home register FAQ memberlist calendar

Go Back   Turbobricks Forums > Mechanical > performance & modifications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-07-2018, 08:48 PM   #1
Lando
Arthur Digby Sellers
 
Lando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Rancho Relaxo
Default Fuel economy transmission swap

I have a pedal cluster, clutch cable and cross member from a manual 240 for a manual swap on my 86 245, but I don’t know what trans I want to swap to. I have a bone stock B230F, that I don’t plan on modifying, I just want a manual transmission to improve my highway fuel economy because I know the AW70 is the main contributor to my 24mpg at best. I commute in freeways where the traffic is going 80+ mph.

What is the latest and greatest swap that people are using considering that I don’t need it to tolerate a whole lot of horsepower? I do not want an M46/47. I’d prefer a hydraulic clutch, but I’m not set on that. The T5 isn’t really calling my name either, but the WC variant does have some nice ratios for decent MPG at 80+ mph. I remember readying about some crazies entertaining the idea of a 6 speed Nissan tranny, but had trouble finding the thread.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by amerbritcan View Post
Lando you have an enticing midriff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 240240 View Post
get on my lawn
Lando is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2018, 09:08 PM   #2
JohnLane
Board Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern Washington
Default

Convert to 10 year old Corolla for 35mpg, less noise, better reliability, more likely hood of survival in a big accident ect.

For those of us with a thing for Volvos.... M-46 if it is healthy will do just fine at stock power level.

Seriously... If fuel economy is changing your lifestyle.... Work harder or smarter!
__________________
Overkill is consistently more fun.
JohnLane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2018, 09:18 PM   #3
John V, outside agitator
Board Member
 
John V, outside agitator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sleezattle, WA, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lando View Post
I have a pedal cluster, clutch cable and cross member from a manual 240 for a manual swap on my 86 245, but I donít know what trans I want to swap to. I have a bone stock B230F, that I donít plan on modifying, I just want a manual transmission to improve my highway fuel economy because I know the AW70 is the main contributor to my 24mpg at best. I commute in freeways where the traffic is going 80+ mph.

What is the latest and greatest swap that people are using considering that I donít need it to tolerate a whole lot of horsepower? I do not want an M46/47. Iíd prefer a hydraulic clutch, but Iím not set on that. The T5 isnít really calling my name either, but the WC variant does have some nice ratios for decent MPG at 80+ mph. I remember readying about some crazies entertaining the idea of a 6 speed Nissan tranny, but had trouble finding the thread.

Careful...I heart all to fawk the T5--the one with the tallest 1st but I also reccomend much shorter axle ratios...
See its an interplay...1st thru 4th fun, and then when you have the insane overdrive of .63 or .72 AND a 4.3/4.37 or even a 4.88--then 5th is allright--on the flat and level>

4.88 back x .63 is 3.07 overall and that's pretty tall..Fine for a turbo car.

But that 5th and a 3.7 is 2.33 and that is nutso tall..So tall you'd be fighting wind resistance at 80+ and being below reasonable torque...so that would probably cost you Em Pea Gees.

As crazy as it sounds increasing the POP per pop --efficiency---all other things being equal--is the key to happiness.

My daily has a M47 and here everybody hates them --just like in the Mare_koooor world everybody "hates" the stock Type 9...Me? I say ""Hmmmmm not too bad for a daily/road car.."
Only problem with both is a) getting a good one or b) getting the parts to run thru the box spiffing it up before install..and getting them for reasonable cost... c) getting good info in the climate of "they're sh!t" which is the reflexive response..

Make manual trans grate again!
__________________
John Vanlandingham/JVAB Imports
Sleezattle WA, USA

--> CALL (206) 431-9696<----

www.rallyrace.net/jvab

www.rallyanarchy.com

Vive le Prole-le-ralliat

"When a man tells you that he got rich through hard work, ask him: 'Whose?'"
ó Don Marquis
John V, outside agitator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2018, 09:26 PM   #4
Lando
Arthur Digby Sellers
 
Lando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Rancho Relaxo
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnLane View Post
Convert to 10 year old Corolla for 35mpg, less noise, better reliability, more likely hood of survival in a big accident ect.

For those of us with a thing for Volvos.... M-46 if it is healthy will do just fine at stock power level.

Seriously... If fuel economy is changing your lifestyle.... Work harder or smarter!
Itís not changing my life style. My AW70 is shifting hard and I want a third pedal. I would also like to maximize my fuel economy. Thanks!
Lando is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2018, 09:28 PM   #5
Lando
Arthur Digby Sellers
 
Lando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Rancho Relaxo
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John V, outside agitator View Post
Careful...I heart all to fawk the T5--the one with the tallest 1st but I also reccomend much shorter axle ratios...
See its an interplay...1st thru 4th fun, and then when you have the insane overdrive of .63 or .72 AND a 4.3/4.37 or even a 4.88--then 5th is allright--on the flat and level>

4.88 back x .63 is 3.07 overall and that's pretty tall..Fine for a turbo car.

But that 5th and a 3.7 is 2.33 and that is nutso tall..So tall you'd be fighting wind resistance at 80+ and being below reasonable torque...so that would probably cost you Em Pea Gees.

As crazy as it sounds increasing the POP per pop --efficiency---all other things being equal--is the key to happiness.

My daily has a M47 and here everybody hates them --just like in the Mare_koooor world everybody "hates" the stock Type 9...Me? I say ""Hmmmmm not too bad for a daily/road car.."
Only problem with both is a) getting a good one or b) getting the parts to run thru the box spiffing it up before install..and getting them for reasonable cost... c) getting good info in the climate of "they're sh!t" which is the reflexive response..

Make manual trans grate again!
Those are my concerns with the M46/47. I don’t want to go to a ton of trouble to put a worn out transmission that I can't find parts for in my car. I also hate the electric overdrive.

Last edited by Lando; 06-07-2018 at 09:42 PM..
Lando is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2018, 09:38 PM   #6
Cwazywazy
Board Member
 
Cwazywazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Granby CT
Default

Will an M46 OD unit bolt to an M47?
__________________
I don't know what I have
Cwazywazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2018, 09:40 PM   #7
JohnLane
Board Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern Washington
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cwazywazy View Post
Will an M46 OD unit bolt to an M47?
Nope
JohnLane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2018, 09:42 PM   #8
Cwazywazy
Board Member
 
Cwazywazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Granby CT
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnLane View Post
Nope
What if you use a lot of glue?
Cwazywazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2018, 09:44 PM   #9
Lando
Arthur Digby Sellers
 
Lando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Rancho Relaxo
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cwazywazy View Post
What if you use a lot of glue?
It'll glue on, it just won't bolt on.
Lando is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 01:10 AM   #10
John V, outside agitator
Board Member
 
John V, outside agitator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sleezattle, WA, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lando View Post
Those are my concerns with the M46/47. I donít want to go to a ton of trouble to put a worn out transmission that I can't find parts for in my car. I also hate the electric overdrive.

Yeah those Lay Cock things are a horrible joke...dry humor, harumph!

The M47 in my wagon isn't bad...there very well may be parts..Truth is I haven'rt looked too hard..I did ask whassis their names down in Socal---the guys that are real sharp on old stuff..
Hiperauto?? He said as far as he knows things are available..
Like the main 4 bearings, and synchro rings..

That said I have found the best MPG improvement via more torque..
If one POP! moves you this much X distance...and a stronger POP!!! moves you 1.15X distance then to move X on the torque-ier it takes less open throttle..

Only have dozens of V4s and 900s I've built where I'm doing n.a. comp at 10.8 to 11.2....they got better mpg on cross country trips..

Of course that means head off and making chips, but it is the best thing I've seen

(and is a good portion why modern engines get better milage is so many are much higher compression---they get even better if they weren't hauling an average of 1000-1100lbs more than a comparable niche car was 30 years ago..)
The bummer of the problem of high speed cruise is that wind resistance goes up like cube-function

A real example..This car Opel Kadett GSI 1988..Opel XE motor (2,0 with 86 x 86mm bore and stroke) 16v head (from the same place all the Germans go since they can't make a good head--England..) stock 150 hp with cat... pretty good numbers for a 2,0 car in 88
Good clean aero shape



According to some fancy German test it took that car in stock for just 7.5hp to go down the road at steady 100 km/hr
But to reach top speed...(214 km/hr or about 132mph) it took all 150hp..

That's one steep curve and it has to be worse for a brick shaped car...
John V, outside agitator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 01:34 AM   #11
Redwood Chair
K-jet For Life
 
Redwood Chair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: - Stock PSI Or Bust -
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lando View Post
I have a pedal cluster, clutch cable and cross member from a manual 240 for a manual swap on my 86 245, but I don’t know what trans I want to swap to. I have a bone stock B230F, that I don’t plan on modifying, I just want a manual transmission to improve my highway fuel economy because I know the AW70 is the main contributor to my 24mpg at best. I commute in freeways where the traffic is going 80+ mph.

What is the latest and greatest swap that people are using considering that I don’t need it to tolerate a whole lot of horsepower? I do not want an M46/47. I’d prefer a hydraulic clutch, but I’m not set on that. The T5 isn’t really calling my name either, but the WC variant does have some nice ratios for decent MPG at 80+ mph. I remember readying about some crazies entertaining the idea of a 6 speed Nissan tranny, but had trouble finding the thread.
^ That's not bad at all.

With 3:54's running at 6 or 7 pounds of vacuum I cross the 24mpg line at 67mph @ 2500 rpm.
__________________
Raise The Lowered


Image hosted by servimg.com

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiperfauto View Post
Folks on here don't know a good deal when they see it.
how psi stock cna support?

Redwood Chair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 08:25 AM   #12
JohnMc
PV Abuser
 
JohnMc's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: St. Louis
Default

Our beater backpacking road trip back up whatever '03 Jetta TDi got 48 mpg on a road trip through west Texas once, going 80 mph all day long, with the A/C blasting. The worst tankful MPG we've ever gotten from it was 38. In the winter, doing lots of city driving, short trips where sometimes it wouldn't even fully warm up before shutting down again.

Avoid the automatics in those, they don't last forever like the engine does. And apparently, we lucked into finding a somewhat rare car - the 2003 (last year of the older, simpler injection pump ALH engine) in 5 spd wagon form. Does it make a difference that the TDi wagons were made in Germany and not in Mexico? Who knows.

Very useful amount of space in the car, even if it isn't as big as a 4Runner or a 245. And while the car is not fast, it also isn't horribly slow. It's a... very relaxing and competent car to drive. It's just so good at what it does. Admirable in its German efficiency.
__________________
'63 PV Rat Rod
'93 245 16VT Classic #1141
JohnMc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 02:00 PM   #13
vwblue1967
Board Member
 
vwblue1967's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: NC
Default

My 93 can get 23-24 MPG pretty often with the AW70 and my 85 with the M46 usually get 25-26...now that I replaced my coolant temp sensor, my last tank was 27.2mpg.

I was thinking about swapping in a lockup tans and an L cam just to see what the 93 could do being that it gets a lot of highway miles. Also looking at the time and cost of parts I wonder how many tanks of gas I'd have to run for it to make it financially worth it.
__________________
85 245 - ipd sport springs and sway bars yoshifab torque rods, kaplhenke bne strut mounts and TAB's. Poly bushings Bilstein tourings. B cam +4. 2.25 exhaust.

93 244 stockish.
vwblue1967 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 02:15 PM   #14
VB242
Sexual healer
 
VB242's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Virginia Beach
Default

There's 6spd adapters in group buy, but not sure if enough torques to utilize it, you'd have to see how the ratios work with your 3rd member.
__________________
1980 primer JDM flares franken-242DL, 1989 silver 780 sienna rear spring nivomat delete
VB242 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 03:16 PM   #15
283SD
Board Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Default

Wagons with a standard trans came with a 3.31, rear this should help with your final drive ratio,but you need to change the whole axle housing
283SD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 04:02 PM   #16
lummert
Board Member
 
lummert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Portland IN
Default

AW71L? Lock-up converter will lower the rpm's.
__________________
Trying to understand stupid people is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end.
lummert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 04:36 PM   #17
Redwood Chair
K-jet For Life
 
Redwood Chair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: - Stock PSI Or Bust -
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 283SD View Post
Wagons with a standard trans *83+* came with a 3.31, rear this should help with your final drive ratio,but you need to change the whole axle housing
The engineers usually combined the parts bin for maximum efficiency, that in combination with an AT would suck to drive and get worse MPGees.
Redwood Chair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2018, 06:02 PM   #18
Kjets On a Plane
Devoid of Luxury
 
Kjets On a Plane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SoCal Rat-Racer/Douche/Rich Puke Playground, Formerly Pacific Wonderland
Default

Driving a brick shaped object in aggressive Utah/AZ style traffic at 80+mph and you wonder about MPG?

Gas is still fairly cheap right now, at ~2mpg the manual is going to net you (in a penny pinchingly stock 86+ car in tip-top shape), it'll take a long time to pay for that effort, and the AW is often the more reliable of the two (provided you don't totally cook it).

Usually if you flush the fluid with synthetic, clean the screen and replace the check balls it'll shift acceptably and a lot better for another 100K, but I know this is TB and everyone wants an excuse to modify or molest.


At 80-85MPH even my more efficient tuned tip top 86-88 skinny rod cars with almost no leak down best they'd get was ~29ish zero traffic with M46/47..

Some M47s are quiet, some aren't, if quiet, and decent fluid is kept in them, they tend to mostly stay that way.
Usually (on M46/47), only 1st gear syncro is crunched from morons jamming them in gear and/or a badly mis-adjusted or dragging clutch/pilot bearing.
The others wear very slowly.
Or they pop out of 2nd on decel when worn out badly (speed gear bushings (later cars are needle bearing) or bearings worn most times). Most have been running around with leaky seals and 1 quart of metal paste fluid remaining for the last 30 years/300K+ Miles.

Notwithstanding that, it's really still just a top-load easy to rebuild transmission with a few bearings that are still available (even the odd grooved one with the clip for the input shaft) for the most part needing minor refresh if it's quiet.
5th gear is a is no fun to press off on a rebuildable/quickly refreshable core M47 though is all.
If it needs more of the $$$ parts, find another core, they aren't made of unicorn tears/are around...as around more moreso as rebuild worthy core decent ratio V8 T5 are, but these come in grandma's 244 sometimes.
It's not like this is some kind of mountain to climb for a boring N/A DD with fuel economy in mind.

The .63 T5 OD ratio is s huge gap/canyon and difficult to use.. The camaro .73 is pleasant enough in a turbo car with a 4.10 rear axle though (probably n/a it’d be fine for a driver too but expense of the adaptation for just s driver)! The T5 adaptation is going to cost you ~$1000+ just in adaptation to hack it in there TB style and the average used one has been in Jim-bob-elroy's mullet missile mustang / camaro instead of grandma's 244. Pick your poison. Cheap enough to rebuild, but they're noisy and most need the rebuild...if they're rebuild worthy as a core.

Almost sooner put a 4.10 in the back and AW-71L (if anything whatever), but if you insist on manual/3-pedals, just put a decent M46/47 in it with stock stick shift 3.31 axle for a DD or buy a car with one already in it.
The stock lazy stick shift car gearing (3.31/185R-14 wagon tires) for 80mph is kinda OK with a T-cam gutless B230F/optimal as they come, you won't do much better from purely a cost/economy standpoint.

I could manage 26-27mpg at 75-80mph in the total flat/no wind with a healthy low mile 86-88 AW7x car, is it really worth the effort?
You'll need a more aerodynamic car and/or some aero mods and/or a diesel engine to penny pinch at those speeds.
Best I could get in a 240 gas car was the L-cam gutless LH1.0 car would return 32-33mpg at 60ishmph.
Diesel, 35-37 possible, but again somewhat slower speeds (like you have a choice much of the time...it's only 82hp at peak power RPM ), and diesel is more expensive often times, that engine is rarer, and maintenance must be done correctly/on time.

Or drive a little slower and worry a bit less about trying to penny pinch your brick-shaped car for 80+ MPH that it'll never really do as efficiently as a super slippery sub-compact...


It probably takes 30-40+HP to go 80-85mph in the stock tip-top brick in the flat/no wind, so even if you have a super ~40% efficient diesel engine in its peak efficiency sweet spot, it's going to use some fuel.

240 is .39-.40 CD (with the stock 185 width tires (tires (especially wider) without a shroud are a huge aerodynamic nightmare), Insight (4 wheeled with covers, not 3-wheeled) is .25 with 1.9 M^2 frontal area not sure what the 240 Volvo frontal area is (2.05 square meters for the 240 Volvo IIRC?), but it ought to be pretty easy to calculate just exactly how much HP you're going to need as a baseline (give or take some tire rolling resistance). That's much more likely to impact fuel use at 80-85MPH than splitting hairs over a couple % efficiency in the engine or trans (assuming they both work correctly/as the factory intended (which tends to be biased toward econ on these cars anyway)...
__________________
How PSI a stock can support?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnMc View Post
If you send me $20 I'll send you a how-to explaining how to make $20 from people on the internet.

Last edited by Kjets On a Plane; 06-10-2018 at 12:47 AM..
Kjets On a Plane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2018, 10:11 PM   #19
Redwood Chair
K-jet For Life
 
Redwood Chair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: - Stock PSI Or Bust -
Default

^

A Saab will do OK @ 80mph, fuel wise a 240 not so much so.
Redwood Chair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2018, 10:34 PM   #20
sbabbs
Board Member
 
sbabbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Rushing Lane, Scappoose, OR
Default

My best was 28mpg at 70 cruise control to seattle in 90 745 with turbo and m46 and 3.54 ratio T cam. Switched to A cam and now it's 25mpg.
__________________
1988 245 White slicktop M47 Wagon! 2.5L NA 8v going in.
1990 745 B230FT Getrag JohnV flywheel 240mm clutch 13c A-cam 3.54 G80 548K MILES
1991 740SE B230FT NPR Strut braces IPD bar A cam 550cc EV14's. 3.73 G80 M90 to put in.
sbabbs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2018, 07:46 AM   #21
DET17
Reformed SAABaholic
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NW Georgia
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redwood Chair View Post
^

A Saab will do OK @ 80mph, fuel wise a 240 not so much so.
My first SAAB 900S, NA with 5 speed would hit 32~33 at 70mph.... a little sleeker and better CD than the RWD bricks. My Turbo C900s would never touch that mileage even with the 5 speeds.

Sounds like the low $ solution for the OP is search for a lower mile M47, with the desert gear in back.... skinny tires "well inflated" to reduce rolling resistance.

This thread makes me wonder if anyone with MS conversions to these 4 bangers that upgraded to sequential fuel ever saw better MPG numbers? I can't believe batch fuel is ideal for economy.

MY GOD, we can't be having an efficiency thread in PERFORMANCE, can we?
__________________
Project "cheap thrills" build thread: http://forums.turbobricks.com/showth...67#post4211467

Feedback thread: http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=198746
DET17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2018, 10:51 AM   #22
VB242
Sexual healer
 
VB242's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Virginia Beach
Default

Why does everyone think batch fire is so bad? I think it gives the fuel a little more time to vaporize, but I'm no expert.
VB242 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2018, 04:08 PM   #23
John V, outside agitator
Board Member
 
John V, outside agitator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sleezattle, WA, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DET17 View Post

MY GOD, we can't be having an efficiency thread in PERFORMANCE, can we?
They are 2 sides of the same coin...more efficiency = moar powrz= less fuel consumed per unit of distance..
John V, outside agitator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 08:09 AM   #24
freevolvos
Board Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: hillpoint
Default

i often thought about the m.p.g. thing myself.. i was wondering if there was a cam that made peak power at say roughly 4k after i put the tach on mine i was shocked to see how little i get above 3 k... In actually started doing it on purpose to get the m.a.f. to self clean.. so what would work advancing the stock cam a few degrees, getting a low rpm cam, shave the head to bring up the c.r. and maybe a tlao chip? i have a 89 engine I'm about to put in and maybe i should get there head done now? a little bowl work maybe?

Last edited by freevolvos; 06-14-2018 at 10:29 AM..
freevolvos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2018, 08:41 AM   #25
Dadssleeper
Board Member
 
Dadssleeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Maine
Default

One of the main reasons I strayed away from V8's is road trips. I put a 240 together with a B230ft and mated that to an M47 with 3:31 gears. I am running a stock turbo at the moment at max psi of 12. I pulled 28-30 MPG's , I was expecting a little less, but still way better then the 12 mpg's I am use to.
Dadssleeper 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 08:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.