volvo 360gle no revs limiter

Various, various and more various!
FA360GLT
Posts: 73
Joined: 01 Nov 2007 06:43 am
Location: santiago,chile

Post by FA360GLT » 01 Feb 2008 05:48 am

The old 345 of my uncle with webers 45 and one cam made in Argentine with 300-300(in-ext) is runing at 7500revs. To A cam pushes even well 6500, the k cam and H cam 6700 - 6800 revs shift points ,the Y cam to 6100revs,the L cam to 5500revs.

classicswede
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 5461
Joined: 25 Apr 2005 06:52 pm
Location: Anglesey North Wales
Contact:

Post by classicswede » 01 Feb 2008 01:57 pm

My preferance is to use the 240 dizzy and m=ignition module over teh renix. The lack of rev limiter is a bit help especialy when on LPG.
I'm sure the stock 360 inlet manifold is quite restrictive. Any idea how the 360 manifold comares to the K jet manifold for air flow?
Dai

Please email me directly on dai@classicswede.co.uk

http://www.classicswede.com

phone/text 07824887160

Web shop http://www.classicswede.co.uk/

Image

User avatar
Jason B
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 909
Joined: 17 Jun 2007 09:18 pm
Location: Bridport, Dorset and Southampton

Post by Jason B » 01 Feb 2008 03:25 pm

I imagine the airbox and induction setup as a whole may be restrictive, but I'm not sure the manifold is to begin with. I'm also not sure as to whether it is the induction or exhaust which is more restrictive on a 360. On a b230 it is definitely the exhaust which is the restricting factor (with 531 head though)
'89 360 GLE awaiting 2.3 power

User avatar
SteveP
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 7933
Joined: 21 Sep 2004 12:45 pm
Location: Coventry, UK

Post by SteveP » 01 Feb 2008 05:42 pm

I didn't think the inlet manifold would be restrictive on a 360, since it's the same manifold used on turbo redblocks - and even some modified turbo redblocks to a certain extent.
1989 - Volvo 360 GLT
1985 - Volvo 360 GLS
2008 - Volvo S60 SE Lux

User avatar
Jason B
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 909
Joined: 17 Jun 2007 09:18 pm
Location: Bridport, Dorset and Southampton

Post by Jason B » 01 Feb 2008 06:49 pm

Cool, I thought it might be as I'm sure the b230fb I'm slowly cooking up has a manifold which isn't going to restrict my plans for sub 180bhp NA power.
'89 360 GLE awaiting 2.3 power

User avatar
Fuse
Posts: 1364
Joined: 29 Jul 2004 09:03 pm
Location: Finland
Contact:

Post by Fuse » 01 Feb 2008 07:11 pm

NA K-Jet manifold is better than the EFI manifold, but that's not the first concern. :P Fuel rail can be fitted on K-Jet manifold too and EFI throttlebody, I've got some pics of the modded ones.
Volvo R-Sport - Equipment for the car enthusiast.

“Buy land, they're not making it anymore” - Mark Twain


"There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games." -Ernest Hemingway

User avatar
foggyjames
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 9361
Joined: 29 Jan 2004 04:20 am
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post by foggyjames » 02 Feb 2008 03:07 am

Yeah, the K-Jet manifold flows a bit better than the EFI one.

NA vs turbo is a bit misleading...you can get away with a lot with turbo, just by winding the boost up a bit more. Things like valve sizes are a much lower priority. People have justified 360 air filters as being more than big enough, since 240 Turbos used the same element, but have you seen how a 240 Turbo airbox tries to collapse when it comes on boost?

Put it this way, on otherwise identical engines (except that Andy has programmable spark AND higher compression, both of which should help), my 360 made almost 20bhp more than Pettaw's. He also has the better flowing genuine Volvo exhaust. That's all down to a pair of 40s vs the stock EFI manifold.

The exhaust is probably a bigger issue, to be fair...especially the backbox. My 360 was noticably more lively when I simply removed the rear exhaust section.
Jason B wrote:and it is proven that an H-cam and bigger exhaust will nearly achieve 160 alone
It is? Remember the FB has a VX3 cam as standard, which is one of the hotter grinds...hotter than an A, at least! A > K yields somewhere in the order of 10bhp on an otherwise stock B200 (with programmable management).

You'll make good torque, but achieving peak power is a matter of getting the right combination of parts to work together. You've got a 270 degree cam now (not insigicant!), so you might as well choose the rest to match, otherwise you'll have thrown away low end, and not gained top end. NA power with limited displacement is all about RPM. Torque + NA B230...well...it's never going to pull out tree stumps! I've got the intake side sorted, but my exhaust was letting me down. Peak power was at ~5500rpm (rather than the expected 6000+), and you could literally hear the exhaust 'honking' as it filled / backed up with gas.

I guess the other option is to use the adjustable cam gear to retard the cam timing, and lower your powerband to where the intake and exhaust can cope with flowing the CFM the cam is trying to deliver. However, all of the cams are fairly high lift...so with the K/Hs, you're mainly gaining performance at high RPM. I ran the 40s with the original Y cam for about a week, and the bigger intake made a MUCH bigger difference than the cam, overall.

cheers

James
VOC 300-series Register Keeper
'89 740 Turbo Intercooler
'88 360 Turbo Intercooler
'85 360 GLT
'81 343 GLS R-Sport
'79 343 DL
'70 164
...and some modern FWD nonsense to get me to work...

FA360GLT
Posts: 73
Joined: 01 Nov 2007 06:43 am
Location: santiago,chile

Post by FA360GLT » 02 Feb 2008 04:33 am

This video is of my previous glt 88 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-8Vhv0TtNg with 4 branch manifold and free flow exhaust system (This car was coming very rapidly to the limit of revs)My 760 turbo not give 5000 to mas and to come to 6200 is delayed too much.My 740 is easy 5500 , The engine is the same with T cam probably one should the 90s exhaust manifold

User avatar
SteveP
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 7933
Joined: 21 Sep 2004 12:45 pm
Location: Coventry, UK

Post by SteveP » 02 Feb 2008 10:21 am

Does the genuine Volvo exhaust really flow any better, and what kind of proof do we have for it? I can't imagine it doing much - it still has that dubious backbox design anyway. Unless we were talking about the earlier backbox type with inlet and oulet on either end of the silencer I doubt it'd make much difference?
1989 - Volvo 360 GLT
1985 - Volvo 360 GLS
2008 - Volvo S60 SE Lux

User avatar
Ronnie
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 1401
Joined: 27 Oct 2005 03:23 am
Location: Inverness
Contact:

Post by Ronnie » 02 Feb 2008 12:08 pm

SteveP wrote:I didn't think the inlet manifold would be restrictive on a 360, since it's the same manifold used on turbo redblocks - and even some modified turbo redblocks to a certain extent.
There's a lot of folk that believe all stock redblock intake manifolds starve 1 and 4 to some extent and that the design is basically weak
'85 360GLT Mk2 3 Door B19E - SOLD
'94 L400 Mitsubishi Delica LWB

http://www.filterfeeder.eu

User avatar
foggyjames
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 9361
Joined: 29 Jan 2004 04:20 am
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post by foggyjames » 02 Feb 2008 12:42 pm

I think the EFI manifold is particularly bad for that, Aaron. The Group A 242TIs ran a very slightly larger injector on one pot to counteract this! A larger throttle body would probably work wonders - I think I already mentioned that Andy was measuring vacuum at high RPM at full throttle :shock:

I think the genuine exhaust is probably marginally better, but it's certainly not a 'performance' design as such. It appears to be bigger bore, and I think the boxes are slightly larger. It is also noisier, which is generally a good indication.

Your car pulls well, Mr FA360GLT :)

cheers

James
VOC 300-series Register Keeper
'89 740 Turbo Intercooler
'88 360 Turbo Intercooler
'85 360 GLT
'81 343 GLS R-Sport
'79 343 DL
'70 164
...and some modern FWD nonsense to get me to work...

User avatar
Jason B
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 909
Joined: 17 Jun 2007 09:18 pm
Location: Bridport, Dorset and Southampton

Post by Jason B » 02 Feb 2008 06:48 pm

wouldn't you be advancing the cam if you were to bring the torque and power down to a useable rev range?
'89 360 GLE awaiting 2.3 power

User avatar
foggyjames
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 9361
Joined: 29 Jan 2004 04:20 am
Location: Nottingham, UK

Post by foggyjames » 02 Feb 2008 07:06 pm

True...I did write that at 2am :D

cheers

James
VOC 300-series Register Keeper
'89 740 Turbo Intercooler
'88 360 Turbo Intercooler
'85 360 GLT
'81 343 GLS R-Sport
'79 343 DL
'70 164
...and some modern FWD nonsense to get me to work...

User avatar
Jason B
*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 909
Joined: 17 Jun 2007 09:18 pm
Location: Bridport, Dorset and Southampton

Post by Jason B » 02 Feb 2008 07:11 pm

hehe, no probs just checking that I had it right in my head too :D
'89 360 GLE awaiting 2.3 power

FA360GLT
Posts: 73
Joined: 01 Nov 2007 06:43 am
Location: santiago,chile

Post by FA360GLT » 24 Mar 2008 04:50 am

The unit of ignition installs 408 and I do not revs limiter

Post Reply