340 cvt for raid

For drift/rally/builds cars projects, engine conversions etc...
Describe your plans, project(s) evolution, works progress and final result!
Post Reply
Posts: 32
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 10:36 am

340 cvt for raid

Post by Bor » 27 Oct 2016 10:10 am

Buenas first the intro:




will tell you the back ground.

We have a 1986 340 cvt with B14 4E for 2017.
We know what we want but are not familiar with the 340 and wonder if your experience pool can help us find the shortest route to obtain that.
We want:
- it higher on the springs
- less understeer
- sump guard
- more grunt/midrange
- low ratio of cvt at low revs/speed, possibly on switch
- Volvo 300 GT or ATS Classic alloys
- braces on front and rear struts supports

Thanks for any info/tips

*** V3M DONOR ***
Posts: 5453
Joined: 25 Apr 2005 06:52 pm
Location: Anglesey North Wales

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by classicswede » 15 Nov 2016 10:29 am

I have rally springs for the 300 series or you could fit 360 front springs,
Better dampers and poly bushing combined with good tyres will reduce the understeer

Sump gard you will need to make

Front strut barec has to be fabricated on teh car
There are no rear stuts so fitted any kind of brace at the back would be silly

For more power a free flowing exhaust and perhaps upgrade to a twin 45 DCOE would be teh best bet

I am not sure if there is any way of changing the CVT gearing

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


phone/text 07824887160

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


Posts: 2243
Joined: 26 May 2009 05:34 pm
Location: Belfast, N. Ireland

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by Ride_on » 15 Nov 2016 08:52 pm

I thought there was a low ratio hold button.

Would the negative camber on 360 struts not help?

What is a brace?
1980 345 DL_______1987 360 GLE (project car restored to GLT spec and B230FT'd)
1984 360 GLT______1987 360 GLT
1983 360 GLS______1989 360 GLE
1985 340 GL_______1986 340 1.4
1985 360 GLS______1995 940 SE 2.3 Turbo Estate (daily)
1987 340 GL 1.7

Posts: 3282
Joined: 09 Feb 2008 02:29 am

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by macplaxton » 16 Nov 2016 02:15 am

Bor wrote: - low ratio of cvt at low revs/speed, possibly on switch
Add a second switch to the low-ratio hold: http://forum.volvo300club.nl/showthread.php?t=9039
72 DAF 44 Estate 78 Volvo 343DL Black BeautyImageImage
82 Volvo 343DL CVTImageImage 88 Volvo 340DL Diesel

Posts: 32
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 10:36 am

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by Bor » 23 Nov 2016 03:07 pm

Thanks for the feedback.

Yes, the CVT can be quite easily improved for sports use by adding a switch to the EMVK and also by adding a one way valve in the lead to the inlet manifold and a reservoir for 'vacuum' .
The standard low ratio button stays in lowest ratio only. Very useful too, but limited.

For power upgrade I will stick to the standard DIR as the DCOE will cost as much at the low end as it brings at the mid/top. I have just dropped a K&N unit in the standard pan. It is also way easy to duct cool air into the standard filter housing with less intake noise as a bonus.
Found a source for a sports camshaft.
Sticking to modding the standard exhaust too.
The power gain will be nothing spectacular but the car will pass periodic inspection without hassles.
Still working out how much to have shaved off the head.

I am sticking with the standard springs at the front as comfort is quite a big thing on 11 hour camino stretches. Still looking at what to do at the front; space the strut at the top or add pre tension to the spring.
Yes the negative camber of the 360 strut legs would do a LOT.

For the back I have 'caravan' springs that go around the standard shocks.

Just received a set of alloys: period ATS 'classic'; 6J x 13 and ET 30.
They are lighter than expected so sm4

Posts: 32
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 10:36 am

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by Bor » 24 Nov 2016 12:24 am

With back sorted out, thought a bit more concentrated about the front.
The standard springs will not do. They will not keep the car high enough off the gravel and the difference in spring rate with the rear is too large.

So I mailed Dai and I thought to share the info with you:

Buenas Dai,

The 340 full hight rally springs you have: Does that imply standard length? How much harder are they than the standard springs?
They would be a very easy 'fix'.

Why the shorter bump stops btw? Same length but harder so why?

Hi Petrus,

the rally springs are shorter than original but stiffer giving the same ride hieght. Custom springs can be made
They are easy enough to fit

The bump stops are a case of what fits and is available

Exactly what I thought and want NOT.

I like the standard springs but do need a bit more ride hight/wheel travel. The caminos here are quite a bit rougher than say the forest sections in the UK.

I want the car HIGHER and max wheel travel.

At the back the 'caravan' springs basically do the same: Giving more ride hight and not much stiffer rating.
I want that at the front too.

The springs that will work for you are http://www.classicswede.co.uk/Original_ ... 56819.aspx

they are a bit stiffer than original and will lift the front about 20mm on a B14. The springs are full length and would work well on a gravel rally car where the suspension needs a lot of give

Thanks for the link. It reads 'or lower other models'.

Meaning the standard, non GLT, 360 springs would be both standard length AND stiffer than the 340 springs?
I mean, the B19/20 is a good deal heavier than the B14.
If so, that seems to be the right medicine.

Yes they are slightly lower for a 360 but with less weight in a 1.4 it gives some lift but is still not a stiff spring. Just a less spongey than teh originals

Looked up spring specs for the various models and the regular 2.0 line has the same spring as the diesel.
It is 30 mm. shorter than the B14/17 spring but some 10% stiffer.
The standard GLT is again shorter and 15% stiffer still, resulting in close to 30% over the B14 one.

Tricky one.
With 30% less sag, I think that the 2 cm. you give is probably on the lowish side.
Probably about the same ride height as the standard 2.0/diesel ones.

Right. The ham question is how much firmer I want the ride.
30% is not that much and will keep the thing better off the ground and I am mounting 30% lighter wheels thus giving less jolt on the springs thus car.
Also it would balance with the stiffer rear.

Instinctively I'd go for the 10% spring but the standard GLT could be just the thing.
Thanks for the suggestion.

I know when I fitted the GLT springs on a 1.4 it did lift it a fair bit but the old springs had sagged. The car felt factory fresh with them on.

So, I am going for the standard GLT springs Dai has had made sm18

Posts: 32
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 10:36 am

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by Bor » 26 Nov 2016 05:35 pm


Add 165/80 M&S tread recovers and have a few more centimeters plus more resistance against punctures because of the extra rubber recovering brings.

Posts: 832
Joined: 27 Dec 2013 08:40 pm

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by 360beast » 26 Nov 2016 09:03 pm

Brilliant, hopefully you won't be bottoming out anywhere now :)

Posts: 32
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 10:36 am

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by Bor » 27 Nov 2016 12:37 am

360beast wrote:Brilliant, hopefully you won't be bottoming out anywhere now :)

Well, there is always hope, but realistically there is more chance on winning the lottery :lol:

The main raid we want to do is some 2500 kilometers of dirt 'roads' through Spain, crossing several serious mountain ranges and two deserts. Very much comparable to an early eighties Dakar.


Posts: 832
Joined: 27 Dec 2013 08:40 pm

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by 360beast » 27 Nov 2016 08:26 pm

It looks like a bloody good time, hope you enjoy it again and the 340 performs well.

Posts: 32
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 10:36 am

Re: 340 cvt for raid

Post by Bor » 28 Nov 2016 01:51 pm

Oh man, 8 days of incredible motoring fun.

So much so that we decided on 2017 during the event.
Although it is not a flat out race; not a speed event, for most of the route it is VERY hard to stay on the ball even with a relatively modern proper 4x4.
We are not aiming for a lot better, in fact not at all, better result that this year, but losing less time on the bumpiest going would make it all a dimension safer.
I think our 55M is quicker than our 340 ever will be, but way more wheel travel and ditto grunt is going to make a comfie world of differences.

Post Reply