home register FAQ memberlist calendar

Go Back   Turbobricks Forums > General > showroom

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-03-2013, 01:46 AM   #1
Ridgeback
Board Member
 
Ridgeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Godalming England
Default '92 940 2.0T Estate - Reaper ride!

I was after an estate to lug the dog around in and crossed off the boring stuff, when this caught my eye on e bay. ticked all the boxes, one owner, low mileage, good nick, cheap, turbo
There was a slight issue. the one careful owner was an undertakers and the Volvo was used to carry bodies from the morgue, to the funeral parlour! The kids thought this was truly awesome, but the wife wasn't so impressed...
Drove it back from Kent, and it was spot on, pulled clean and boosted well, no knocks rattles, smooth as.
Took the kids and missus out, only for her to open the glovebox and find a load of receipts. Oh and bodybag tags. That and the blacked out rear windows kind of sealed it in her eyes.

It's done 110K, full Volvo service history and is the 2 litre SE Turbo Manual. Usual tricks will apply - 3"system, MBC to 10psi, chip, bigger Turbo and injectors. Touch of lows, then it will be fit for some tail out action.








Last edited by Ridgeback; 02-03-2013 at 01:51 AM.. Reason: pictures
Ridgeback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 03:15 AM   #2
SwedishBee
Drill em deep
 
SwedishBee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: TX
Default

Now dats gangsta.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyChopStick View Post
I bought an 850.
SwedishBee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 03:17 AM   #3
Harlard
80/20 speed parts club
 
Harlard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: PDX
Default

M90. I want one.
__________________


Herr Harlard am Erstens

1979 242 DL

Quote:
Originally Posted by t8fanning View Post
My knob has a big chunk of steel on it
Harlard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 04:20 PM   #4
amerbritcan
Hnnnnnng
 
amerbritcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eastern Ontario
Default

2.0L is a small engine to haul that much weight around. good thing it's turbo. we only ever got 2.3L's over here, 2.1L on early 240's
__________________
1990 745tic
1984 244DL (parts)
1989 245 slicktop M47 drift missile- ratty as hell
1967 220 amazon station wagon.
1990 244GL M47 summer DD project.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles850t View Post
I fart and Reese Witherspoon falls out of my ass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GhengisKhan View Post
I'm just a cum guzzler and I can't help myself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by My Mom
Get a bike
Honestly I've not been to www.brickspeed.net in years so I have no idea why it's still in my sig
Poopie scissors
amerbritcan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 04:30 PM   #5
Paddler Ed
Board Member
 
Paddler Ed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Armidale, NSW, Australia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amerbritcan View Post
2.0L is a small engine to haul that much weight around. good thing it's turbo. we only ever got 2.3L's over here, 2.1L on early 240's
2.0 was a tax break thing back in the early 1990's; if it was under £17.5k and 2049cc it was a lower company car tax bracket, so that's how the SE Turbo came about, and the Wentworth's later on (same as an SET, just a different name)

IIRC an SE Turbo or Wentworth (under £17.5k) should have:
-Cloth interior (or half leather on Wentworth's)
-M46 (4sp+OD)
-Electric front windows, manual backs
-Air Conditioning (but not Climate Control)
-Steel wheels

There was a higher spec Wentworth for a little bit over £17.5k that had:
-Leather
-Electric windows all round
-ECC
-Alloy wheels

We had a fair few that Dad abused over the years towing a caravan with... eventually we went to a 960 with the B6304 in it; much better car!

At that time, 1991ish, the Land Rover Discovery cost the same in the UK as a 940 of the spec above... IIRC...

God, I've managed to remember some random sh1te... too many long car journeys with car magazines and Volvo brochures to read...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2manyturbos View Post
If you're expecting your threads to stay on the track you have in mind, better find another forum. Derailments are the way with Turbobricks. It's like trying to herd cats here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forg View Post
Alfa variable cam timing is just something not working properly & flexing inappropriately
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bready View Post
Churd is like a forum full of idiots all rolled into one so it's not much different...
Stuff:
'92 Toyota 4Runner
'78 LC HJ45 ute
'94 LC FZJ80
'91 Yam XT600
'07 Yam WR250R
Past:
'00 V70
'94 854
'86 'Cruiser FJ73
Paddler Ed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 04:36 PM   #6
mocambique-amazone
Board Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Default b220ft is scrap

Don't try to tune this engine block with bigger turbo etc.
The bore is only 89mm.
The 530 head is made for 96mm!!!
Result: The head has a bigger diameter then the pistons:

SCRAP---SCRAP____SCRAP

This kind of combustion chamber is ****.

Look closer for a B230FT short block, everything you can swap. Even the ECU will run fine.
Bore out to 96mm will not work too. With "good luck" you bore to water channel.

Nice car nevertheless.
i did own the "same". Unfortunately my elk was killed by a doe, and the doe from the elk

good luck, Kay


Sorry B200FT is scrap!
mocambique-amazone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 10:16 PM   #7
Ridgeback
Board Member
 
Ridgeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Godalming England
Default

Is it that bad an engine? Bit confused as its the same block as the 230, only 300cc less?
I thought the B200FT had very strong internals?
Ridgeback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 10:39 PM   #8
Harlard
80/20 speed parts club
 
Harlard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: PDX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mocambique-amazone View Post
Don't try to tune this engine block with bigger turbo etc.
The bore is only 89mm.
The 530 head is made for 96mm!!!
Result: The head has a bigger diameter then the pistons:

SCRAP---SCRAP____SCRAP

This kind of combustion chamber is ****.

Look closer for a B230FT short block, everything you can swap. Even the ECU will run fine.
Bore out to 96mm will not work too. With "good luck" you bore to water channel.

Nice car nevertheless.
i did own the "same". Unfortunately my elk was killed by a doe, and the doe from the elk

good luck, Kay


Sorry B200FT is scrap!
So? Bigger squish pads and thicker cylinder walls. Both very desirable things.
Harlard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 10:47 PM   #9
Smithy110769
Board Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Default

Peeps have pulled good power out of the 2.0L 940 due to the thicker walls and they can take lots of boost too .
Smithy110769 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2013, 10:58 PM   #10
Ridgeback
Board Member
 
Ridgeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Godalming England
Default

I don't really want to carry out an engine swap, as the lump in this one only has 110K on it, has been serviced on a near monthly basis and probably hasn't been above 50, due to its past!
I will get hold of an M90 if one comes along, just for peace of mind, if I decide to get serious with the power, but as this will be my daily I don't want to go too mental.
Ridgeback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 03:21 AM   #11
mocambique-amazone
Board Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Default no squish

sorry Harribert, the B200FT has no squish. Zero! and impossible to get anything of squish with a 530 head. The diamter of the head is 96mm, the diameter of piston 89mm. The combustionroom looks like a mushroom.
Not really thicker walls, the casting mould is different between B230 and B200.
The internals are the same like B230. Strong rods, strong crankshaft

Ridgeback: The only and very best solution is to swap the head. With 16V this engine will work fine.
Its made for this.
I build a B200Ft with a 16V conversion, works great.

kindly regards, Kay
mocambique-amazone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 03:26 AM   #12
Harlard
80/20 speed parts club
 
Harlard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: PDX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mocambique-amazone View Post
sorry Harribert, the B200FT has no squish. Zero! and impossible to get anything of squish with a 530 head. The diamter of the head is 96mm, the diameter of piston 89mm. The combustionroom looks like a mushroom.
Not really thicker walls, the casting mould is different between B230 and B200.
The internals are the same like B230. Strong rods, strong crankshaft
Weak! Thought the pistons had a different dish than the 96mm slugs. So the combuston chamber extends past the bore and no thicker walls...weak. Would the B204 head be a good alternative then?
Harlard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 06:30 AM   #13
Ridgeback
Board Member
 
Ridgeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Godalming England
Default

According to this, the 2.0 and 2.3 share the same block, just a different bore? The 2.0 16V uses a different casting -

B19 Turbo

The 1,986 cc 136 PS (100 kW) B19ET was sold in certain markets where engines of over 2 litre displacement were heavily taxed, such as Italy. The engine has the same stroke as all other redblocks, the smaller displacement is the result of a smaller bore (88.9 x 80.0 mm). It is a very robust engine with forged pistons (made by Kolbenschmidt).[citation needed] The B19 later turned into the B200 low friction engine.
[edit] B23 Turbo

The B23ET and B23FT motors were offered for two years only in the 1983 and 1984 Volvo 700 and 200 series. Both the B23ET and B23FT are somewhat unique in the 700 series as they are were only turbo motor offered in the 700 series with a block mounted distributor, forged pistons and a forged crankshaft. The B23ET was the only redblock known to be equipped with a small coolant passage version of the higher flowing 405 cylinder head, the FT had to make do with normal 398 head. As these motors predate the low-friction B200 and B230 turbos and are equipped with forged pistons and crank, they are often considered one of the most robust Volvo turbo motors.

[edit] 16 Valve





B204GT in a Volvo 960
Introduced in 1989 for the 740 GLE (and later used in the 940/960), The 16-Valve Redblock motors were offered in both a 2.0 litre Turbo and a 2.3 litre 154 hp Naturally aspirated version. The head was designed for Volvo by Porsche.[citation needed] In addition to the 16 Valve head, these motors were equipped with twin counter rotating external balance shafts and the engine block itself differs from the 8V redblock

So the only block that is different on the 7 and 9 series is the 2.0 and 2.3 16V blocks. The 8 valve is the same whether its 2.0 or 2.3?

Last edited by Ridgeback; 02-04-2013 at 09:28 AM..
Ridgeback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 08:47 AM   #14
Old Iron
I Roll
 
Old Iron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dela-Where?
Default

Nice car, that color always looks good on the 9's. I think this car has an inherent theme, No?
__________________
Turbobricked
Old Iron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 12:42 PM   #15
Cojones
Board Member
 
Cojones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mocambique-amazone View Post
Don't try to tune this engine block with bigger turbo etc.
The bore is only 89mm.
The 530 head is made for 96mm!!!
Result: The head has a bigger diameter then the pistons:

SCRAP---SCRAP____SCRAP

This kind of combustion chamber is ****.

Look closer for a B230FT short block, everything you can swap. Even the ECU will run fine.
Bore out to 96mm will not work too. With "good luck" you bore to water channel.

Nice car nevertheless.
i did own the "same". Unfortunately my elk was killed by a doe, and the doe from the elk

good luck, Kay


Sorry B200FT is scrap!
Bull****. I drove a B200FT with 15G at 1.5 bar (that's 21,7 psi), 3" exhaust without cat and some custom chip. It worked wonders, should have had around 260HP. No problems at all.
__________________

S90 Executive
Cojones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 04:14 PM   #16
Martin L.
Kombinationskraftwagen
 
Martin L.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: München
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mocambique-amazone View Post
Don't try to tune this engine block with bigger turbo etc.
The bore is only 89mm.
The 530 head is made for 96mm!!!
Result: The head has a bigger diameter then the pistons:

SCRAP---SCRAP____SCRAP

This kind of combustion chamber is ****.
This misinformation is widespread belief in Germany. I do not know why, but nearly everybody here parrots that nonsense, not once having seen nor measured this particular engine.

In the next few hours you will notice an other typically related phenomenon: I will get harshly insulted for my statement and above stated false facts will be religiosly reapeated.
You will see...
__________________
IDKFA

Last edited by Martin L.; 02-04-2013 at 04:19 PM..
Martin L. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 04:19 PM   #17
Martin L.
Kombinationskraftwagen
 
Martin L.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: München
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cojones View Post
I drove a B200FT with 15G at 1.5 bar (that's 21,7 psi), 3" exhaust without cat and some custom chip. It worked wonders, should have had around 260HP. No problems at all.
Nearly the same here for some 10.000s kms. No problem at all.
Martin L. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 05:00 PM   #18
Cojones
Board Member
 
Cojones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Default

But he ís right about the different diameters, but whatever, it ran great.
Cojones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 05:34 PM   #19
Ridgeback
Board Member
 
Ridgeback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Godalming England
Default

Glad its not a total fail I'm not after vast amounts of power. I have an R6 Streetfighter for blowing the cobwebs away, just looking to squeeze a bit more oomph out of the big ole beast
Ridgeback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2013, 06:26 PM   #20
amerbritcan
Hnnnnnng
 
amerbritcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eastern Ontario
Default

I have a 2.1L block which I was planning on 16V swapping, and was told not to due to the tabletopping thing. maybe that's because the valves hit the edge of the bore though?
amerbritcan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 05:00 AM   #21
professor245
Board Member
 
professor245's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Serbia Belgrade
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cojones View Post
Bull****. I drove a B200FT with 15G at 1.5 bar (that's 21,7 psi), 3" exhaust without cat and some custom chip. It worked wonders, should have had around 260HP. No problems at all.
Must agree, B200FT is a great engine, and SAME as B230FT in every possible way except the bore!
And Volvo ingeneers are just dumb and don't give a sh*t so they slapped on 530 head on it!!!
We have here B200FT with 531 head put on it, and it's bigger combustion chamber, and it pulls like a train...for long time now....

It's just like B23 and B21 before B2XX engines...
__________________
''I was so ugly the doctor slapped my momma when i was born!
Then he took out his pocket knife and cut off my horns...''
WAYLON

My seller/buyer feedback
professor245 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 09:49 AM   #22
mocambique-amazone
Board Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Germany
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cojones View Post
Bull****. I drove a B200FT with 15G at 1.5 bar (that's 21,7 psi), 3" exhaust without cat and some custom chip. It worked wonders, should have had around 260HP. No problems at all.
I will open the spare engine, yes the same B200FT. And you will see: It's bull**** you are writing down.
The casting mould of the B200 is definetily different from B230
From outside it LOOKS like the same, but casting cores are different. 100%

The combustionroom is ****. even if you drive this scrap with a good feeling.....
The mpg is worse then the B230.

I will do pics and everyone will see this kind of leadership of a red pencil in a company.

lindy-muc: No chance, not on this level

Religion is in believing something (or not)
Knowledge is....


try it with another person


have a good day
mocambique-amazone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 11:32 AM   #23
professor245
Board Member
 
professor245's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Serbia Belgrade
Default

Quote:
The mpg is worse then the B230.
Sure it is, B200 has smaller bore, aaaaand what that relates to??? Lower torque, and lower torque=???
professor245 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2013, 01:16 PM   #24
Cojones
Board Member
 
Cojones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Default

Quit your selective reading mocambique-amazon. I said putting a bigger turbo on worked fine. I said nothimg about you being wrong about the differences in the bores. And yes, mileage isn't much better than a B230. But that's also something I kept my mouth shut about. Hold your horses dude.
Cojones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 08:21 AM   #25
foggyjames
Ryan's spanner monkey
 
foggyjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Lincoln, UK
Default

Welcome, fellow UK-er!

There's nothing wrong with tuning a B200. The portion of the chamber which is in the head overlaps the deck of the block slightly in a couple of places. Slightly. In a couple of places. It's not a "mushroom shape". UK Tbrickers have had a couple of B200 cars reliably running 260+bhp with relatively minor work. Because the head is the same (and the limiting factor in terms of peak horsepower in many applications), they have the nice effect of making similar peak horsepower numbers (B200 vs B230), all else being equal.

The issue is that you do notice the reduction in torque in the heavier chassis, but I'm sure it'll be perfectly adequate for what you're doing.

cheers

James
__________________
'13 V70 D4
'89 740 Turbo Intercooler
'88 360 Turbo Intercooler
'84 360 GLT
'81 343 GLS R-Sport
'80 343 DL
'70 164 - Under Restoration

PM me if you're looking for Euro parts!
foggyjames is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.