S-L-O-W 1993 240 Classic wagon

Tis the winter season and my 1993 240 Classic wagon is off the road until Spring and road salt is gone, and so this is a good time to work on various issues.

Chief among these is that the car runs beautifully, but 0-60 times might be better measured with a calendar than a stop watch. It is a normally-aspirated engine, automatic transmission, with 145,000 miles. I have performed all of the customary stage 0 maintenance: plugs, wires, distributor cap, timing belt, coolant flush and change, oil and filter change, transmission flush and fluid change, new air filter, cleaned MAF filament, new O2 sensor, new injectors, new flame trap and breather box and all associated vacuum hoses, all with quality parts from IPD. Tires are 205/70/14. Speedometer is dead-nuts on. One passenger: me (155 lbs). Gas tank was full (87 octane). Timing was with a digital stopwatch.

Average of ten 0-60 times was 15.4 seconds after the above.

I installed the IPD VX cam (by the book), checking and confirming all valve clearances on a cold motor.

Average of ten 0-60 times was 15.3 seconds after the VX cam. Not what I was hoping for. Aside from the idle being ever-so-slightly lumpy on a cold start, and then smooth, all is as before. Gas mileage is average: 22 mpg highway at 70 mph on cruise control. I?m not sensing any ignition breakdown at high RPM. There are no drivability issues. It?s just a slug after leaving 1st gear. Second climbs smoothly but slowly, and it shifts into 3rd just shy of 60 mph and..........................................................finally we reach 60 mph.

I have read the TB post on performance upgrades to NA 240s. I will reroute the preheat tube to cold air as suggested, give Seafoam a try, and report later. Might restriction in exhaust be an issue?

Other than that, do you have any suggestions as to what I should try next? I had expected more from the VX camshaft. I?m trying to keep my expectations reasonable, but what can one expect from this car with the above. The VX cam is advertised as generating ca 10% more HP. I just don?t feel it.

Hello, this is from a review of the VX cam: "Also, take note that the advertised power figures in IPD's listing are made with the combination of the higher flowing, large intake port 531 cylinder head AND the VX camshaft. This means that just installing the camshaft will most likely not give you 20 more horsepower alone."

I don't know about the 531 vs 530, I believe the 530 performs better for NA? Anyway, the point of what is said is still correct. Supporting mods like exhaust and intake are usually a good way to get everything out of a camshaft.

Yes open the airbox and confirm it draws cold air. The bi-metal thermostat is very often broken so it draws hot air.

Also, can you confirm TDC via checking with a pin in a sparkplug hole to see when piston really is at TDC? Sometimes the crankshaft damper with the markings can get misaligned.

Whrn you say new injectors and new lambdasensor, is that genuine Bosch parts?

A 10% bump to a car that from the factory made 114 crank hp - like 90 wheel hp - isn’t really going to be noticeable. Slow car is still slow.

Your 0-60 seems slow at first glance but it looks like others have seen similar numbers.
https://www.brickboard.com/RWD/volv...volvo_240_060_times_old_road_track_tests.html

When running properly, my stock 240s were about 14 seconds to 60, so you're not that far off. I don't think you should be seeing third gear until well after 60 though. Can you feel the kickdown thing engage when you mat the pedal?

Disconnect the cat from the exhaust and try again. The last few cats I've taken off my 240s have been melted and the car was dog slow

OK, it is 0 degrees here this morning, so a good day for a test. First: yes to the question of genuine Bosch parts for the injectors and O2 sensor.

I disconnected the duct running to the airbox at the exhaust manifold and rerouted the end of the duct to the side of the radiator to avoid any heated air, and then returned to my favorite flat straight stretch of road to rerun a few 0-60 times.

WOW! What a difference: three runs 13.4, 13.4 and 13.6 sec. Something in that airbox is amiss.

Moreover, the transmission now stays in 2nd gear past 60 and the engine is still pulling at 5500 rpm.

Looks like I have some work to do in the airbox. I need to wait for a warmer day. Will report on what I find.

Those 205-70-14 tires are not helping anything except carrying large loads. They are much taller than the stock tires. My 93 wagon used 185-70-14 stock and a good upgrade to help handling and performance is a 195-65-14.

I feel your pain. I started to semi daily drive my 92 N/A Regina equipped 745 and it?s challenging

dl242gt said:

Those 205-70-14 tires are not helping anything except carrying large loads. They are much taller than the stock tires. My 93 wagon used 185-70-14 stock and a good upgrade to help handling and performance is a 195-65-14.

Click to expand...

They're not significantly taller. The owners manual and door sticker for the 1993 wagon specify 185/R14, but that's not the same as a 185/70/14. I wanted a modern tire size yielding the same circumference and hence equivalent revolutions per mile as a 185/R14, so I could choose between a 195/75R14 or a 205/70R14. I chose the latter. There's no real difference in revolutions per mile for any of the forgoing tire sizes, so I doubt that would affect acceleration. Handling, perhaps. The car has IPD swaybars front and rear, new shocks all around, and the tires are new General Altimax, so it actually handles quite well. Also, speedometer is dead on with this tire size.

Automatic? That slush box probably ate whatever horsepower increase you got

Wagons and sedans have different tyre sizes.

Also the gearing inside the cluster is different for this reason. The standard wagon tyre size is 185R14. Which in modern equivalent size translates to 195-75-14. Very similar in dimension to 205-70-14

Agreed this does not help with acceleration, but you should accept the car and engine for what they are, I believe you are at the level which the car was when it was new, it's a cruiser, enjoy it for what it is

Any modifications aimed at increasing horsepower will cost you in other areas (driveability) unless you are building a race car

hessam69 said:

you should accept the car and engine for what they are, I believe you are at the level which the car was when it was new, it's a cruiser, enjoy it for what it is

Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm happy with 0-60 in 13 seconds in this car. I did not get this 240 to go fast. But, it was a bit of a slug, even for a NA 240 with an automatic (0-60 in 15.5). I do most my own work, and enjoy it. So in the course of doing the timing belt, water pump, valve clearance checks, that seemed like an opportune time to spend $185 and drop in the VX cam. What started this thread was that the VX cam produced zilch, which did not fit at all with experiences of others. I just wanted to know why. This seemed like the best place to go for ideas. It was a good choice.

I'm kicking myself for not checking the heated-air intake in the first place, but happy to arrive at what is a likely cause for the poor acceleration. With it completely disconnected, the car starts and runs fine on a 0F morning, and the engine temp comes up fast (within 1.5 miles, the temp gauge is dead center, and the heat is blasting). The transmission staying with 2nd gear all the way to 5500 rpm rather than kicking into 3rd when the engine hung up around 4000 rpm (50-ish mph) was a nice surprise! So, whatever would have happened to emission on cold start with a working intake of warm air from the exhaust manifold tube seems trivial. Greta might scold me for a larger carbon footprint, but I should get some credit for not causing a new car to be built since 1993.

Take the head off and get it surfaced 0.030-0.040” for higher compression. This is the easiest hp on a redblock.
With lh2.4/3.1 you can still run on regular fuel with the higher CR, or spring for premium and get better mileage and power.

The VX cam isn’t anything great, a B cam probably works better… but those are getting close to a VX in price.

culberro said:

Take the head off and get it surfaced 0.030-0.040? for higher compression. This is the easiest hp on a redblock.
With lh2.4/3.1 you can still run on regular fuel with the higher CR, or spring for premium and get better mileage and power.

The VX cam isn?t anything great, a B cam probably works better? but those are getting close to a VX in price.

Click to expand...

What comp ratio does the .030-.040" achieve?

OldCarNewTricks said:

What comp ratio does the .030-.040" achieve?

Click to expand...

On a stock b230f, it will be ~10-10.2:1. Assuming the pistons are flush with the deck of the block.

Stock is ~9.5:1 when calculated out.

culberro said:

On a stock b230f, it will be ~10-10.2:1. Assuming the pistons are flush with the deck of the block.

Stock is ~9.5:1 when calculated out.

Click to expand...

Okay, I see. So it actually takes it to a similar comp ratio as the B23F with flat top pistons, then.

I read this quickly and saw 15 seconds and assumed it was in the 1/4 mile… and said “not bad for NA”… then I reread it. What do you want to do with the car? Is this a toy or do you need it to be reliable? If it’s the latter, stop what you’re doing and live with the fact that you have a slow car. If you have a bit of money to spend, the quickest way to acceleration is nitrous, a second could be the 16v head, the third, a 16 v head with a stick to increase the fun factor. You can go down the rabbit hole quickly with these cars as basically everything will need upgrading once you start down the road of power adders.

Don’t forget, with the stock stall speed in the converter, it’s not going anywhere fast. If you want to keep the slush box, consider a higher stall converter as well as the accumulator mod.

dmg4 said:

They're not significantly taller. The owners manual and door sticker for the 1993 wagon specify 185/R14, but that's not the same as a 185/70/14. I wanted a modern tire size yielding the same circumference and hence equivalent revolutions per mile as a 185/R14, so I could choose between a 195/75R14 or a 205/70R14. I chose the latter. There's no real difference in revolutions per mile for any of the forgoing tire sizes, so I doubt that would affect acceleration. Handling, perhaps. The car has IPD swaybars front and rear, new shocks all around, and the tires are new General Altimax, so it actually handles quite well. Also, speedometer is dead on with this tire size.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know all about that. Except the door sticker on my 93 which uses 185-70-14 tires stock on a wagon. I've used the stock 78 series type tires and find them too tall. As are the 205-70-14 tires which will slow down the car a good amount. All of the tires you mention as good are all too tall for any decent performance from these cars. A 195-70-14 is another good alternative size for a wagon.