|
|
Maybe someday I'll own, care for, and motor about in one.
Well, I'd motored and repaired many 164s.
That I-6, the last I-6 Volvo designed and built for their autos. With manual transmission and overdrive (M410, thank you).
(Welp, the 960/S90/V90 has the Porsche engine in it, I guess).
Or, better, hang the 164 front end on a 142 and move the 164 guttiwuts into the 142 for the imaginary, yet fabled, 162e). Now, that'd be swell!
I can dream, can't I?
cheers,
Volvo "Buttermilk" Writer
--
I've owned only ever Volvo 240s since 1985.
They are all wee beasties!
All final assembly at Volvo Halifax Assembly, save for the 1991 240.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_Halifax_Assembly
RIP, yet beloved:
1975 244 DL (B20, M40, OHV B20F RULES!)
1976 242 DL (B21, M46, Moonroof - an SRO? The West Coast-only Volvo)
1979 245 DL (B21, M46, From Midwest to West Coast)
1979 242 GT (B21, M46, Moonroof - an SRO? Grey Market from Holland-
-Failed West Coast Dreams, RIP, Taylors Junkyard,
(back to) St. Louis, MO, June 2001)
........................................................................
Currently owned, beloved, operating, and getting better all the time(!):
1990 240 DL (245, B230, M47 II) Final assembly at
1991 240 (B230, M47 II, Moonroof. Grey Market from Germany)
1992 240 GL (B230, M47 II, L-jet 3.1, Moonroof)
........................................................................
|
|
-
|
|
|
No need to put a front end from a 164 to a 142 or a 242..............
Just get a stock 71 142E,(rare as a hens tooth). It has a 164 leather interior, upgraded driveshaft along with the M41 tranny, maybe you could substitute 160 vented front brakes,but the stock 71 142E brakes were an upgrade and more braking isn't needed. Higner hp was provided with high compression FI engine. This was a full package Volvo product, it had all Volvo had to give at the time.
--
Antique Swedish Steel 71 142E color V#102
|
|
-
|
|
|
Antique Swedish Steel,
Thank you. So you mean get a 1971 142 E and not bother with bring to life a another fabulous 162 E? Be satisfied if I could find a 142 E?
Well, we'll see. Happy Holidayz,
MacDuff.
|
|
-
|
|
|
I had a 1973 164E with a five speed in it. It was a great car, twenty years ago when it was almost twenty years old.
But they'll eat you alive - a Cadillac Escalade gets better fuel mileage.....
|
|
-
|
|
|
Rhys!
As a resident (of Canada - barely!) fuel systems expert, why do you suppose the 164 is such a gas hog? They are geared higher (usually) than 140s so you would think that would help some, with about equal torque for the gearing.
Do you think the fact that nearly all of them had the "C" cam figures into it?
--
George Downs Bartlesville, Oklahoma
|
|
-
|
|
|
Hi George,
Well I do live below the 49th parallel! And with a good slingshot I just might be able to lob into the USA!
I have wondered about the dismal fuel mileage. With the 164E the injection made the fuel distribution more even than the tortuous path the carbed ones had. I removed the vacuum retard on mine, adjusted the manifold pressure sensor a bit, and replaced the cam with a new "F" as I recall. The "E" was available, but it would have come from Sweden, the F was in Canada. I didn't machine the head, but I should have. I removed all of the air conditioning gear. So I got 18-19 Imperial out of it, which many locally didn't believe, and perhaps 23 on the highway. The auto box 164E's around here were lucky to get 16/20.
Just why I don't know. The engine weighed more than a small block Chevy I think - very heavy for the displacement. But another 200 pounds shouldn't have made the difference given how slow the engine could be run.
I did run the car in solo events a few times and it was a crowd pleaser. Big bronze four door, rolled over onto it's door handles. Hit 7000rpm once or twice, and it was still pulling hard!
But it was a gas gobbling stone....
|
|
-
|
|
B30's have very crappy exhaust ports which flow not much better than 50% of the intake flow when you really want 70-80% for best economy & power.
--
Three 164's, Two 144's, One 142 & a partridge in a pear tree.
|
|
-
|
|
So go out and getcha one! This one looks pretty good:
http://seattle.craigslist.org/kit/cto/2625558896.html
Quick M410 conversion and you're motorin' happy
As for building a 162, my though as always been take the doors off, move the pillar back about 6", use doors from a 142 or 242, as well as the rear windows and quarter panel skin...
Hanging the 164 innards on a 142 ain't an easy proposition at all.
--
-Matt I ♥ my ♂
|
|
-
|
|
|
Hi Matt,
See, I'm really with it these days it being two months and 8 dayze since you posted.
The Seattle Craigslist link is gone as of today (D'oh!). Thank you, though!
I'd seen a 162 where someone had done this, I think, someplace.
There is another post where someone would want to put a 164 nose on a 252 C Bertone.
Welp, I'd be pleased as eggnog to have a 164. In 1988, I had a chance at a gold/copper/bronze 1975 for sale in wonderful San Francisco (I used to live in Marin County - over the golden gate bridge and through the Muir Woods to all that's Marin and Grandma's house we go!). Welp, I flubbed it. Went on to a 1976 242 DL from El Granada, CA (North of Monterrey and South of Aptos/Santa Clauz {Cruz}).
Welp, I'll keep a vigil. When I get back into the jobby-job game, and I complete all repairs on the three 240s I have, I'd like a 164, 142, or 120,130,220 series with carbs and NO electronics. As simple and all Swedish RWD Volvo as can be (with manual tranny, overdrive, and moon roof, tho the moon roof is optional for me on these models).
The 164, though, such a prize. An executive luxury automobile. Yet I like the Europa auto luxury notion in that spartan Euro context.
Volvo 'luxury' now, or since Ford tried to kill Volvo, is oppressive. I find the cars claustrophobic; sort of like the 850/C70 series
Oh well. Thank you.
Slappy Holidayze,
Volvo164e "Eggnog" Mac Gurk
--
Happy Holidayze? No, no, no, I say, "Happy (go to) Helladayze." I could do with some years without the religious hypocrisy in the guise of material consumption.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Clipping the front from a '75 164 onto a 242 would make more sense. I had an aquaintence that built a 165 that way--but lost it in divorce. -- Dave
|
|
|
|
|
