Alfa Romeo 164 q

turboalfa · March 27, 2009, 09:14:35 PM

hahah thank

...

yea he spent alot of moneyy on it tho lol and i mean alot!! ... also it was road rego as well! and we brought it to the drags considering it had role cage and he couldnt just dump the clutch or he would snap the driveshaft haha! .. andd we still pulled 11 seconds and 128 mph! .. lol was fastest alfa ive been in .. i believe it would be up there with the fastest in victoria. or even australia at that.

was a scary car haha

1750GT · March 27, 2009, 09:22:26 PM

Scary but lovely and it would seem from your comments unforgettable rush nonetheless I bet.

1750GT

turboalfa · March 27, 2009, 09:53:42 PM

something ill never forget.. he use to be in the aroca .. he use to go to sandown a fair bit and the island. you probly seen it around if you go to race days.

1750GT · March 27, 2009, 10:02:39 PM

Has unc still got the beast?

1750GT

turboalfa · March 28, 2009, 01:06:56 AM

Just sold it for 20 g's .. 2 weeks ago so no idea who to although i do know the guy that bought it had other 75's and said he has never seen anything like this one haha

1750GT · March 30, 2009, 08:57:27 PM

Well now that the "family" no longer has the beast, you'll need keep it going and do your own 75 and forget the 164Q Ah! By the way hows the search for the 164Q going, found anything yet?

1750GT

pep105 · March 30, 2009, 11:12:08 PM

Hey turboalfa

Thats one off its face 75 your uncle owned, that didnt used to be champange colour by any chance did it? My mates old 75 Twinspark had the same rego PYY-970 and used to be that colour. Also I think this car was on ebay last year (not easy to forget it!) and the engine bay was champange..

John Hanslow · April 02, 2009, 07:11:53 AM

I know the 164 q has a higher spec engine with more power, but wouldn't a 75 3.0lt Potenziata with a standard 164 engine (which it has) be a lighter and better handling car ? ... and of course rear wheel drive, last of the true Alfa designed sports cars etc..

The 164 is more of a cruiser and has new technology in comparison to the 75 but a potenziata must be worth it.

Even on the Sun Cars Guide a few weeks ago,they did a review of a late 80's performace Commodore VK SS or similar and one of the related cars of the era was noted as the Alfa 75.

Cheers.

Joe Garra · April 02, 2009, 09:41:17 AM

I had a 75 Twin Spark which was wonderful to drive, but so is my Q. Try both

turboalfa · April 03, 2009, 09:29:16 PM

hey yes the car did use to be champainge haha! ... sorry guys havnt been able to get on last few days

... although yes it was a silver, champainge color when he first bought the car haha.

and no stil same 164q but ive spotted an alfa 75 TS .. although its 2.0 i prefer the v6 if anything.

pep105 · April 03, 2009, 10:00:19 PM

Then thats the car then

Dont spew about a Twinspark thay are a great package you wont be dissapointed

turboalfa · April 03, 2009, 10:46:31 PM

i would have to drive one i suppose before i buy it so i have an idea .. see i like a bit of balls ... if anything i may by the ts and put a small t4 turbo i have in the back i actually have 2 maybe i shall slap them on with low pounds such as 6 or something rather for a bit of fun:) haha

good or bad idea? lol

pep105 · April 03, 2009, 11:05:09 PM

Just drive one and see how you go. Try and appreciate it for the car it is rather than something with outright balls. Compare it to a 164Q and 75 3 litre Potenztiata or standard 3 litre. The Twinspark would be the best handling and has great driveabilty, just keep those turbos in the garage for now.........

1750GT · April 04, 2009, 11:52:24 PM

I agree pep, drive them both and see what suits you the most, and I wouldn't worry about the turbo's for now either. I think the guys are right, the 2lt. is always maligned but with the loss of some substabtial weight from the 3lt down to the 2lt, the car gets an almost perfect 50/50 wieght distribution and makes the car an enjoyable weapon indeed (particularly because it still has some useful power); and if you ever do want to whack on the turbo's on or fettal the car this is a model which shouldn't be discounted, more room for the bits and more room around the engine to get more air flow for the adiitional heat.

For my money the 75, in 2lt or 3lt is the weapon of choice when compared to the 164, and is a much simpler generation of car to get parts for and maintain. But if you like to cruise and are sure that you won't get the rush to use the car you choose as a weapon then the 164 may be the one for you.

Good luck. You know almost the most enjoyable part for a while, the chase to find the one!

1750GT

turboalfa · April 07, 2009, 03:54:22 PM

see you guys are right im not gonna pull the turbos out untill at least 4 years or maybe 3 although ive heard the 164s have a much nicer sound and with my own eyes i believe they look alot better ... if the 75's wernt the ugliest looking alfa haha.. i would defiantly go for it. but honestly i think there a little to boxy for me.