A VOLVO diesel engine?

You could swap in an Audi 5 cylinder or maybe even a VW 4 (using the Volvo transi), but personally I like the six cylinder diesel.I have heard that a few Canadian 240 diesels were made with the Audi 5 cylinder, but I have never seen one.
My diesel has 500,000km, but the body is rotting off. It was fantastic in the ice and snow in Canada. What you need is decent tires.
I ran the bag off of mine. It sounded pretty nice at 5500rpm, and it handled pretty good too. If I didn't already have a nice Jetta Td, I would be looking for another Volvo diesel.

How did they stunk on ice any more than the 240 with the underpowered 4
cylinder motor. Traction with RWD is a problem inherent with the drive
wheel placement, not to the power plant. Starting in a higher gear can
sometimes help. I drove one for over 200,000 miles and it drove like
I expected a diesel would drive.

Where specifically would you like the small heavy diesel to go. And
why would you want it to be necessarily heavy. And why would you like
to be made by Volvo.

Most of them failed young. Actually the younger after warranty it
failed the better because the car was in good shape and would be picked
by someone wanting to do small block Chevy swap. The alternative
usually was death by parting out.

"Stinks on ice" is a phrase meaning "stinks very badly" or "is a very
bad thing". It was a very poor engine that died a young death
characteristically.

By "heavy diesel" I meant an engine intended for industrial, ag or
truck use. And the Volvo part is called "brand loyalty" though there
are several Mits or Isuzu engines that might well be a better selection.

They did??? Not in my experience. The only reason that motor should
fail would be from infrequent oil changes and not keeping up with
maintenance.

???? That's a new one... Don't understand the connection to ice at
all.

Actually the 6 cylinder diesel was used for many years in europe.
Couldn't have been that bad. I suspect most of the problem was from
owners not knowing frequent oil and filter changes could not be skimped
on, fuel filters had to be attended to, and injector/glow plug problems
needed to be attended to and the all important cam belt had to be
changed.. The unfortunate myth about diesels being low maintenance may
have caused some owners to ignore required work. But taken care of it
was a decent if underpowered motor.

Why would you want to put an diesel engine designed for industrial or
commercial use into a passenger car. You would be paying a lot for an
overbuilt design that in all likelihood would not be designed to power
a lightweight car well at all. Most industrial diesels are constant
speed power plants and not designed for rapid acceleration demanded in
automotive applications. And to refer back to the original comment it
would be heavy as the dickens. You would have to redo the suspension
or live with driving downhill all the time.

Whether the motor or other part is machined and assembled in a Volvo
plant is pretty much irrelevant these days. Parts and components come
from many sources.

Most died by blowing out all the coolant through the exhaust. This did
put an end to the racket though ;)
I finally gave up and bought an Opel which had the BMW engine Volvo
should have sourced

-
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
http://www.m-gineering.nl

It's been a few years, but I seem to remember a maintenance requirement
to retorque the head somewhere in the duty cycle of that motor?

I have yet to find a diesel that did not announce it's presence by a
combination of noise and excessive pollution. Including the BMW
diesel.

Interesting comment...maybe you should seek employment with Volvo in
their powerplant design section. :)

Most in the US died young.

http://www.jagsthatrun.com/Pages/Volvo_2...
Our 240 Volvo

We purchased a diesel Volvo with the sole interest of installing a V-8
for this conversion manual.

Our goal was to do an engine swap that was repeatable, and functional.
The parts for the swap had to be easy to make and/or readily available.
And we didn't want to change the feel of the car.

This Volvo originally had a diesel engine and an automatic
transmission. It had about 110,000 miles and the engine was worn out
and would not start in cold weather. The Volvo diesel engine was
actually built by Volkswagen and was never noted for its durability.

The nice part about this car is that it is complete, and it is
unmodified. The diesel Volvo has the advantages of coming with
suspension and brake components that are compatible with the V-8
because the diesel engine is fairly heavy. The disadvantages of the
diesel car are that the fuel system, and the exhaust system (heat
shields) have to be changed for the gas engine. The electrical system
is also a bit more work to hook up, compared to a gas car.

As you can see in the above photo, the V-8 installation looks nearly
stock. The engine is a 305 throttle-body-injected V-8 from a 1991
Camaro. Almost all of the parts are available from Volvo or Chevrolet.
This is what makes the engine swap so repeatable, and so stock looking.

In this photo, the battery had been relocated to the passenger's side
to improve balance, and to allow using the battery cables that came
with the 1991 Camaro engine. Later, the battery was moved to the trunk
to improve front/rear weight distribution. The windshield washer
reservoir and the coolant recovery tank were relocated to where they
fit best. The air conditioning hoses were also re-routed. The firewall
required no hammering, but the transmission tunnel needed lots of
hammering to accommodate the 700-R4 transmission.

The V-8 added weight to the car. With all options (air conditioning,
power windows, sunroof), 700-R4 automatic transmission, heavy duty
trailer hitch (about 35 lbs), full tank of gas, rear mounted battery,
IPD swaybars (about 15 lbs heavier than stock), and 2-1/2" exhaust; the
car weighs about 3325 lbs and the weight distribution is 56/44
(front/rear). The published curb weight for the Volvo is listed at
about 3120 lbs, so taking into account that the sway bars and trailer
hitch added about 50 lbs, the V-8 added about 150 lbs. The weight
distribution is close to stock, and it is much better than the
late-model V-8 Mustangs and Camaros which typically have a weight
distribution of 58/42.

The car has a heavier feel than a 4-cylinder car, but it does not feel
much different than a diesel car or a V6 car. It doesn't even feel very
fast, although it accelerates quite well. That phenomenon is referred
to as refinement. A quiet, smooth car typically feels slower than it
really is. Conversely, a noisy, vibrating car often feels faster than
it really is.

Improved Merging Power!

With the standard 3.31 gears, 195/70-14 tires, a 700-R4 transmission,
and the stock Volvo 2 inch diesel exhaust, the car would do 0-60 mph in
8.1 seconds. The 1/4 mile took about 16.3 seconds with a trap speed of
84 mph. Changing to a 2-1/2" exhaust improved the 0-60 time to 7.7
seconds. The 1/4 mile took 16.1 seconds with a trap speed of 86 mph.
These are real numbers, not hyped up numbers used for magazine articles
or advertising purposes. In overdrive (.70:1), engine speed was 1900
rpm at 60 mph. Driven conservatively, gas mileage averaged about 18 mpg
with either exhaust, trip mileage (freeway travel at 65-70 mph) was
about 22 mpg.

A Borg-Warner 5-speed transmission with a .63:1 overdrive was then
installed. A lightweight flywheel (16 lbs) from a TPI Camaro was
installed to reduce weight, the car weighed about 70 lbs less than with
the automatic transmission. Although the car felt much quicker, 0-60
mph takes 4/10 seconds longer (about 8.1 seconds) because it takes
about 1/2 second to shift from one gear to another, and two gear
changes are required to get to 60 mph. The quarter mile takes 16.2
seconds with a trap speed of 87 mph. In fifth gear (.63:1), engine
speed is 1700 rpm at 60 mph. Driven conservatively, gas mileage
averages about 19 mpg, and trip mileage is about 24 mpg, which is not
surprising considering this same engine and transmission in a 1991
Camaro is EPA rated at about 17 mpg city and 26 mpg highway, although
the Camaro has taller tires (26" diameter) and a taller rear axle ratio
(2.73). Depending upon which magazines you believe, the performance and
fuel mileage is comparable or superior to a Turbo-Intercooled 240
Volvo.

We installed an NOS (Nitrous Oxide Systems) throttle-body nitrous
system to see how the car would hold up with some real power. The car
has run a best quarter mile in 14.8 seconds at 95 mph with no
mechanical problems. These times are very close to that of the 1994
Camaro Z28 with the 275 horsepower LT1 engine. It would be very
expensive to get a Volvo engine to put out that kind of power.

The Volvo that is used in some Land Rover swaps appears to be an
inline four with a redline of somewhere around 3000 rpm and weighing
around 600 lbs, which is SB Chev territory. It is not like putting a
Cummins or a 53 series Detroit in there. I think this engine is common
to small construction and genset use. I don't know its model
nomenclature. Figured you Volvo types would.

The Mercedes five cylinder OM 617 is the best and most available old
diesel in the US but it has a front bag sump that presents clearance
problems. Isuzu, Mits and Nissan make good diesels of this size range
too but they are only available in industrial or lift truck trim here
so you would need to do a fair amount of swapping over of accessories,
brackets, etc.

I have driven pickups and Blazers with Detroit Diesels. They are a lot
of fun but the blower noise gets old in a while.

Sounds like a fun project.

That would be quite a challenge, given that you are substituting a V-8
gas engine for an iline 6 cylinder diesel.

The automatic was a poor idea. The four speed manual with electric
overdrive gave a lot better acceleration. It could at least have hope
of keeping up with a VW bus.

Mine had the Audi logo.

Well, the 240 cars no matter which engine was installed were not
exactly light and the suspension was not exactly sporty, so
acceleration was ponderous at best.

Better acceleration, but at the cost of milage. The diesel would get
35mpg on the road and the gas engine could easily top 28mpg.

Not sure I understand the purpose behind trying to make a boxy heavy
sedan with suspension that tends to pitch side to side into a
performance vehicle. I would think there are better platforms to work
from.

Well, diesel motors as a group are in my opinion not worth the hassle
for passenger cars. They are noisy, and the polluting smelly exhaust
eventually works its way into every crevice of the car, no matter the
make. Air vents develop a fine blackish coating, etc. The big 8
cylinder diesels used in USA vehicles are obnoxiously loud and
polluting in my experience. They are so noisy that I have to think the
engineers purposely designed them that way so the driver could feel
like he was piloting a "real truck".

The problem with the 240 diesel (plain diesel with 85 bhp) was the lack of
understanding of car diesel useage in the USA. The later versions (700
series with turbo) had 109 bhp and were certainly long-lived if regular
maintenance was carried out. The later 760 series added an intercooler and
gave 122 bhp. The post 1993 version had swirl chamber modifications,
hydraulic tappets and a tensioner for the cambelt which avoided water pump
problems caused when tensioning the cambelt. My own gives out 185 bhp (still
40 bhp less than top available) has over 170,000 miles and runs on 100%
Biodiesel (from used chip oil). This is cheaper than mineral diesel and when
I produce my own will cost less than 50cents/Litre (32P/Litre, UK). It has
more power, is smoother and has benefits for pump lubrication over the ULSD
(Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel) manufactured in Europe/UK.

Americans should get to know the great benefits of Biodiesel for their
environment and fuel costs, not because Dubya says they should but for their
own sakes. Biodiesel is a far cleaner, greener and more efficient fuel than
gasoline (petrol, essence) could ever hope to be.

As far as Volvo diesel engines are concerned look for the D5 in two power
ratings, 163 bhp and 184 bhp. This engine should open your eyes to just how
good diesels have got. The other good diesel is the Honda which will show
you just how quiet a diesel can be. They learnt from the Southampton (UK)
University trials in the 60s using a Ford Costcutter diesel engine. For
truck engines cnsider the Volvo FH16. Arguably the most powerful diesel
engine found in a truck, it is a V16 with four turbos producing nearly 2
tons of torque!! at 650 bhp.

All the best, Peter.

700/900/90 Register Keeper,
Volvo Owners Club (UK).

...

I don't believe Volvo ever made a diesel engine on it's own which is
suitable for automotive use. In fact, Volvo's range of engine
production has always been limited. They went with a GM based marine
engine, used VW/Audi for diesels and the lovely :( joint venture with
Peugeot and Renault which produced a very forgettable V-6. Volvo Cars
has only manufactured two families of engines for automobiles itself,
the "red block" series of 4 cylinder B___ engines and the modern "white
block" family of 4, 5 and 6 cylinder inline engines.

Hopefully Volvo will emerge unscathed from Ford's latest troubles!

John