KL-BKK-KUNMING AROC MALAYSIA OVERLAND EXPEDITION

Total Fee for 1 Car of 2 Pax Only : RM5,000
Fee for Additional Person : RM 700 /person

Date : 12th March 2010

Fee Coverage:-

Member-related Expenses:
1. Double occupancy with breakfast as indicated;
2. Tip for tour guide;
3. Urban construction fees;
4. One day city tours in Kunming by coach;
5. Full-period travel insurance (with a maximum indemnity of RMB300,000.00. For details please refer to the clauses of the insurance policy.);
6. Temporary driver’s license for driving in China;
7. A guiding car and English speaking guide;

Vehicle-related Expenses:
1. Formality clearance for special types of tourism (state-authority –level);
2. Formality clearance for special types of tourism (provincial-authority –level);
3. General purpose road tolls;
4. Tolls for particular sections of roads and bridges;
5. Third-party insurance;
6. Parking fees;
7. Quarantine fees for entry of foreign vehicles;
8. Administration fees imposed by China border control authority;
9. Vehicle inspection and testing fees for foreign vehicles;
10. Fees for training in traffic laws and regulations;
11. Fees for customs clearance of professional photographing and filming equipment;
12. Temporary driving permit of vehicles.
13. Ferry from Ching Khong to Huay Xai and from Huay Xai to Ching Khong.

Documents for Permit Application for Self Drive in China:-

1. Change in Number of Vehicles: Number of vehicles entering China shall not exceed what is claimed in the documents but may be less.
2. Variation in Vehicles and Participants: Detailed documentation of vehicles shall be included in the submittal, and a final document of the vehicles and participants shall be submitted 30 days prior to their arrival. No variation, particularly in documentation of vehicles, will be granted thereafter, otherwise no entry will be permitted.
3. All vehicles shall be taken out of China upon departure of the group.
4. All members are expected to obtain entry visas by themselves and at their own costs.
5. Change of Date: The date of change is not supposed to change unless in a case of force majeure.
6. Details of vehicles and members to be submitted for application:

a). Vehicle List:
Registered
Owner Veh# Maker Model Engine# Chassis # Capacity Year Fuel Colour Seats weight Value L/R hand drive Vehicle Size

b). Participants Lists (include drivers)
C# Participant Name Sex Birth Date Birth Place Age Nationality Occupation P/P No. Issue Date Issue Place Expiry Dr. Lic. Visa No.

7. The following documents are required for application purpose (20days to1 month before arrival):
1) Photo of vehicle （front and side pictures）;
2) photo to indicate the position of engine number, chasis number; (not the number on the plate);
3) Photocopy of vehicle registration paper（for vehicle）;
4) Photocopy of driver’s passport (for driver only);
5) Photocopy of driver’s driving license (for driver only);
6) Two 2.5×3.6cm color head photos with white background (for driver only).
Remarks: additional document or information will be needed for Tibet self-drive tour.

Pls prepare these documents and submit to ED Ron Nathan.

Goodwood Festival of Speed: Moving Motor Show

New road cars are the focus of an event running the day before this year’s Festival in the grounds of Goodwood House.

1K2 – Alfa Romeo 75 Rally (1985-1992)



1K2

Alfa Romeo 75 Rally (1985-1992)

1K2 shock absorber

The 1K2 is a real “high-end” shock absorber for demanding street- and competition use. The 1K2 is build using the finest materials. The housing is made from 7075 aluminum. This guarantees low weight, maximum strength and optimum cooling.

The 1K2 damper is always chosen in the largest size possible for the most accurate damping control: normally a 46mm body with a 40mm piston and a 16mm piston rod. Mc. Pherson struts are normally converted from the standard 22mm piston rod to an upside-down system with a 40 or 45mm guidance tube for maximum stiffness and wheel guidance. This is especially important when the G-forces are higher than obtainable with the standard vehicle.

The 1K2 can optionally be equipped with the “Black Titan” coating on the guidance- and piston rod. This is a coating that cannot rust and is extreme hard and smooth. The friction is lowered with these piston rods, improving comfort, reducing oil temperatures, improving traction and extending life time under the severest conditions. The “Black Titan” is a luxury which – if you can afford it – is certainly recommended.

When there is sufficient room available, the 1K2 can be equipped with a “spring rate adjuster” which makes it possible to change the spring constant without removal of the struts/springs. See for more info the category products > spring rate adjuster,

Settings

We take suspension serious. Therefore we offer for most applications different settings on the spring rates, shim stacks and damping pistons:

* Fast street / occasional trackday. An upgrade to the sportive side from the OEM equipment. Daily comfort, vibration and noise levels are just as important as handling.

* Trackday / bumpy race circuit / Nordschleife. A suspension to race on both smooth and bumpy circuits. It is possible to ride to- and from the circuits. Ride height is enough to drive on public roads. Laptimes and handling are more important than comfort levels.

* Full-race / rally. Stiff suspension, designed to work with slicks and rollcage fitted. Not useable on the street. Lap time optimized.

Intrax is a Dutch manufacturer of high-end suspension technology with over 30 years experience at the highest levels in racing. Intrax designs and produces shock absorbers, springs and suspension packages for Formula 1 cars, road cars and everything in between. In addition to an elaborate street- and competition program, Intrax also delivers “custom-made solutions”.

Alfa Romeo Zagato



The Alfa Romeo SZ (Sprint Zagato) or ES-30 (Experimental Sportscar 3.0 litre) is a high performance limited production sports car/road-concept car built between 1989 and 1991 with partnership via Centro Stile Zagato, Centro Stile Alfa Romeo and Centro Stile Fiat. It was unveiled as ES-30 in 1989 Geneva Motor Show as a prototype by Zagato, although the car was mainly built by them – not designed mechanically.

AROCKV in Italiaspeed



13.06.2009 SINGAPORE ALFA ROMEO OWNERS’ HEAD TO MALAYSIA FOR “FAMILY WEEKEND”

The ever-active members’ of the Alfa Romeo Owners’ Club Singapore have just held a very successful and enjoyable 2nd Family Weekend: Express di Lanjut 2009, from 6th to 8th Jun 09, which built on the achievements of the first weekend.

For the 2nd Annual Family Weekend, AROC SG ventured towards the Kampung Lanjut, situated in Kuala Rompin, Pahang, on the East Coast of Peninsular Malaysia. The drive, which is always a major part of such events, was a mix of highway and b-roads through plantations and kampungs (i.e. local villages).

Hosted by Serai di Lanjut Golf & Beach Resort, the group had the opportunity to experience a variety of activities such as golf, a firefly river cruise and a jungle trek. As Rompin was also hosting its Sea Festival, this gave participants the opportunity to take in some of the local sights and sounds.

It was certainly a time for the extended ‘family’ to get together. While regular active members were present, a few long-time but not so active members were able to join the event. One of the highlights was the celebration of the first birthday of one of the “AROC babies” – Xavier Wong.

While in Kuala Rompin, AROC SG was able to meet up with members of AROC Klang Valley, a Malaysian affiliate club, who were spending the weekend at a neighbouring resort. As a first meeting between the two clubs, it also marked the first step towards future coordinated events and activities.

This event was made possible with the support of Serai di Lanjut Gold & Beach Resort as well EuroAutomobile Pte Ltd, the official distributor of Alfa Romeo in Singapore.

by Colin Ong

Credit : ItaliaSpeed & AROC SG

Alfa Romeo 145

The Alfa Romeo 145 and 146 are small family cars produced by the Italian automaker Alfa Romeo between 1994 and 2001, they were launched at the 1994 Turin Motor Show.^[3] The 145 and 146 both share common design plans and interior components from the B-pillar forwards; the 145 is a three-door hatchback, whereas the 146 is a five-door.

The 145 and 146 are prized by performance minded Alfisti as a source of performance upgrades for the earlier Sprint. As these cars were initially designed for use with the Alfasud boxer engines, and later updates with Twinspark units, it is technically feasible to take a late 16v boxer engine from these cars and directly transplant them into a Sprint, giving the car a tremendous performance upgrade in the process.

Alfa Romeo 147

The Alfa Romeo 147 is a small family car produced by Italian automaker Alfa Romeo from 2000 to 2010.^[2] The 147 was also voted European Car of the Year for 2001, beating the Ford Mondeo and the Toyota Prius.

The 147 was launched at the 2000 Turin Motor Show as a replacement for the 145 / 146 hatchbacks, and is based on the running gear of the larger 156 saloon. It was available with 1.6, 2.0, and 3.2-litre petrol engines and a 1.9-litre diesel engine.

The car was in production for ten years making it one of the oldest small family cars on sale in Europe at the time of its replacement by the Alfa Romeo Giulietta in late May 2010. However, there is still some export stock left to last into 2011.

In Defense of Some Recent Alfas

In Defense of Some Recent Alfas

Dana Loomis and Joost Gompels

( This article originally appeared in Alfa Owner )

A few months ago, Pat Braden had critical words for recent Alfa Romeos, especially the Alfetta and the Milano. We would like to offer a counterpoint to his remarks. In doing so, it is not our purpose to question Braden’s vast knowledge and certainly not to challenge his taste, or anyone else’s. However since we both own Milano 3.0s and like them, we thought that some comments stemming from the perspective of satisfied owners and members interested in history might be appropriate.

The history of the Milano, which was the US-market version of the car known to the rest of the world as the Alfa 75, begins with the Alfetta, which was first presented to the European press in June 1974. Braden says the Alfetta used “decades-old technology of questionable merit” and was “complex without being superior” relative to earlier Alfas. The technology he refers to can only be the distinctive combination of DeDion rear suspension and rear-mounted transaxle introduced on the Alfetta, and used later in the Milano.

The DeDion configuration was indeed decades old. Alfa Romeo used it in the tipo 162 V16 Grand Prix car of 1939, the tipo 512 12C GP car of 1940, the tipo 159 “Alfetta” GP car which won the World Championship in 1951 and subsequently in the famous 6C 3000 CM and the 2000 Sportiva of the fifties. In fact, the DeDion arrangement goes back to the origins of the automobile and the French manufacturer from which it derives its name. Alfa Romeo experimented a great deal with this design, and other distinguished makers like Aston Martin used it for decades, replacing it only quite recently.

The rear-mounted transaxle had also been used by Alfa decades before in the tipo C 8C car and 12 C GP cars of 1935, the tipo 158 “Alfetta” GP car of 1938 and in the prototype 6C 2000 “Gazzella” of 1943.

It is not at all clear why the merit of either of these two designs should be questioned merely on account of their age. Putting aside electronics and digital engine management systems, most of the hardware in the modern automobile is many decades old. Twin overhead cams, multi valve heads, and dual ignitions all date from before World War I. Pistons, cams, cranks, springs, shafts, bearings, and axles were not unknown to our forefathers. However, production technology has improved, and this, in some cases, has enabled old concepts once thought to be impractical to be dusted off, refined, and reintroduced. Some good designs were not adopted because of cost: the DeDion axle-rear transaxle arrangement is one such example.

There would certainly have been little reason to question Alfa’s choice of rear suspension configuration when it appeared in the 1970s. All rear suspension designs are compromises, and Alfa’s configuration sacrifices independent response to achieve favorable fore-aft weight distribution, low unsprung weight, and constant geometry. But the merit of technology is always relative. Even in racing, you only need to be faster than your competitors on that track, on that day.

In this relative sense, no rear suspension available on affordable production cars in the 1970s was better than the Alfetta’s. However, some were much worse. Alfa’s DeDion design was not only preferable to a live axle, but also to rudimentary IRS suspensions in use at the time, like the swing axle and semi-trailing arm suspensions most German and French makers favored.

Braden also contends that by the 1980s Alfa was producing products that were “neither innovative nor appealing.” It’s true that the 75 did not break any new ground: it was, in fact, adapted from the Nuova Giulietta, itself a major rework of the Alfetta. But the 75 was what the Alfetta should have been from the beginning. In the 75, problems like the Alfetta’s rubbery shift linkage and marginal build quality were finally resolved, the drive train was less fragile, and performance was much better with Bosch injection and a V6 or 2.0 litre twin spark. While none of the component parts of the 75 were entirely new, the whole added up to something better than the component parts. Moreover, the entire car was extensively tested in US conditions, something Alfa had never done before, so it was better adapted for sale to a wider group of buyers. In addition, the US-market Milano was as reliable as any European vehicle in the US, aside from singular and endemic problems with the timing belt and its detensioner.

The 3.0 l V6 was the most developed version of both the world- and US-market versions of the Alfa 75. In the US market, it was what the Milano should have been from the beginning. With abundant torque throughout the RPM range, long-legged gearing, and specially-tuned suspension it combines a sports car’s exhilirating performance and sophisticated handling with the flexible, controlled feel of a large luxury tourer. Henry Wessells, who has owned at least one example of just about every significant Alfa Romeo car from the Tipo B to the ES30 SZ, feels that the road behavior, handling and response of the 3.0 is outstanding and decidedly superior to the 2.5 Milanos.

Despite the lack of substantial innovation, it is hard to support Braden’s argument that Alfa engineers had lost their technical “edge” after the 1960s The Alfetta and most parts of the Milano were designed by the same team that had produced virtually every rear-wheel drive Alfa Romeo since the 1940s, and they had not lost their abilities in any sense. Alfa had experimented aggressively with rear suspension designs for years, and used a variety of IRS arrangements on production and racing cars as early as the 1930s. Alfa’s designers unquestionably understood these systems. The pre-war Alfa Romeo 6C2500 cars had IRS with swing axles, and thus, as Wessells points out, “Alfa knew all about swing axles, which is why the new 1900 model of the fifties had a live rear axle.”

The DeDion axle was chosen for the Giulia’s successor after extensive design work and demanding road tests supervised by Ing. Giuseppe Busso and carried out by Consalvo Sanesi, Alfa’s legendary test driver. The tests evaluated several alternative designs, including IRS, and compared cars such as the Sportiva and the TZ.

The Alfa V6 was another of Busso’s products. Although simpler than the Montreal’s 4-cam V8, it was still so advanced that Fiat/Lancia scrapped their own V6 design after acquiring Alfa Romeo 10 years after the Alfa V6 was introduced.

What Alfa did lose progressively from the ’70s onward was the cash to develop new products and to fine-tune and carefully build existing ones. The Alfetta was especially cursed by the era in which it was made. The late 1970s were a gloomy time for automobiles, when the synergy between the changing realities of fuel crises, emissions and safety regulations, and labor strife forced auto manufacturers to experiment with new materials and production processes, often with unhappy results. While most manufacturers suffered, as a state-financed enterprise, Alfa Romeo was also a victim of its political masters, who included the labor unions, as well as the Italian government. Wessells, who witnessed these conditions in Italy and was a confidant of Alfa Romeo engineers and management, describes the situation as “industrial anarchy” and marvels that Alfa produced anything in those years. The Alfetta was a product of that time. It was not the basic design but its execution that was the major problem.

In later years, the obsolescent Spider was the most egregious example of Alfa’s lack of resources, but smaller problems also remained. Some weaknesses related to the transaxle cars’ unique drive train and the V6′s rubber timing belt and detensioner were never completely resolved (ironically, these troublesome items were modern designs!).

In a world of absolutes, perhaps Alfa should have developed a 4-cam, multivalve V6 in the 1980s; perhaps they should have forsaken DeDion axles for light alloy, multilink independent rear suspensions. But fortunately, the mechanical parts that were to go into the Milano were advanced enough when designed that Alfa still retained a technical advantage.

In the real world of the late 1980s, where else could you have found a more advanced four-door sedan at a price comparable to the Milano 3.0? A BMW 325i was inferior in technical sophistication and performance: in 1988, it came with a 168 hp SOHC inline six and a semi-trailing arm rear suspension. For another $10,000, you could have bought a BMW M3 with a 190 hp DOHC 16-valve inline four giving performance equivalent to the Milano’s, but the M3 still had the same suspension design as the standard 325. A Mercedes 190e 2.3 cost almost as much as an M3, but had an SOHC 4-cylinder motor with substantially less power. The Nissan Maxima and Toyota Cressida were perhaps closest to the Milano 3.0 in price and engine displacement. Both Japanese sedans had novel independent rear suspension systems and SOHC 3.0 l V6s in the late 1980s, but they produced substantially less power than the Milano and delivered middling road manners, indeed a case of “complexity without superiority”. Not until complex multi-link rear suspensions found their way from the Porsche 928 to Mercedes and BMW, did modern IRS systems improve beyond the limits of which the Milano’s DeDion arrangement was capable.

Far from being outmoded, key components of the Milano’s design remain superior to the competition, even today. Busso’s V6 still outperforms virtually any other 2-cam V6 on the market, nearly 20 years after it was introduced. Until 1996, Alfa continuted to use the DeDion axle and rear-mounted transaxle on the ES30, a high-performance sports car based on the 75 3.0. Wessells says that the ES30 shows that the basic design is capable of “fantastic” performance with further development. He attributes much of this to the DeDion axle, which, with constant camber, gives very predictable response and, in Alfa’s design, very little roll steer. On the other hand, BMW still has not weaned itself from semi-trailing arms, which have been resurrected for the rear of the Z3 roadster.

So we’re left with some subjective judgements about the 75′s merits. Braden says the styling offends him. Personally, we like its looks more every year. It was ahead of its time; the lines now seem fresh and distinctive after 10 years. The car today draws compliments and praise. It compares well in its looks and stance with current successful offerings such as the Volvo 850 and Saab 9000. It’s appearance seems to us crisper and more aggressive than the current 155 and 164. Perhaps some aspects of the 75′s styling are quirky, but that’s true for the Giulia sedan, too. It’s an Alfa hallmark, an Italian tradition.

In the end, perhaps we can agree to disagree. The Alfa 75 was a good European car, but the 75 3.0 V6 was a stellar one. It had the performance, the technical sophistication, the build quality and the character to carve out a place among the best sports sedans in the ’80s and early ’90s. But, in the United States, it was not marketed wisely, and now we have a handful of these cars left in the country as witnesses to a lost opportunity. Perhaps they are cult objects, but that is no disgrace. Besides, in this country, you could label any Alfa that: they are all rare and outside the mainstream. Call them what you will, we’re happy to own one of the best performance cars Alfa Romeo produced in the postwar era.

Alfa Romeo 156 GTA

In September 2001, the 156 GTA and Sportwagon GTA were launched at the Frankfurt Motor Show. The GTA was named after the Alfa Romeo GTA from the 1960s, the letters GTA meaning Gran Turismo Alleggerita (English: lightened Grand Tourer). Even though the name suggests a light car, the GTA isn’t any lighter than base 156. It was actually 91 kilograms (200 lb) heavier than 2.5 litre V6 engined version.^[23] With its 3.2 litre engine its easy to get very varying fuel consumption figures, the EC urban fuel consumption is 15.6 miles per imperial gallon (18.1 L/100 km; 13.0 mpg_-US) and combined 23.3 mpg_-imp (12.1 L/100 km; 19.4 mpg_-US), extra-urban consumption is 32.8 mpg_-imp (8.61 L/100 km; 27.3 mpg_-US).

Alfa Romeo 155

The 155 was initially released with 1.7 L Twin Spark, 1.8 L Twin Spark, and 2.0 L Twin Spark petrol engines, the latter two with variable valve timing. The 1.7 L was not sold in the United Kingdom.

Two four-cylinder turbocharged diesel engines, of 1.9 L (92 PS (68 kW; 91 hp)) and 2.5 L (125 PS (92 kW; 123 hp)) were available in some markets, but again not the UK.

At the top of the 155 range were the 2.5 L V6, using a (166 PS (122 kW; 164 hp)) engine derived from the 3.0 L V6 used in the larger Alfa Romeo 164, and the Q4 which used a drivetrain derived from the Lancia Delta Integrale which meant a 190 PS (140 kW; 190 hp) 2.0 L 16V turbocharged engine and permanent four-wheel drive. The Q4 also incorporated three differential gears (normal at the front, epicyclic at the centre (including a Ferguson viscous coupling) and torsen self-locking at the rear).^[5] Both the 2.5 V6 and Q4 models were also available with electronically adjustable suspension with two damper settings (automatic and sport).