Busso V6 characteristics

[GTVeloce]

Hi all

Trying to choose between the V6's and curious to hear other's thoughts. There are the obvious differences like how much power they put out but that is easy to find out. I am more interested in how they drive i.e. which feels torquier in the real world; which one sounds the best!; which one prefers to rev the most/the least etc. I am interested in 12V 2.5/3.0 and 24V 2.5/3.0 and 3.2.

What about general drive ability like cold/hot starts etc?

Not interested in track performance - road use only.

Thanks
Julian

[martym00se72]

Hi Julian,
I bought my GTV6 with the stock 2.5. I found it would happily rev to 7k but there was little point in doing so. It just seemed to lack punch in 2nd gear when you nailed it but it did sound pretty good.

About 3 years today +/- a day (my god where has that time gone? Engine swap had to be complete before my daughter was born - she is coming up to her 3rd birthday next week) I put in a 3.0 12v from a 164 of unknown heritage. From the get go it seemed to sputter out at 5k8 rpm (somtimes as low as 5k3) but new plugs in a hotter range has it running super sweet at the moment and it will rev well into the 6k range. I must add I have lightened the flywheel in the swap so that may have some bearing to the 'reviness'.

To my ears, I like the slightly bassier sound of the 3.0 at idle and snarlier sound when going hard. The 2.5 was screamier. Had the same exhaust setup across both engines (CSC headers, twin hotdogs to rear section of unknown manufacture) - sounds not too bad but one of the things I have an issue with is that I have no idea what my car sounds like from the outside when going - need some flyby footage or something...
Cheers
Marty

[martym00se72]

Forgot to add - sorry no experience with any of the 24v variety. Also, I have found that the startability of either engine has more to do with the running gear on the engine rather than the engine themselves (assuming engine in reasonable condition) - again, new plugs has made starting a breeze like it used to be for both.

I don't really think there is a 'wrong' choice, but given a choice I would go for the 3.0. But if I won Powerball I would be looking for the 3.2 with Ferrari TB - look for the UK dude on Youtube with the 147 GTA - ripping sound! I could listen to that all day.

[poohbah]

What a wonderful choice you have to make Julian.

I've only owned the very last iterations of the Busso 24v 2.5s (1999 and 2001), so not sure how they compare to other variants. But I will say they are close to the best sounding motor I've ever heard under acceleration, and are beautifully smooth.

In general, I'd say the 24V 2.5 lacks torque at low revs - with little oomph under 2500rpm.

In some ways they feel a bit like a turbo - you need to spool 'em up and then the power seems to come on in a rush once you get above 3000rpm.

If you want a sporty drive, you do have to row them along a bit to get the best out of them, but keep them in the power band and they are fantastic. But if you just want to cruise, they are effortless. Obviously, a lot also depends on the transmission. In the 156, I'd say the 6sp manual mated to a 2.5L 24V is the perfect combo.

That probably doesn't help you much in finding the right option to put in 116 transaxle though.

[rowan_bris]

I have a 3.2 engine in my GTV6 now and would never go back!

[VeeSix]

3.0 12 valve best all rounder, 3.0 24 valve best power but power up in the revolution range and 24 valve higher maintanance than the 12 valve 

[Garibaldi]

3.0 12 valve best all rounder, 3.0 24 valve best power but power up in the revolution range and 24 valve higher maintanance than the 12 valve 

Great coffee table, love it! 

[poohbah]

I assume that was thrashed to death before it became part of your lounge room Veesix.

[V AR 164]

That coffee table is awesome haha.

I can only really comment on the 3.0 12v and the 3.2 24v. The 3.0 12v is my personal favourite though (biased maybe  ).

I would definitely have to agree with poohbah in that under 3k rpm they lack torque, but after that, they go hard.

I have been in a 3.2 24v manual GT before and I liked that a lot too, the 24v motors have more of the Alfa 'rasp' to them. The lower end torque is improved but looses some up in the higher rev range (my experience).

But the 12v's are easier to work on, and they are redily available from the multiple 164's that get wrecked. Would be my option for a conversion. Plus they are plenty powerful for road use and sound the best IMO.

Andrew.

[gtv6sv]

Hey mate,

If you want pure power, find a GTA 3.2 V6.

I was told by a few mechanics my 164 Q had a bit of a freak engine (God I miss it😢). I drove my brother's 147 GTA and let me tell you, that blows the doors off my 164 Q! Power right through the range as opposed to my 164 Q which power really kicked in from about 2700rpm or so.

However the 12V 3.0 Q sounds quite mean, has an angry growl at low revs and snarls up to higher ranges😁don't get me wrong, that Q was quite powerful! If you want good power for a decently affordable conversion, go the mighty 164 Q 3.0 if possible. Otherwise if money is not an issue, try find a 3.2 24v GTA engine:-)