|
|
|
Hi gang-
Finished my disk brake swap yesterday - removed the reverse valve from the master, flipped the shocks after cutting/welding the bolts.
I've always wanted to do something kinda nuts, and this car seems like the ideal choice - small, light, cheap, and not nice enough to be a restoration candidate.
Ideally, I'd like a complete donor for 2Kish that could be a source for engine/trans/fuel supply/efi/rack n pinion/rear end etc. Hoping to do it on the cheap, but no illusions about this not being a waste of time and money. Goal is something in the neighborhood of 8 to 10 #/HP.
I've been fixated on 5.0 mustangs, since I could use pretty much the whole OEM drivetrain. But man, after spending some time under the car, there really isn't a lot of room. Any thoughts on using the A4OD instead of a T5? Don't know that I'd miss the shifting action with that much power, and it could really simplify the install.
2.3L Ford four cyl (Ranger/Mustang) has been kicked around as well, but that'd need a turbo, megasquirt setup which adds another level of complexity.
I had my sights on BMW M52's for a bit, but I think it's way too long.
KA24E/DE could work, but the drifters have pretty well killed the supply of 240sx's.
SR20DET would be cool, but then there's the headache of sorting all the ancillaries, since I'd be using a JDM Ebay source.
Also pondering a B230FT, but I figure the AW71 wouldn't fit, and an M46/7 is probably not sturdy enough, leading to a T5 swap down the road.
Any bright ideas out there? Regardless of what I do, I'm sure to need a rear end, part of the allure of the Ford products, keep the same bolt spacing.
Is a rebuilt B16B worth anything? Rebuilt SUs? Transmission (M4 I guess)?
Thanks all-
|
|
-
|
|
|
The "who cares about money" dreams for my PV are either an XC90 V8 or a B36 from an old boat... I'd buy either in a heartbeat if I saw a good deal, figure the rest out later.
Or just batshit ratrod-y, I may still go big block. Get a 427 until I destroy the chassis(or realize my mistake), then keep it for the Cobra kit I've always wanted to do...
OR a T6 motor. Yeah. Those should be getting cheaper.
|
|
-
|
|
A B36 swap would be so incredibly right in so many ways. There aren't that many of them around. In addition to the Penta versions, they were in Volvo trucks as well. And not only that, but the last few (???) Sugga's apparently had B36 motors too, instead of the sidevalve I6 that most of them had.
I wonder about parts availability, I wonder if B18/20 parts fit on it fairly well (pistons, bearings, etc).
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic #1141 245 (now w/16V turbo)
|
|
-
|
|
|
http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v608/Erkkios/
Interesting pics in there...
re: firewall - I would think that as long as I leave the rails and outer areas intact, I'm okay; figuring the battery tray and downward is fair game?
|
|
-
|
|
|
I am in the middle of getting my engine/trans ready to drop in my 544. Not hi-tech but reliable. It is a 1987 S10 2.5 with a toyota Supra W58 transmission. I replaced the rear end with a Ford Ranger in 2002. Everyone thinks I am nuts so I am putting a Volvo valve cover on my engine.
pictures of my engine at http://s1153.photobucket.com/albums/p513/rayj5/
Be careful cutting the firewall because it is the support for the front suspension. The S2000 has a big aluminum oil pan and would make swapping into a 544 a challenge.
Check out this build http://canadianrodder.com/pv/update1.htm
He is installing a 3.4 Chevy V6
Best of luck
Ray J.
|
|
-
|
|
|
WOW - that 3.4 swap guy is going nutso. Funny (to me, at least) to spend so much time and money on a "traditional" hotrod build without putting in a more exotic power plant.
Great web site though, excellent photos of what's involved.
Particularly interesting to see the limits on the ride height. Now I've started to think about sectioning or channeling it. Yikes.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Kyle- I'm doing a 3.4 V6 build as well. The reasoning is this - I want a car suitable for reasonably fast touring, decent stoplight performance, one that will be fun on a twisty road, provide creature comforts like A/C and probably power windows and steering.
One of the criteria was that the car had to be capable of 30+mpg on unleaded REGULAR ( 87 octane ). By utilizing the torque of the 3.4 vs. the horsepower of a more exotic engine, all of my criteria can be met. And as a bonus, the 3.4 weighs about the same as the B-16. n With the fuel injection, altitude changes create no issues.
At the moment, unleaded regular goes for upwards of 30 cents per gallon CHEAPER than 91-92 octane.
The other engine I have considered ( but not measured ) is the Rover/Buick aluminum V8, which was used in production up to 2004. I know it is narrower than the 3.4 across the pulleys, so might fit better between the frame rails of the PV444-544. While it is entirely possible to get good performance out of the various 4 bangers, that will almost always require the use of premium fuel.
|
|
-
|
|
|
In 1989 I put a 1963 Oldsmobile F85 215 V8 (the Oldsmobile version of the all aluminum Buick 215) into a 1976 265. It made a great road car even with the slushbox Roto-Hydramatic. It is the low compression version of the 215 with 155 HP -- and 210ft/lbs of torque - more than enough to make the car spunky. Now the motor sits in a 1993 245 with a Camaro T5 stick shift. I expect it to make near 30mpg and if it doesn't I have a 3.31 rear axle to replace the 3.73. It will be back on the road shortly (has to--as my trusty 1980 245 w/M46 has too many body issues to keep it on the road). The Oldsmobile motor has a great racing history as it was the basis of Jack Brabham's 1967 and 1968 Formula 1 Championships. -- Dave
|
|
-
|
|
|
Picked up a 90 5.0/T5 mustang yesterday... thanks for the help and advice so far!!
|
|
-
|
|
|
I agree with all that has been said especially regarding the limits of the suspension. My 544 has massaged B20 with a M41, and doing more than 160 km/h is a challenge, highways do get very narrow then with this set-up. The smallest bump in the road will lead to unwanted steering to left or right, depending on the bump you will encounter. And be assured, ANY uneven surface will lead to this reaction. The power of 110HP is by far enough for the suspension, even if you upgrade it wit PU bushes, anything stock is lifethreathening. And for the power, my 544 has enough to challenge a Lotus Elan on a twisty mountain road, so why bother with 200+ HP?
All the best Michael
|
|
-
|
|
|
Mine has plenty of pep, and it's quite stable at higher speeds. The fastest I've had it up to was around 130 (6000 rpm in OD), and it was very planted and stable - actually felt far better than either of my old 1800E's did at lower 100+ speeds. Although the PV needs more HP to get going that fast, it didn't feel light in the steering wheel like both the 1800's did.
I've been thrashing my PV for 10 years of so with a well warmed up B20 (150 - 170 ish crank HP) with a largely stock suspension and 40 - 50 year old bushings holding the rear axle in place. IPD sways and Bilsteins front and rear, however, did make a huge improvement in the way it handles. Prior to that it would lean, a LOT, in corners. And would bounce side to side approaching the rear of semi trucks on the highway. Now it handles as firmly and flatly as a modern sports sedan, and is stable and planted. Wider tires helped a lot too (205/50/15 on 15X6 wheels).
And not to detract from the driving experience that I'm sure an Elan is, but time has crept on. And econo hatchbacks and minivans will outrun one now. My PV is a blast to drive with it's 150-170-ish HP, I'm sure 50 - 100 more will be a blast as well. You still have the option of only pushing the pedal halfway down if you only want 100 hp.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic #1141 245 (now w/16V turbo)
|
|
-
|
|
|
If you really do want low revs / high torque: I always had a pipe dream of putting a VW TDI diesel in a Volvo. At least a few people have done it in 240s - they are a bit underpowered stock but can be tuned quite a lot. Furthermore, the Suzuki Sidekick used the AW71, in addition to various Toyota manual gearboxes, and someone already makes an adapter to put the TDI on those, so... hmmmm....
The "drive by wire" accelerator supposedly makes the swap easier. One downside is that the engines are in high demand and relatively pricey.
How adventurous are you? Just a crazy idea.
--
now: '86 745 (Jerry Sizzler) ex: '89 244 (Olof)
|
|
-
|
|
|
TDI doesn't really tickle me elmo for whatever reason. Plus, I have a feeling it would get pricey in a hurry.
I drove my wife's V70 2.4T the other day, and forgot how much I like the low seamless torque. Hi power, hi revving cars are plenty fun (my 240Z rarely gets shifted before 6K, and often 7).
If I were still in junior high, and still had my drawing chops, I'd be doodling something like this in my spare time...
Low, wide, rowdy, exposed pipes. Almost demands a V8 with that treatment.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Another idea would be to use a B30. you would have to cut the firewall where the battery goes etc and use an auto ( preferably something better than whatever came in the 164 but maybe that would be OK in a PV ) as there would only be space for two pedals, I did measure up for this and pretty sure that it would work. If done right it would look factory correct. Just make sure that the front of the engine is in the same place.
|
|
-
|
|
|
I've thought about this for my PV210. Good to hear someone has measured. I still might go for it, would love the wagon to sound like a UPS truck.
I also wonder about mating a t9 5spd trans to the back... I haven't seen one, but I hear they might fit in the PV tunnel, though the shifter is further back.
|
|
-
|
|
A massaged B20 + M41 + 2" exhaust and you'll have more power and potential speed than the PV's 1939 design can safely handle. You'd have to chop and enlarge the tunnel, but that's pretty much a given with any kind of swap you'd come up with.
I do admit, though, JohnMc's VW TDI sounds really tempting to me. ;-)
--
‘62 PV544 (B20, M41), '71 142E (Ex-automatic, now carbed), '93 240 Classic Wagon. 
|
|
-
|
|
|
I'd agree that anything with serious power would probably require a total reengineering of the rear suspension. The PV's goofy lateral arms and central torque arms just weren't meant to handle serious amounts of power.
That's a step above the complexity of swapping a stronger axle in but keeping the same suspension design (as you might need to do on a 122/1800/140/240/700/900 with serious power).
Probably require new subframe structure in back, too.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic #1141 245 (now w/16V turbo)
|
|
-
|
|
|
Thanks John, as always appreciate the input; realize much of this is rehash of the TB thread.
Rear suspension - no joke there. Couldn't believe how spindly everything is.
With the Ford swap, I loosely planned on taking the donor axle and mounting points.
A low torque/hi rev setup might allow me to retain the existing axle and suspension, no? Seems I read that the stock stuff wasn't adequate at even stock power levels... But man, rotaries just scare me, S2K stuff is rare and expensive around here.
As far as the tunnel goes, the existing floor/tunnel is fixed, correct? I knew this would be an issue... basic plan was to cut out the top of the tunnel and part of the firewall, lay things in, and build the firewall and tunnel back in place in new positions. Kinda strange on this car that there's no removable trans crossmember; so I'll have to make sure I can get the engine/trans in and out later - don't want to paint myself into a corner, haha.
Am I crazy for being hung up on a complete donor?
KISSing would be okay too. A bit of a retraction of my stated goal to be nuts, though.
Anyone know offhand if a B230FT/M46(7) would fit in the engine bay? Or do redblocks need to be upright? And how big a deal is it to mount that way?
I think I'm nearing a mental crossroads - either a V8, re-engineering the rest of the car in a ratrod style, or a turbo I4, retaining as much of the existing car as I can, rally/vintage race style.
Either way, I think I prefer the low rev/high torque approach, since it'll be a street toy, and hi rev stuff on the street gets old in a hurry.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Other than the tunnel, it seems like there's a not-too-bad amount of room in the engine compartment. Iamtheonlyrealone (sic) has pics of the LS sitting in the engine bay that make it seem roomier. You just need to get the bulky heater unit out of the way (not an issue in some climates, need to install something inside for others), and probably do something about the steering column. The stock steering column is a pretty significant safety concern anyhow.
I've been thrashing the heck out of mine for more than a decade, with a 175-ish HP B20, no broken stuff on the rear suspension yet. But I don't put very sticky tires on it - just some rather ordinary 205/50/15 Toyo Proxes. That way I spin wheels in 1st gear instead of (possibly) strip gears or snap axle shafts.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic #1141 245 (now w/16V turbo)
|
|
-
|
|
|
I had a Nissan ute ( truck ) with a 2.4 twin cam 16 valve motor ( not sure what model that was ) it was a really nice motor, lots of torque, reved well, towed well, economical, I think it was 150hp. The beauty about getting it out of a ute is that apart from the motor the rest of the ute was 1970's technology even if it was built in 2000 so the other bits that you need to make the engine go are add ons rather than integrated into the vehicle like they would be in a car making the transfer much simpler. Gearbox was good too. It went really well in 1400kg ute so should be great in 1050kg PV.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Thanks Hans -
The KA24 truck application we got US was a single cam. Not a dealbreaker, and still 140hp. There's a pickup with 170K on it for 1200 locally. Would prefer a car application to get dual cam and rack n pinion though.
As far as the B30 goes, if I thought I could squeeze an L6 in, I'd be looking hard at BMW M50/M52. If I can find a local cheapie I'll measure things out.
Hell, if I cut out the firewall and trans tunnel, just about anything ought to fit, right!?
|
|
-
|
|
|
Hell, if I cut out the firewall and trans tunnel, just about anything ought to fit, right!?
Everything except for driver and passenger ;)
|
|
-
|
|
|
Hell, if I cut out the firewall and trans tunnel, just about anything ought to fit, right!?
I'm sure you know this but here goes anyway: easy with that firewall, everything up front hangs from it.
--
‘62 PV544 (B20, M41), '71 142E (Ex-automatic, now carbed), '93 240 Classic Wagon.
|
|
-
|
|
|
We had the single cam 2.4 here too , an old nail compared to the twin cam.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Here's a grab bag of idears.
1) Fast(er) and frugal - A VW TDi swap (Acme Adapters and a 2WD Toyota pickup manual trans). Gobs of torque, 120-ish HP stock (certain years). Vaguely similar HP levels but twice the MPG. And you can tweak the TDi's up to 150 - 170 - 190 hp . Then it would be fast and still get 45 mpg. And have a cool diesel clatter at idle. A TDi pulls like a bull in a heavy modern Jetta, I'd imagine it would actually be a lot of fun in a 2200 lb PV.
2) Funky - People keep yanking rotaries out of old RX-7's to stick LSX motors in them, how about sticking one of those in the PV? Turbo rotary. Open the hood and it will look like the engine is missing, until you see the little beer keg hiding out down on the crossmember. Lack of torque would be mitigated by the lack of heft in the PV. Rev, rev, rev. Boost goes in, apex seals come out. It would make the PV even lighter than it already is. Get out a Ouija board and ask Colin Chapman how hard it is to add lightness to a car.
3) Fast-n-furious - The Honda S2000 drivetrain. A whole generation of FWD raised Honda fanbois bought these, then discovered RWD oversteer when a telephone pole approached the side of their car at high speed. Suffice it to say there are a decent number of donor drivetrains floating about. It really is quite a motor. In the porky S2K it seems a little torqueless, but it's 150 ft lbs, more than a B20. And work the 6 speed manual trans and rev the thing up to 9000 glorious RPM, it makes 240 hp from 2 liters of normally aspirated motor. It's really a super high quality race motor.
4) Volvo whiteblock - Motor swaps are fine and all, but there's just a slight bit of added cool factor when the engine still has the correct manufacturer on the valve cover. That's probably just personal opinion on my part, but a Volvo motor would still be neat. A 16V redblock would be nice, but you might as well go for the gusto with a 5 cylinder whiteblock, since you'll be making mounts and chopping stuff to make it fit anyhow. And 20V > 16V, easier to make HP. M90 manual from Europe stuck behind it. Oh. Yeah.
5) In any discussion of motor swaps, you just have to toss in the obligatory LS swap. The aluminum blocked Chevy V8 is just the darling of the swap crowd. People stick them in *EVERYTHING*. Old Land Cruisers. Miatas. 914 Porsches. Old Fairmont wagons. And in 99.7% of the cases (assuming it's done with at least a modest level of skill) it does indeed make a nice car even nicer. Why? Because it's a modern engineering marvel. It's light, it's compact (srsly, it fits in a Miata), it has 400 lazy, torquey HP's. And by lazy I mean understressed in stock form, and easy to improve on. Shake a Summit Racing or Jag's catalog at one and you'll pick up 50 hp. Stick a couple of turbos on one and you'll *really* be making take-out-extra-life-insurance levels of HP (cue the video of Dug Strickler's turbo LS1 Volvo 740 wagon going 190+ mph). Stick an awesome T56 6 speed manual behind it. Only minor issue with this is - you're out of the 'minor leagues' now - it's serious business...
6) Last, but not least, and dear to my heart - keep it pushrod redblock. Not the B16 - too old, too weak, not much support anywhere for performance parts. I'm sure it's a lovely engine in stock form, but that's where it should stay. Under someone else's hood. But a B20 has a fair amount of aftermarket support. Build a 180 - 200 hp normally aspirated B20 and it will be quite fun in the PV. if that's not enough, start with a low compression F head and add some boost. Sure, you'll have to adjust valves every 5K miles, but it will still look authentic under the hood.
Pretty much whatever you do will result in you chopping out the trans tunnel, so get resigned to that early on. The only thing that fits in there is a non-OD M4 or M40, the tunnel just pinches in behind the short trans for the narrow driveshaft section. Bear in mind that the PV has a lot less structure under there (why it weighs several hundred pounds less than a 122/1800) - and the trans tunnel is a more significant structural component here than it is in most unibody cars. So make sure whatever you replace it with is pretty sturdy and solidly fastened in place.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic #1141 245 (now w/16V turbo)
|
|
-
|
|
|
That's a great list. If I were going non-Volvo, I'd be desperately seeking the Honda setup. Awesome stuff.
I don't think anyone should have to adjust valves on a forced induction F headed B20 every 5K - I have an engine like that, and its valves are pretty good about staying in adjustment.
Best,
Cameron
Rose City
|
|
-
|
|
|
Best to check, but I think that the Honda S2000 engine rotates in the opposite direction to the Volvo. Odd but........
|
|
-
|
|
|
Most Honda engines since about '00 or so, and the F20C/F22C run 'normal'/clockwise direction. As far as I know.
but certainly, if anyone was going to contemplate a swap more seriously, verify that fact.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic #1141 245 (now w/16V turbo)
|
|
-
|
|
|
To be fair, I'm recalling my experiences with a hard-driven F head motor without hardened valve seats. The exhaust valves kept tightening up on it, I had to keep readjusting them every time they'd get too quiet.
The head I have now has hardened seats and yes, the interval is a lot longer now.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic #1141 245 (now w/16V turbo)
|
|
-
|
|
TransWarp Drive.
Reduce your carbon footprint! =^)
|
|
-
|
|
|
For something completely different how about an Alfa Romeo Spider 2 litre twin cam all aluminum 4 which has a fairly narrow 5-speed (and uses a longish slanted back shifter just like the Volvo). -- Dave
|
|
-
|
|
|
How about the little Buick V6? They pack a lot of punch for their size.
A rebuilt B16 (especially if the rebuild is well documented) would be worth something
to the 544/Duett/210 guys. If the carbs are H4 they should go with the engine.
M41 with D or J overdrive? Both are valuable but the J is worth more than the D.
--
George Downs Bartlesville, Oklahoma
|
|
-
|
|
I think he was referring to an M4, not M41.
At least that's what I'd expect behind a B16B.
Still, M4s are hard to come by for spare parts. Would hate to see it go to the scrap yard...
--
"Differences of opinions should be tolerated, but not if they're too different' - Sharon Craig
|
|
|
|
|
