2.5 is quicker than my 3.0 0-60 but the 60 - 100 is brill in the 3.0.

 

The 2.5 in my was terrible for its lack of torque, it would have been good in a track car because once it was spinning above 5K rpm it really came alive :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a 156 2.5 v6 that thing was rapid, dunno what was done to it but it tore the road up :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The power was good in mine, its just the spread of it that was bad.

 

I think the best Alfa engine I've had was in my 146 1.8 twinny, it was just so revvy and fun. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 1.8ts is ok (155 2.5 v6 was a lovely revy lump and lots more fun than 1.8) but 20v is a different league...

 

I was very lucky, picked up Jan 2012, 05 plate with about 90k for £1500 ;) my other plan was a v6 and lpg it but a silly priced oil burner showed up.

 

John

Edited by mr-mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my 1.8 was in a 146 and 2.5 in a 166, so the power to weight may have been an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...