"'Volvo'and 'performance' are incompatible no more"

Have been for some time. Some of us have done engine conversions on older Volvos. :-)

Even without an engine conversion, a 240 Turbo with a bit of extra boost can be an impressive performer, especially for a 22+ year old car.

My 91 740 is around 250hp which is small fry compared to what some Swedes have done.

Regards,

Boris Mohar

Got Knock? - see: Viatrack Printed Circuit Designs (among other things)

void _-void-_ in the obvious place

Yes, but how does that compare to an alloy headed 350 chev with about

11.5:1 compression, etc.? :-) (That's the new engine I'm getting parts together for ATM - the old engine is still okay but is only about 300HP.)

IMHO there's just something sacrilegious about jamming a pushrod V8 into a Volvo, it just seems such caveman technology. Can't be great for the fuel economy or serviceability and what's the extra hundred pounds or so under the hood do to the handling?

Now an interesting engine swap would be the S80T6 motor, smooth refined all aluminum DOHC twin turbo producing about 300HP stock. It's gotta be good for 400 HP with some tweaking, anything more than that will likely exceed the traction abilities of any streetable tires.

A high compression engine with cold air induction, good exhaust, decent gearing, etc. running on straight LPG is quite a cheap thing to run, particularly relative to its performance. :-) I considered running less compression and a pair of turbos but the economy wouldn't be as good!

The 264 with all cast iron 350 weighed in at 1440kg, which is equal to the weight of the equivalent 265, being 50kg more than the standard

264. The front of the engine is further back in the engine bay than the front of the V6, with the back of the gearbox _far_ further back, so the weight distribution has actually improved!

I fitted the engine and gearbox without changing the front suspension and it sat very slightly lower but handled fine. I later went to a pair of '78 front coils, because the wire diameter was larger than the later ones, fitted bilsteins front and rear (rears specifically because the ford 9" is heavier than the dana 30 and the extra weight theoretically needs better damping), urethane bushes in the bottom of the front end, lower chassis braces (again from '78 parts car) as well as the original top strut braces.

The new swaybars and adjustable strut top bearings are sitting in the garage waiting to go on but aren't essential... One of these days, I'll also pull the large-bush rear upper control arms out of the '88 parts car and fit them, too.

Of course, the new engine will have alloy heads, manifold and water pump and new extractors (headers), so will be lighter than the current one. That will be offset by the heavier gearbox (change from 3-speed to overdrive 4-speed auto). The weight distribution will shift even further back.

I'd be curious to know how the weight of the 6cyl diesel 2-series compares...

Traction like that is only an issue from a standing start. Aside from having a detroit locker (major traction advantage off the line), I'm more interested in how the thing performs at highway speeds. We have a _lot_ of 2-lane roads around here and being able to overtake quickly is important. :-)