home register FAQ memberlist calendar

Go Back   Turbobricks Forums > Mechanical > performance & modifications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-10-2009, 06:13 PM   #1
brusk
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Default Is the 960's 3.0 reliable and respond to mods

Looking at a 96 960 3.0 I6 and wondering if it's a reliable enough car and how the engine is. Currently it's got a bad engine but the guy has another engine to put in it. I was originally thinking of putting a Toyota Supra 1JZ-GTTE 2.5 I6 in instead of the stock engine but not sure I really need to waste that kind of money right now. I was thinking about redoing the exhaust and intake if the engine typically responds well to that but I've seen a few old style "tank" like cars that just don't make much of a difference afterward leaving you wonder why you wasted the time and money doing the exhaust.
brusk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009, 06:18 PM   #2
volvo 4 life
Board Member
 
volvo 4 life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Northwest Connecticut
Default

Contact "the poi" here on turbobricks.
__________________
Originally posted by Forg: "How To Properly Seafoam A Saab In One Easy Steps":

Step 1. Push into sea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenacious Todd View Post
I was hitting the brakes real hard and the grille flew out and I ran it over
Only on a Volvo...

Quote:
Originally Posted by isaac View Post
A volvo 240 with the front wheels chopped off would be a reliable all wheel drive vehicle.
volvo 4 life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009, 06:19 PM   #3
blkaplan
50 shades of beige
 
blkaplan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Default

they are reliable as long as you keep up with maintenance. IE regular oil changes and scheduled timing belt changes 70k
__________________
www.BEIGEPOWER.com
Kaplhenke Racing Facebook
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkKratoz View Post
The only safe bet is Ben.©
blkaplan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009, 06:20 PM   #4
frpe82
Guest
 
Default

With a chip or aftermaket engine management + extractor pipes + big and tuned exhaust + good intake you can get up to around 270HP on it.

With bigger cams, at least 300HP.

With head work etc. quite a bit beyond 300HP beleive it or not.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009, 06:32 PM   #5
DaButcher
Do a Burnout!
 
DaButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bergen, Norway
Default

The magic document about b6254 w/ sequential turbos and b6304 with twin turbos (in paralell)
DaButcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009, 08:28 PM   #6
brusk
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frpe82 View Post
With a chip or aftermaket engine management + extractor pipes + big and tuned exhaust + good intake you can get up to around 270HP on it.

With bigger cams, at least 300HP.

With head work etc. quite a bit beyond 300HP beleive it or not.
chip, I/H/E and even cams is not going to increase an N/A car by 90 HP. It typically won't make those numbers by adding a turbo (again to a block that was NA). I'm not looking for crazy numbers but was hoping maybe another 20HP with some basic bolt ons and chip.
brusk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009, 11:05 PM   #7
DurableSwedish
Hunting for a turbo
 
DurableSwedish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hillsboro, OR
Default

have you seen the tiny exahust and collectors on a 960? its a 3L motor with like a 1" exhaust...Those Swedes (Frpe82)/Norwegians (dabucher) have done it, and they have dynos to prove it. Dabucher gained like 40hp just going to a full 3" exhaust...
__________________
One Volvo left.
1982 244ti (313chp), 2011 Audi S4 (333chp) , 2016 Kawasaki 650R (76chp)
DurableSwedish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009, 11:08 PM   #8
Karl Buchka
Board Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brusk View Post
chip, I/H/E and even cams is not going to increase an N/A car by 90 HP. It typically won't make those numbers by adding a turbo (again to a block that was NA). I'm not looking for crazy numbers but was hoping maybe another 20HP with some basic bolt ons and chip.
Good thing you showed up to tell it like it is.

Oh wait you posted the thread and said you don't know jack **** about these motors.
Karl Buchka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009, 11:12 PM   #9
sacrifice
Board Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl Buchka View Post
Good thing you showed up to tell it like it is.

Oh wait you posted the thread and said you don't know jack **** about these motors.
I didn't even realize that was a response from the op
__________________
granny shifting not double clutchin like I should
sacrifice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2009, 11:12 PM   #10
the poi
Has been
 
the poi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Pasadena, CA
Default

the 960's 3.0 responds to snuggling and cheap romance novels
the poi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 04:24 AM   #11
DaButcher
Do a Burnout!
 
DaButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bergen, Norway
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the poi View Post
the 960's 3.0 responds to snuggling and cheap romance novels
yes, I use scented oils for murrr power.

Seriously though:
Even in N/A form, there are many limiting factors on the stock b6304:
Manifoils are crap
Front pipe W/ cat is CRAP (pipe in pipe, tiny diametre!)
Also, the cat robs some power (but this I have to have on my current car).

The b6304 is also limited in the ECU, since Volvo wanted the 960 to be a "mercedes like car".
I never tried chipping the b6304, but with new exhaust from the OEM manifoils, down to 3" N/A JT Superflow exhaust (and cat removal) I got 242Hp on the dyno.
Ironically enough, the engine resided in a Volvo 242.

This was running on regular fuel.. The b6304 is also not mapped for premium fuel, from factory.

Powerchip amongst others (also frpe82) offers tuning for the software too.
Ps. I also had a conical filter, but this does not give a gain :-) I just had to have it, due to space limitations in my engine compartment.

Read the file I posted above, it's about turbocharging with unleaded 95 octane (european standard, the best octane here is 98), it also tests M85 (E85) on the lower displacement engine b6254. 200Kw was easy, they say.

I've read some nice posts lately, where some board members here have figured out that bmw m50/m52 manifoils fit, with a little custom work.. This means you can have headers for the b6304 too, with just modding the flange (klracing sells flanges for b6304).

If I cant get the "PCP" engine approved, which I have, I'll either go for the B6304 N/A w/ the earlier cams (204hp version) and tune it, or I'll go for a T5 engine.

An N/A engine with power, is very fun to drive.. it responds much faster than a turbo lagged car. (ps. that is comparing the b6304 vs the b230ft, both cars auto and ~~same weight, as well as ~~same power levels).

If you where to turbocharge the b6304 w/ lower comp. you would easy attain 400++nm and 200++Kw on NON PREMIUM fuel :O That must be a loco drive..
Volvo tested this on the 760, 1560kg.. 0-100 km/h (0-60mph) 6.8 seconds. With traction control: 6.5 and with perfect grip, even lower (6.25 or so).

I hope this gives you some inspiration/goals/ideas.
N/A tuning for the b6304 wont be very expensive and it will give your engine a nice ROAR, like a sportscar.
DaButcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 06:16 AM   #12
MikeHardy
The Sirius/Nova Police
 
MikeHardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: northern Wales, UK
Default

you can't really ask a question then say thats not possible when someone from a country where it's done often tells you what you get from mods
MikeHardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 06:49 AM   #13
740Weapon
Traitor
 
740Weapon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Salem MA
Default

isn't the rear end ratio also extremely undesireable from a n/a performance stand point?
__________________
'92 944 Turbo:13.400@99.68. Sold.
'90 744 16 Valve. 16.317@85.55. Sold.
'92 244. Sold. http://pbase.com/740weapon
740Weapon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 06:56 AM   #14
Morley
Barbie Ken
 
Morley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Norway
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravennexus View Post
you can't really ask a question then say thats not possible when someone from a country where it's done often tells you what you get from mods
When Fredrik claims 300hp from a "untouched" longblock, apart from the cams, I'm skeptic too. But I'm smart enough to STFU since I don't know **** about the engines, really.

Would be interesting to test the car before and after mods on the same dyno, not comparing OEM data to new dyno-numbers. Also keep in mind that there are two ways measuring is done on dynos - dynamic and static. Dynamic numbers are usually a little bit higher - vehicle manufacturers mostly use static measuring.
__________________
Morley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 07:07 AM   #15
SteveMD
Membro
 
SteveMD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: West of I-270
Default

As for reliability (in stock form anyway) they are used as taxis in Euro-land. They rack up a lot of miles with normal maintenance. I mean kilometers.
SteveMD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 07:39 AM   #16
MikeHardy
The Sirius/Nova Police
 
MikeHardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: northern Wales, UK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 740Weapon View Post
isn't the rear end ratio also extremely undesireable from a n/a performance stand point?
but 2.5 960 are common enough over here to steal a 4.1 from
MikeHardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 09:01 AM   #17
DaButcher
Do a Burnout!
 
DaButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bergen, Norway
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravennexus View Post
but 2.5 960 are common enough over here to steal a 4.1 from
yes, the 3.0 has 3.91 on auto, while the 2.5 auto has 4.1:1, as you state.
At least this is the case for 95+ (when the 2.5 arrived)

The 2.5 960 therefore is not very much slower than the 3.0, since it has 4.1 vs the 3.91 (less than a second slower). I know less than a second is "some power", but still

the 4.1 uses more fuel though, due to higher rpm..
but the auto has a very low ratio in the final drive, so it's all ok for highway too.
DaButcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 09:19 AM   #18
Al
Board Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Pittsburgh
Default

The U.S. Canada models have 3.73 rear gears. You can order 3.90 and 4.10 gears from your dealer. Be prepared to get raped for those gears. I'm still trying to find out who makes the rear ends in the 95-98's.

And I have to agree a bigger exhaust system, cams and ECM mods you should be able to easily pull 35 to 40 hp more with this engine. It is really detuned for old people driving and fuel mileage on the highway.
Al is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 09:20 AM   #19
Fivehundred
.
 
Fivehundred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al View Post
The U.S. Canada models have 3.73 rear gears. You can order 3.90 and 4.10 gears from your dealer. Be prepared to get raped for those gears. I'm still trying to find out who makes the rear ends in the 95-98's.
According to the part number the crown gear and pinion are identical to the live axle, at least as far as I remember.

Last edited by Fivehundred; 03-11-2009 at 09:26 AM..
Fivehundred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 09:35 AM   #20
olov
doing something stupid
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: warrenton, nc 27589
Default

i was under the impression that 960's were overweight slugs

but reliable
__________________
Quote:
opinions are like ***holes, i have one, and they're censored on tb
olov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 09:51 AM   #21
DrvSfly
Bored Clown
 
DrvSfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ATL
Default

I have seen it and talking to the regional Volvo tech and we have both seen them crack along the middle ridge between 2 and 3 and 3 and 4. My $.02
__________________
Drive Safely

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forg View Post
I think we'll either get rid of religion, or it will get rid of us.

'83 245 TIc sold
'97 960 totalled
'94 745 totalled (not mine)
'87 744 totalled (not mine)
'91 780 totalled and sold
'81 b21f, T cam, Lh2.2, 960 injectors, junkyard/back of the shop 15" trash rims. - Sold

DrvSfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 10:09 AM   #22
Karl Buchka
Board Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrvSfly View Post
I have seen it and talking to the regional Volvo tech and we have both seen them crack along the middle ridge between 2 and 3 and 3 and 4. My $.02
What year motor and what was the maintenance history?
Karl Buchka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 10:29 AM   #23
DaButcher
Do a Burnout!
 
DaButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bergen, Norway
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrvSfly View Post
I have seen it and talking to the regional Volvo tech and we have both seen them crack along the middle ridge between 2 and 3 and 3 and 4. My $.02
The first b6304's had the porous block problem, where if you used the wrong type of coolant, you could get corrosion problems beneath the exhaust manifoil.

However, in theory they should all have been called back to the factory to fix this issue.
I bet there are cars which have gotten this issue.

I think the issue was until 1992, and the problem is if you dont change the coolant fluid or if you mix coolant types, or if you use a lower quality coolant fluid.

I only use Volvo coolant fluid and I would do the same on any engine made of ALU components.. I guess the porous block problem is there for all alu engines, maybe in a lesser degree, but better safe than sorry... Dont save 5$ and waste your engine, use premium liquids (for instance castrol oil, volvo coolant, etc.).
DaButcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 10:36 AM   #24
DrvSfly
Bored Clown
 
DrvSfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ATL
Default

I don't doubt poor maintenance, but this particular car was a '97. +1 on Prem fluids. save a buck to lose your bearings
DrvSfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2009, 11:52 AM   #25
isaac
F*ck the police
 
isaac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ciudad Poupstonn
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brusk View Post
chip, I/H/E and even cams is not going to increase an N/A car by 90 HP. It typically won't make those numbers by adding a turbo (again to a block that was NA). I'm not looking for crazy numbers but was hoping maybe another 20HP with some basic bolt ons and chip.
No offense but you know the guy you're talking to is Swedish right? I'm gonna go with his word on this.
__________________
"If you, the citizen, deliberately vote for someone who won't give you health care over someone who will, you need to have your head examined, except you can't afford to have your head examined." - Bill Maher
1998 Volvo V70T5
1989 Volvo 244DL
1990 BMW 52(3)5i
and Matt Dionne still rides with me
isaac 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 12:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.