Rusty *VOLVO* In Scotland - Collection complete!

[cms206]

7 hours ago, Talbot said:

Given that it's a 2.0 engine that likely hasn't seen a decent service in a fair while (unless you've already done it?) driving through an un-lockable torque converter, dragging around 35 tonnes of car with the aerodynamics of a medium-sized block of flats, that doesn't sound as awful as it first appears.

If you're not using them, I'd remove the roof-rails.  They could make 1-2mpg difference on faster driving, which at 20mpg could be 5-10% difference.

Also, is this carb or fuel injection?  If carburettor, I'll bet it's a mile out of tune, possibly running horribly rich at higher speed/load.  That and an ignition system freshen-up might improve that to mid-high 20's. 

20mpg is absolute horseshit for a 2.0i.

My 2.3i auto has had a REALLY hard life and it'll do 36mpg on a run. David's really nice 2.3 auto has been known to crack 40mpg.

[paulplom]

I agree. My 1993 850 t-5 auto got low to mid 20's hammering it around the doors.

Low thirties on a run.

[cort16]

I had a Volvo 360 with the 2.0 carb and it was absolutely awful on fuel. My stand out memory of owning that car is how much fuel I poured in  it and subsequently how much I wanted to pour on it and set it on fire.,  

I can't imagine how awful it would be in a bigger car with an autobox.

Nice car tho.

[davidfowler2000]

11 hours ago, Talbot said:

Given that it's a 2.0 engine that likely hasn't seen a decent service in a fair while (unless you've already done it?) driving through an un-lockable torque converter, dragging around 35 tonnes of car with the aerodynamics of a medium-sized block of flats, that doesn't sound as awful as it first appears.

If you're not using them, I'd remove the roof-rails.  They could make 1-2mpg difference on faster driving, which at 20mpg could be 5-10% difference.

Also, is this carb or fuel injection?  If carburettor, I'll bet it's a mile out of tune, possibly running horribly rich at higher speed/load.  That and an ignition system freshen-up might improve that to mid-high 20's. 

I'll chime in.

It's a 2.0 injection so we've already discussed that it NEEDS a service and possibly a tune up. The fact the idle microswitch was not being engaged when the throttle was actually at idle probably means it has been running very rich at some point so the plugs are likely fouled. It may also be the cause of the slight misfire currently being reported.
Agreed the roof bars need to come off.

This car MAY have a locking torque converter. @captain_70s will have to confirm or deny this.

No matter what the gearbox setup, this car should be getting low 30s on a run. Also bear in mind there's no working odododomemememeter so the mpgs are approximate just now.

[davidfowler2000]

3 hours ago, cms206 said:

20mpg is absolute horseshit for a 2.0i.

My 2.3i auto has had a REALLY hard life and it'll do 36mpg on a run. David's really nice 2.3 auto has been known to crack 40mpg.

My 3.0 T6 is averaging, as you can see from the fuelly badges below, 26.4 on the combined cycle since I got it last year. 34mpg was the best it's done.

[Tadhg Tiogar]

1 hour ago, davidfowler2000 said:

..... there's no working odododomemememeter ....

Internal cog split? Can be repaired

New cogs available

[Talbot]

1 hour ago, davidfowler2000 said:

This car MAY have a locking torque converter.

I didn't think anything produced in the 80's had a lock-up torque converter.  The first I'd even heard of them was early-90's Fords, and even then it was lock-up in top gear only.  I'm also intrigued as to what the "three speed plus overdrive" means on an autobox.  Surely that's just a 4-speed Auto isn't it?  Or is it a manually engaged overdrive?

[davidfowler2000]

The Captain's 2.0 740 will have the AW70 box but it MAY have the AW70L with lockup depending when they started fitting them in the European market. A quick reading suggests the American market got them in the 1988 model year. It's described as 3 + OD rather than a 4 speed as the selector goes 12DNRP with top gear lock out being an electrical button on the side of the selector. No idea what the physical setup is but seeing it's a mechanical autobox with an electric lock out for top, I'd suggest there's a separate physical OD unit within the box.

The 2.3 GLEs like mine have the ZF 4HP22 box which is definitely a straight 4 speed with lockup as the selector is 123DNRP.

[Tadhg Tiogar]

2 minutes ago, davidfowler2000 said:

.... ZF 4HP22 box which is definitely a straight 4 speed with lockup as the selector is 123DNRP.

Same gearbox as used in the late '82 635CSi onwards - o/d 4th only kicked in at about 58mph.

[Talbot]

5 hours ago, cms206 said:

My 2.3i auto has had a REALLY hard life and it'll do 36mpg on a run. David's really nice 2.3 auto has been known to crack 40mpg.

Those are some surprisingly good fuel economy figures.  Whilst I've never owned anything truly comparable, the 1988 Mk2 Cav 2.0i Manual I had for many years used to get low-30s when buggering about and approaching 40mpg on a long gentle-ish run.  That being a car at least half-a-tonne lighter than the Volvo in question, with far better aerodynamics and a far less lossy drivetrain.  Achieving 40mpg from a 2.3 brick with an autobox seems incredibly high.

[danthecapriman]

I’ve never had anywhere near 40mpg from my 2.3 injection auto. Mine usually stays around 25-30mpg ish depending how/where it’s used. Having said that, if your that bothered about such things as mpg then you’ve got the wrong car! I don’t really give a flying fuck tbh.

This ones probably in a similar state to how mine was when I first got it, looked after in the past but somewhat neglected more recently. It likely desperately needs a good service, new plugs, leads, rotor arm and dizzy cap. Your cap and rotor are probably the cause of the mis fire, mine was actually the cars original (date stamped 1987!) and was absolutely fucked! It was minging, worn to buggery and almost split in half, yet still worked (with a mis fire). My rotor arm was much the same. They’re on the very back of the head against the bulkhead so often get ignored and can be a whore to get off sometimes.

As @Ghosty said, get the flame trap cleaned out, these clog up over time and can cause pressure in the system which can blow gaskets etc. My old saloon actually blew its dip stick out of the tube when revved! A new flame trap ‘element’ costs pence and it’s not too difficult to change. I always replace the element and thoroughly clean all the associated pipes etc too. Every red block volvo I’ve had has suffered with blocked flame traps!

[sloth]

it will be an aw70.   aw70l only went into the turbos. it should see 29mpg combined. full service all fluids and oils, and filters, plugs, leads, dizzy cap and arm, timing belt kit and some italian tuneup. 

 

[Tickman]

I've just seen this and am more than a little impressed.

It looks very straight indeed.

[big_al_granvia]

injection you said david, is that bosch jetronic as seemed to be the norm or did volvo have their own system??? agree full service. 

[Ghosty]

10 hours ago, paulplom said:

I agree. My 1993 850 t-5 auto got low to mid 20's hammering it around the doors.

Low thirties on a run.

I got 23mpg on the computer no matter how I drove it, 30ish on a run.

[Ghosty]

1 hour ago, big_al_granvia said:

is that bosch jetronic

yeah these are K-Jet.

[big_al_granvia]

hmm, from what i have heard if not maintained that system can be problematic, could it be over fuelling

[sloth]

should be lh2.2 by that date

[davidfowler2000]

It's K-Jetronic

[captain_70s]

Aye, MPGs are mostly guesswork due to lack of functional fuel gauge/odometer. It wasn't exactly motorway work either, I drove over several mountain ranges...

 

Overall impressions are good.

Engine seems healthy although could likely do with a good service. Gearbag seems to function as you'd expect. Various electrical issues that come and go, I'm told this isn't unusual for an aged 740 (Girlfriend_70s was most impressed when she found her window won't descend). Rear suspension is a big saggy and it drags it's flaps on tight corners (ooh-err missus). Currently has no PAS, which is sub-optimal (although all the fluid has now fucked off out of the system so it no longer leaves puddles/rainbows when parked). Front footwells fill with water, need to investigate cause. Rear of the sills and rear arch tubs are rusty and will need prodding and associated welding. 

I shall continue the car's story in my general fleet thread as this collection is now complete + 400 odd miles of fucking about!

[Supernaut]

7 hours ago, captain_70s said:

Engine seems healthy although could likely do with a good service. Gearbag seems to function as you'd expect. Various electrical issues that come and go, I'm told this isn't unusual for an aged 740 (Girlfriend_70s was most impressed when she found her window won't descend). Rear suspension is a big saggy and it drags it's flaps on tight corners (ooh-err missus). Currently has no PAS, which is sub-optimal (although all the fluid has now fucked off out of the system so it no longer leaves puddles/rainbows when parked). Front footwells fill with water, need to investigate cause. Rear of the sills and rear arch tubs are rusty and will need prodding and associated welding. 

I shall continue the car's story in my general fleet thread as this collection is now complete + 400 odd miles of fucking about!

I don't feel quite so bad about my £300 Swedish car purchase, now.

Sorry!

[Jim Bell]

Nice!

I bet it's a heavy old pump to parallel park at crawling speeds. Three shredded wheat and a few star jumps every morning and I'm sure you'll not even notice the steering weight.  

[Supernaut]

1 minute ago, Jim Bell said:

Nice!

I bet it's a heavy old pump to parallel park at crawling speeds. Three shredded wheat and a few star jumps every morning and I'm sure you'll not even notice the steering weight.  

I used to regularly drive around in a series 3 land rover. I didn't bother 'parking' it as much as 'just driving it roughly towards a space, and over anything in the way'. I'm sure you could do the same with an old Volvo...

[SiC]

33 minutes ago, Jim Bell said:

Nice!

I bet it's a heavy old pump to parallel park at crawling speeds. Three shredded wheat and a few star jumps every morning and I'm sure you'll not even notice the steering weight.  

Even worse on PAS cars that aren't being assisted anymore. Almost always they reduce the rack turns and thus assistance as the PAS will take up the slack.

[Austin-Rover]

16 hours ago, captain_70s said:

Front footwells fill with water, need to investigate cause.

My 960 did this with no obvious cause. (searching for this leak might explain all the disassembled trim when you got the car!) Anyway, a new windscreen sorted it out, and my foot wells have been bone dry ever since!