Learn me: Turbo Volvo

Anyone here with a turbo Volvo? I'm looking at Volvo 740's mainly. What kind of gas mileage do you guys get out of these cars? Can you specify whether yours is modded and what model and bodystyle? Is it as DIY-friendly as a Miata or Civic?

I had a '95 850 Turbo wagon. Loved that car.

Timing belt and water pump was easy. Good usable HP and I never did modify mine. Mileage on 89 octane was 26 on the highway.

Crankcase vent system can be a pain if you have to replace it.

I had a 745 Turbo for 3 years, and my autocrosser is a 240 that's been turbocharged.

My 745T got around 22MPG average in mixed driving. It had the 4spd+OD manual tranny. I added a manual boost controller to see as much as 14PSI, and an ipd Turbo cam for better top-end breathing. Everything else in the driveline I left stock. All told, it probably added about 40HP over the stock 160, and a very robust torque curve.

As far as being DIY friendly, I'd say yes and no. Yes, because the cars are very easy to work on. No, in that the aftermarket for performance parts is nowhere near that of a Miata or Civic - but there are some really cool bits out there, and people like us are always making new stuff all the time.

You can pick up these cars so cheaply, and adding 20 to 50 horses is so easy and inexpensive. The engines built from '90+ have the strongest bottom ends. If you want a manual (stock), you'll need to find a 740. Otherwise, the 940 is virtually the same car, albeit only available with an auto (but you can swap it.)

Listening intently. Aside from "90+" is one year more desirable than another? Common trouble spots/unperformed maintenance to look for?

One of our techs has driven the same 740 Turbo for almost 20 years. Looks like drek, paint peeling and the glass keeps cracking, but it's never stopped running.

How well do the autos hold up to more boost? I will be looking at doing basic mods of K&N filter and 3" catback. Don't need big power but just enough to put a smile on my face.

poopshovel wrote: Aside from "90+" is one year more desirable than another? Common trouble spots/unperformed maintenance to look for?

There's not a whole lot to recommend one year over another aside from the engine. The bodies are well-rustproofed, and the design didn't change much - the '90+ cars got a little more aero with composite headlamps and new front air dams. The engine is where the biggest changes occurred. '85-'87 used thinner rods, and the crank thrust bearing was in the middle somewhere - it ended up being less durable. The '88-'89 put the thrust bearing back where it belonged, but still had the thinner rods. 90+ got thicker rods, and '93+ got piston oil squirters. A '93-'95 motor represents the cream of the crop. That is not to say the earlier motors were fragile - they can still be modded, but not quite as far.

As long as the oil has been changed occasionally, these cars tend to run forever. They will endure inordinate amounts of owner neglect and continue to run. The turbo is the most fragile part of the system, so checking it for play, checking for oil in the intercooler (there is always a little, but there should not be a lot) and the typical 'state of the engine bay' are good indications of the health of the motor. You can also listen for any piston slap at cold startup, although this is usually not a dealbreaker on these cars.

B14boy wrote: How well do the autos hold up to more boost? I will be looking at doing basic mods of K&N filter and 3" catback. Don't need big power but just enough to put a smile on my face.

The stock auto is a Toyota unit that will hold ~250HP without problems. Beyond that, there are free DIY valve body mods that you can do that will firm up the shifts and give you more power capability (see ww.turbobricks.com)

love my 95 850 t-wagon workhorse, 300k+ miles, auto trans, just have to keep oil in it and Its just like the Energizer bunny...

I've owned a few. 82 245, 90 745T fully restored black on black. 01 V70 T5 auto and 01 V70 T5 manual. The 745 was probably my fave,the do everything decentlymobile. The taillights and turn signal lenses always need love. With good shocks and tires they are fun.It was sort of needy though which is not fun for me. Got avg 20mpg from mine. The most pleasant was the 01 T5 auto. The one I want is a 945 with an LS,6 speed auto and a full suspension.

11110000 wrote:

poopshovel wrote: Aside from "90+" is one year more desirable than another? Common trouble spots/unperformed maintenance to look for?

You can also listen for any piston slap at cold startup, although this is usually not a dealbreaker on these cars.

I've heard them make truly nasty piston slap, but still live. I took one apart once when the owner started to have trouble hearing the radio, and the cylinders were barrel shaped past the max overbore pistons available.

I will have a 92 up for sale in a couple months depending on where you are.

I get around 20mpg combined in mine. I imagine it would be much more fun with the boost turned up and a manual but it isn't too bad in stock form.

Amongst many other things I have had many Volvo's, one Honda, and a Subie. Volvo's are easy to work on and they are built to be maintained indefinitely. The Honda is and Subie was easy to work on as well, they just needed quite a bit less of it. On the other hand, the Volvos' are always saying to me "I will never quit bub, go ahead and fix the AC, and I wont let you down", while the Honda and Subie said "I may be peppy now, but I am simply going to entirely quit one of these days and I mean it".

In terms of go fast bits, there are plenty of parts available and online how to sources for a reasonably quick Volvo street car.

ls1fiero wrote: The most pleasant was the 01 T5 auto.

Did your '01 T5 auto have transmission trouble? Thinking about upgrading and ran across an auto T5 with just over 100K miles, but the stories of transmission failure concern me. .

I have 180k on a Volvo 850 100k of which have been with 17psi available and not a peep from the transmission. It works that same as the day i bought it. I change the fluid at 30k or so (every 2 years), and put a smallish cooler after the fluid exits the radiator.

It is a persistent inteweb rumor, but threads where the 4 speed aisin autobox dies are pretty rare, and then it is usually to do with a Holset mega snail at 22 psi doing damage to the box or the rods.

I think if they have had the fluid changed they are fine.

I have a the basic ecu retune and few tweaks that bump the torques up to 300 flbs or so and the lack of traction is appalling and also a great deterrent to getting on it until you are going pretty good. It is a very un fussy and easy to live with slushbox- it stays in gear and shifts minimally- it is set up well by Volvo to utilize the torque of the long stroke 5 bangers.

The FWD cars do not handle very well- besides being understerring pigs, the inputs are all very vague and inaccurate. They handle O.K. I think of it as a GT and am quite happy. The seats are divine, and it can haul loads and loads of people and their crap.

Thanks for the info guys. Trying to find a nice example right now for weekend people/stuff hauling.

the best years are '93+... they changed the IC and radiator and added piston oil squirters (which goes a long way to slowing or at least quieting piston slap)... and even the older engines will run for decades with the piston slap....

i'm on my 3rd 700/900 wagon... if you are not looking to install a full EMS (megasquirt) i'd go '91+... as they come with LH2.4 electronics and with chips can pull off 300hp

mine has a little larger turbo (16t), fuel and ignition chips, 3" amm, CAI, "brown top" injectors, fancy plug wires, hacked up stock exhaust

it was enough to kill the stock transmission with 16+ PSI... but to be fair that was a junkyard trans and don't know the history of it... would slip with anything over 1/4 throttle (even at stock boost)... a fluid drain and refill (including a quart of lucas trans fix) is buying me time till I get around to swapping the trans... shifts funny now (skips 2nd) but no probs on the HW... have a spare that I did the accumulator mod done to (quicker shifts leads to less clutch slipping so less heat)... will go in come spring.

in the mean time even with the funky shifting i'm getting just under 20mpg mixed driving... should go up to about 21mpg mixed once I swap the trans...

most things are easy to work on... did the HG job and it was oh so easy...

mine has 245k on it... I have no question that it can hit 300k

So just for conversation's sake, if you found a nice 940 turbo sedan with 60k miles on it, for under 6 grand, would that be a good deal?

bastomatic wrote: So just for conversation's sake, if you found a nice 940 turbo sedan with 60k miles on it, for under 6 grand, would that be a good deal?

How far under $6k? I probably would if I wasn't just looking for a turbo beater.

In reply to espz28: No problems at all with the trans! The taillights were the most frequent issue on mine.

Sorry to bump my thread but I started looking at the '93-'97 850 turbo wagons. I don't like the whole FWD part but it looks a little nicer and they seem easier to find newer ones where I live. How do these compare to the 740/760 for reliability, cost of maintence (parts only), and gas mileage? Is the 5 cylinder any better or worse than the previous 4 cylinder?

Shaun wrote: I have 180k on a Volvo 850 100k of which have been with 17psi available and not a peep from the transmission. It works that same as the day i bought it. I change the fluid at 30k or so (every 2 years), and put a smallish cooler after the fluid exits the radiator. It is a persistent inteweb rumor, but threads where the 4 speed aisin autobox dies are pretty rare, and then it is usually to do with a Holset mega snail at 22 psi doing damage to the box or the rods. I think if they have had the fluid changed they are fine. I have a the basic ecu retune and few tweaks that bump the torques up to 300 flbs or so and the lack of traction is appalling and also a great deterrent to getting on it until you are going pretty good. It is a very un fussy and easy to live with slushbox- it stays in gear and shifts minimally- it is set up well by Volvo to utilize the torque of the long stroke 5 bangers. The FWD cars do not handle very well- besides being understerring pigs, the inputs are all very vague and inaccurate. They handle O.K. I think of it as a GT and am quite happy. The seats are divine, and it can haul loads and loads of people and their crap.

What kind of tweaks did you do other than the tune? I would guess you at least have a catback? Was the power measured on any dynos? What kind of MPG do you get? So many questions...lastly do you live in the SF Bay Area? This all sounds very familiar to me which is the only reason I ask that last question...

In reply to donalson:

This was my old car. Reliable, sorta. Very easy to work on. I had a cooling system issue that was traced to a faulty rad cap, but it blew 3 coolant lines, the head gasket and the heater core before I figured it out. The turbo died, the tranny died (hence the JY unit I put in it) and some seals and stuff died. Parts are VERY EASY to find on the internet and CRAZY HARD to find locally. The car stayed parked for maybe 10 accumulated days over my 2 years ownership waiting for parts. Not cool for a DD. It was quick, very squirty kind of car. It would pull hard from 10-20 mph, nothing much from idle and nothing much on top. Could get it much over 100, even, but it ran with V8 Mustangs at the strip.

95 850 NA wagon, 5 speed getting 30 on the highway

Just to keep the subject on track let's just keep this discussion to turbo Volvos please.