http://www.brickboard.com/FORUMS/uid=10316 The Volvo owner's resource since 1997. en Copyright 1997-2009, Jarrod Stenberg Sat, 21 Nov 2009 03:53 GMT Sat, 21 Nov 2009 03:53 GMT brickadmin@denizen.net brickadmin@denizen.net volvo 1440 http://www.brickboard.com/images/logo_b_25.gif http://www.brickboard.com/ 25 25 The Volvo owner's resource since 1997. I've gotten used cars and faced this, too (and one of the reasons I do tuneups myself, so I know they're torqued properly). Start up the engine and run it to normal temperature. The expansion of the warmed head will enlarge the size of the spark plug hole and possibly loosen the grip on the plug &#091which may be contrary to popular notions that it will intrude into the hole and make it smaller :-) &#093 Of course, this assumes that the reason for it being stuck is just being too tight (torqued too much), not cross-threaded! Good luck. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1387229&rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:28 GMT For snow tires, you want taller and narrower, or in other words, minus one. Example, my sedans came with 185/70-14's (of course). In the summer, I use 205/55-15 and 205/55-16 tires (I don't like to go less than 55 because it makes them more vulnerable to pothole damage) on Virgos and Hydras, but in the winter I like to got to 185-14's (that's a ratio of about .83) on the OEM steel wheels -- not quite minus one, but its taller and narrower. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1387227&rss=1 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:23 GMT Two key things: 1) you say that your driveshaft doesn't turn. Well, since the transmission is in Park, that's good -- the driveshaft isn't supposed to turn if you're in Park. 2) given that your driveshaft is "locked" in Park, your right and left axles are still free to rotate because you have an open differential. This is what allows your two rear wheels to move at slightly different speeds when you go through a curve (or vastly different speeds when one wheel spins on ice, for that matter). You see, because of the open differential, they're free to rotate even when the driveshaft cannot. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1386098&rss=1 Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:00 GMT re: "...My multimeter doesn't measure an current between + battery and the disconnected + cable...." I find that hard to believe. On your '90, there normally should be about 12 ma (for ECU-OBD2 and radio preset memories), with brief pulses to 25 ma to power the clock's stepper motor), drawing across the disconnected battery terminals. And if you're experiencing a battery drain (run down battery overnight?), there should be far, far more amperage than that. I don't know what features your meter offers, but assuming you're using the meter in the correct mode (DC amps), are you using the correct scale. Twelve to 25 ma is actually 0.012 to 0.025 in amps, so the amp scale may not show anything (depending on how many significant digits your display shows) -- and if you're using an analog meter, the needle would hardly, if at all, move. One other point, just to add here, is that you've chosen the more dangerous side of the battery to disconnect. You should always disconnect the negative side first, and reconnect the negative side last. That's because, when using a metal tool to loosen the clamps, if you're working on the positive terminal (with a negative cable still attached to the battery) and accidentally let the tool touch something metal on the car, you're going to really see sparks fly, if you're lucky, and risk melting down or exploding the battery, or welding something permanently to the car! Using the negative side will work as well with your meter as the positive side, though. Good luck. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1382861&rss=1 Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:31 GMT You might be thinking simply fabricating something to bypass the ABS, thinking that you could just reroute some customized lines around the unit. But unless you do a thorough swap of all the brake lines, as well as the junction box (a.k.a., "octopus") and the front calipers, to the system of a pre-'92 car, you'll also wind up with a single brake system -- i.e., you won't have the benefits of the dual, triangular, independent brake circuits was so effective in those earlier cars. Note that the front ABS calipers have only a single brake line, not the two lines that made the old dual system possible. It just isn't a good idea, and we're wondering, as Jorrell asked, why you would possibly want to do this. Are you having a problem with your brake system? Tell us, maybe we can help. It's a very robust system (quite unlike the newer FWD cars' ABS that inevitably needs a rebuild), and doesn't seem to have any particular foibles, so if you are having a problem, it might be easy to fix. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1382851&rss=1 Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:06 GMT Ah ha! I didn't think of that possibility -- good for you! But if he adjusted it, it may be too "tight", and not letting the throttle linkage back down against the (screw) stop on the throttle body; and if that's the case, maybe it also isn't closing the throttle position switch that lets the ECU know that the engine is in "idle" mode. This could screw things up. Just guessing, of course, until we hear from the guy again. http://www.brickboard.com/PERFORMANCE/?id=1382846&rss=1 Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:56 GMT But if it's what I think of as a "box wrench" ratchet (I've got a couple of sets of these myself), there is no "direction switch. Instead, you have to take the wrench off, and turn it around, to reverse direction. I think that's his problem. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1381852&rss=1 Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:10 GMT The ignition (secondary) wires could, indeed, have something to do with making the car sputter, if they're bad. But that aside,... re: "...I adjusted the idle on it because it kept cutting off and now i think thats the reason why its sputtering because its getting too much fuel...." That statement might be the key to your problem -- exactly *how* did you manage to adjust the idle? The reason I'm asking is that, for a '93 with (for a typical, 49-state car with automatic transmission) LH2.4, there shouldn't be any way for you to adjust the idle, or the ignition timing either, for that matter. &#091I'm not familiar with 3.1 cars (mostly California cars with manual transmission), but I'd guess the same holds true for these, too&#093 ~~~~~~~~~~ On these 1993, LH2.4 cars, turning the distributor should have no effect on timing whatsoever, unless you've turned it so far (usually impossible because of a wedge on the shaft retainer, unless it's been removed) that the cap's contacts are barely overlapping with the rotor's contacts. ~~~~~~~~~ Sure, on my older '84 with LH2.2, or even all my previously-owned models (LH 2.0, K-jet, etc.), you could turn the little black knob under the throttle body for idle speed, and turn the distributor to change timing -- but both of these things are *gone* by '93, in which both idle speed and timing are entirely controlled by the "blackbox brains" of microprocessors. So maybe, however or whatever you did to adjust the idle really shouldn't have been done? More details, please, and maybe we can help. http://www.brickboard.com/PERFORMANCE/?id=1381845&rss=1 Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:54 GMT I've never seen any chip for a 240 with a normally aspirated engine. Most chips for cars and trucks primarily affect the turbo -- not applicable, obviously, and only secondarily tweek the fuel mixture mapping. I have heard of so-called chips for cars like ours though, that wind up merely being a resistor that changes the signal to the ECU coming from the coolant sensor (the sensor to the ECU, not the other one to the temp gauge) -- this just tells the ECU that the engine is not yet warmed up and needs a richer fuel mixture, resulting to slightly more power. But that certainly won't increase mileage :-). Anyway, I would spend the cost of a stamp on that ruse! Caveat emptor!!! http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1381546&rss=1 Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:34 GMT Here's what I did (my '93 only had one anemic horn) -- four horns! But you should always add a relay, too (and 10 ga wiring) for maximum voltage. <img src='http://www.brickboard.com/GALLERY/images/6484.jpg'/> http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1381544&rss=1 Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:25 GMT I would say that it mostly depends on the kind of fuel you've been using. If you've been using the cheapest stuff in the neighborhood, it may have been low on detergents. Modern injectors are pretty robust, and while they can stand up to a lot, good fuel detergency is always a help. If you've been using a good grade of national name-brand fuel, you probably don't need injector reconditioning. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1381542&rss=1 Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:20 GMT You wrote about swapping the rotors. Just in case you didn't realize it before starting this, you will also need to swap the calipers. If this was obvious, my apologies. But I agree that the vented rotors are always preferrable -- and replacements aren't that expensive! It's the better solution. good luck http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1381541&rss=1 Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:16 GMT What do you want to convert? What I mean is, do you want to convert the entire car including the engine (ignition coil, distributor points, etc.), or only the accessories (e.g., radio, bulbs for lighting, etc.)? If it's the engine, this will be hardest. You'll probably have to look into cobbling 12-volt stuff to work in your car -- for example, a new ignition coil and distributor points/condenser (putting 12 v into a coil designed for 6 will cook it; same for points). Some earlier 12-v cars had a resistor to reduce amperage to those components: during start-up when the starter was spinning, they got a full, "12 volt" equivalent shock for a hot spark, then for running the resistor was in the circuit to limit current. If you can't change those parts, you may have to resort to some resistor like that. Consider a modern, solid-state ignition, too, so you don't have to redo your points every few thousand miles. As for the car body's accessories (radio and lights), there are converters available (try hot-rod shops). The fuse bus for these things will be fed through the converter. The remaining problem will be certain gauges -- maybe the temp and fuel gauge -- which will be relatively easy to solve. They're usually (I don't know about your car specifically) designed to work off a constant voltage (via a regulator, electromechanical, this being on car predating solid-state electronics) source slightly below ordinary battery voltage, in order to show reliable readings: maybe at 4.5 or 5 volts (just guessing) vs your car's original 6+ volts. You will have to find the specs for the original voltage "regulator", and then you can easily match this with a modern solid-state (discrete chip) voltage regulator of that same, low voltage, rating to keep them accurate. Good luck. http://www.brickboard.com/STORIES/?id=1381538&rss=1 Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:09 GMT You should always put the year of your car (next to the "200" box) because, as illustrated by your question, there are two entirely different answers depending on whether you have a -'84 car with a B23 or earlier engine, or a '85-on B230 engine. The latter has adjustable brackets. But you did say that you have the "split" crank pulley, so clearly (in this case) you have the earlier design. And for this, I'm afraid, the answer is as the other person mentioned, in the use of shims. You have to split the halves (removing the fasteners) and add or remove shims by (I'm sorry to say) trial and error. And yes, it is a pain. If you need more shims, your crank pulley should have been reassembled (the last time the belt was changed) with some spare shims (a reserve supply) outside the pulley, to be used in the future for later work. Have you disassembled the pulley yet? Maybe they're there. If not, then the last mechanic to work on your car kept them or threw them away, but in either case screwed you. The only place to get more is a Volvo dealer -- I've never seen them for sale anywhere else. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1380941&rss=1 Wed, 21 Oct 2009 05:01 GMT From the 240 forum, where all the cars are MUCH older than yours, we who work on our brake lines all know that the only flare nut wrenches that work (are more precisely sized not to slip, and are robust enough not to bend) are from a Snap-On dealer (or from their website). If you're not familiar with the brand, they're the guys that work out of their trucks -- you have to ask around at shops to ask when the Snap-On guys is coming again (they make regular rounds to collect payments, because the guys in the shops all buy on credit. The tools are expensive, but they're worth it, and you only need a couple of sizes, right? To work on an old 240 (worse than your '97), what I do is first spray with brake cleaner to get rid of the dirt (that would block the PB-Blaster from penetrating); then spray, and respray every few hours with PB-Blaster over the course of a day. By the next morning, you put a pair of Snap-Ons on the lines' nuts, and they will give way easily, and (most important) without having messed up the nuts. This has never failed me over the years, on '80, '83, '84 and '93 240s. Good luck. http://www.brickboard.com/AWD/?id=1380197&rss=1 Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:33 GMT Here's what I got on eBay about 2 years ago -- it also has a second set of cup holders that slide rearward, for rear passengers. <img src='http://www.brickboard.com/GALLERY/images/6925.jpg'/> But the cup holders aren't great -- they're not as deep as I would prefer. Good luck on eBay. http://www.brickboard.com/PICKNPULL/?id=1380189&rss=1 Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:15 GMT Hi, I hope this helps. First, the easiest to answer is about the choice of thermostat: if you really relish heat, get the one (a quality one from your Volvo dealer) marked 92C (rather than the 89 or 87). It's part no 273307-9. And yes, the few degrees difference (3 C or almost 6 F) does make a noticeable difference in how much heat you'll feel (assuming your heating system is good). The next easiest thing to address is your comment, "...The temperature gauge is no help. It's all over the place like all my other 240s...." If your other 240s are also '86-on, the chances are that your temperature compensation boards (installed after '85) are all shot, a very common problem. If you look up, on this Brickboard forum about the TCB, you'll learn how to remove them (don't bother replacing them) and jumper their connections so that your gauge works accurately again, like '84 and earlier cars. &#091I've heard speculations as to why Volvo put in the TCBs, but in any case, they're just an unnecessary pain, and worse than useless&#093. With such a TCB-free, accurate gauge, the temperature (with a 92C thermostat) should show around 9:15 or 9:30. Now, as to why you don't have heat, and possibly another factor in a fluctuating temp gauge (although you should get rid of your TCB anyway), you could have an air bubble in your cooling system. If you installed a quality thermostat previously, there should have been a "bleeder" on it -- either a small hole with a tiny jiggle stick, or even a tiny ball valve -- that requires you to install the thermostat rotated so that the bleeder is on the highest side (noting that the thermostat sits in its housing slightly tilted, or "canted"), letting any air bubbles pass through the thermostat and escape in the expansion tank. And to avoid any aggravation later, install the thermostat with a new rubber seal (no chemicals or gaskets), and tighten the two nuts only "two finger" tight -- i.e., use only two fingers on the ratchet handle. You shouldn't need any more torque to ensure against leaks, and you don't want to strip or break the studs, something that I've heard often on this forum from folks who overtightened them. Good luck. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1379988&rss=1 Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:22 GMT NOt to nitpick, but a 1987 240 could not possibly have a factory turbo (they ended, in the 240s, in '84, or maybe '85 the latest), so if you ever have to order any parts for it, you should know that it's a AW-70, not a -71 (only turbo's got the -71 in 240's). But that said, the others are dead-on correct advising a swap, rather than a rebuild of your own tranny. Rebuilding it is not cost effective, unless the guy is low-balling your estimate, or charges so low that he's likely not qualified or equipped to do the rebuild properly. Actually, I'm leery that you actually need a rebuild -- AW's, even mere -70's, are so rugged and reliable that it's doubtful you need a rebuild or swap; more likely, it's fluids have been neglected and can use a very thorough flush. If you accept that suggestion, follow the others' advice about that, but I'd add that you should be very generous with the quantity of fluid you use -- go 20 to 24 quarts through it, to be sure (and it's still cheaper than a tranny swap, let alone a rebuild, even if you use synthetic fluid). I'm at work now and don't have some things I've saved on my home PC, but I vaguely remember that you need to run about 20 quarts through in order to flush just 95% of the old fluid out (because of the remixing/diluting factor to consider when you add new fluid to old fluid); I just as vaguely remember that 99% removal requires about 29 quarts of flushing. On the other hand, if your car isn't entirely "original" and has a -71 from a previous swap (or if you've got a whole, swapped-in turbo engine + -71 tranny which you didn't bother to tell us), then that's a whole different story. Regards, http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1379566&rss=1 Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:13 GMT I'm not personally familiar with Draco wheels, but I have Hydra wheels, 6.5x16x24 (that's a 24mm offset, or "ET" on some wheels) without a problem on my '93 240. They're wearing, by the way, 205/55-16 tires (Michelin Exalto PE2's). http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1379563&rss=1 Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:56 GMT It's not really an award for him -- he was just in office ~12 days when nominations were closed; and he certainly hadn't a record of achievement, before he took office, to warrant the Nobel. Clearly, the *only* remaining explanation, no matter how unlikely, is the only possibility (very roughly paraphrasing S.H./A.C.D.): it's a reward for winning the White House and, in particular, as a result being able to say "good riddance" to Bush and Cheney. Now the whole world can breathe a sigh of relief. I know I can! And yes, I know that you won't agree ;-). Just had to put in my $0.02. Best regards anyway. http://www.brickboard.com/OPINIONS/?id=1378395&rss=1 Fri, 9 Oct 2009 20:17 GMT I never bother using a nail or dowel in place of the thermostat plunger (like some folks have described) -- to me, doing that hints that someday they might want to restore the thermostat. When I buy a 240, it's always for keeps: I'll keep it until it's a rust bucket (I'm here in the N.E.) that no one would want except the crusher :-). For myself, instead, I always simple cut out the whole mechanism (a couple of minutes with a dremel) and then (using 3M's fast-setting 5200, a permanent marine adhesive) glue a piece of sheet metal over that opening, followed by a quick spray of flat black paint (it becomes invisible in the dark recesseses of the filter box, should someone peek behind the filter). It's just easier, a few minutes at most, at least to me. But anything is acceptable as long as you get rid of that thermostat. Regards, http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1374275&rss=1 Tue, 22 Sep 2009 04:23 GMT Considering what it takes to open the air-filter box, do you really think that they would take the time to do that? The old K-jet (no AMM) of my '80 was easy, but not the LH 2.0 and beyond. For me to look inside, I have to loosen and pull off the bolt mounting the AMM, to make it somewhat moveable; then I have to undo the straps on boths ends of the hard plastic duct between the box and the AMM; then I have to wrestle the hard plastic duct out of the way; and only then do I have a chance of opening the airbox to look inside (or to change the air filter). Considering doing all that, and then putting everything back properly, do you think an inspection station will look inside. As long as you have the aluminum duct in place, they have no way of knowing that you've removed the flapper mechanism. Good luck. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1374228&rss=1 Tue, 22 Sep 2009 00:26 GMT http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1371839&rss=1 Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:27 GMT Chances are (at 10 years and 155K miles) that your cat is "dead". I'd speculate that, where you live, you have no state emissions inspection test -- is that right? I only change mine when the car fails it's NOx test (my experience, about 6 to 8 years), but I've never had the misfortune, yet, to encounter the "clogged" converter problem that some folks have reported, and which would be another reason. http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1371834&rss=1 Sat, 12 Sep 2009 16:54 GMT http://www.brickboard.com/RWD/?id=1369494&rss=1 Tue, 1 Sep 2009 20:34 GMT Use the text input below to search brickboard.com query http://www.brickboard.com/FIND/