Difference GT 3.2 vs GTA 3.2

[Dna Dave]

Hi all,

Does anyone know what is the difference between the GT (176kw) and the GTA (185kw) engine.

I believe one of the cams are different (not sure which one)
The runners and plenum may be different

Also does anyone know if the 2.5L V6 and early non cat 3.0L non cat headers bolt straight on to a GT, I was told from a Well known Alfa specialist that the angle is slightly different, but he wasn't a 100% sure.

Thank you all in advance

Regards

David

[wankski]

idk about the first question - probably in the fuel map too..

second issue - yes cf1 manifolds will fit the heads, but they will not bolt up to the cf3 front pipes - you will need to custom fab those to accept - but it's no big deal. will need a lambda bung in the front downpipe i think it is... again, no biggie...

been done before...

[Dna Dave]

Thanks wankski

Now all I need to do is find a set of the non cat headers

[L4OMEO]

The compression ratio is different between the GT and GTA engines (10.0 v 10.5), not sure how this is achieved hardware-wise. I believe the mapping is also different, intended to be less aggressive in the GT. I'm fairly sure the runners and plenum are the same but don't quote me on that.

Cheers
Rory

[shiny_car]

The compression ratio is different between the GT and GTA engines (10.0 v 10.5)

^^^ Not heard this one before. Maybe true. However, ePer lists the same part numbers for heads, head gaskets, pistons and cranks. So there's no hardware difference, which makes it seem unlikely.  

So it may only be ECU mapping, and may only be marketing. If you drive both, I don't think there's a difference. I've only driven a handful of GTAs, and they don't feel any quicker, and others concur. Then again, some people may have noticed a difference.

[L4OMEO]

The technical spec sheets issued by Ateco note this difference and it has been referenced in media road tests of the respective vehicles (check Wheels Sep 2004 for the GT, Dec 2003 for the 147 GTA). This doesn't necessarily mean it is so, but even if there are marketing reasons for quoting different outputs you have to wonder why the distributor would go to the effort of quoting different compression ratios when they could, if challenged, just point to the mapping.

Regardless, performance figures obtained by Wheels for the GT were fractionally better for the GT than those for the 50kg lighter 147 GTA (albeit taken on different days at different locations with different drivers). If I owned a GT I probably wouldn't feel short-changed 

Cheers Richard
Rory