Thats the problem I'm sure roop would like to abuse it

There is a lot that cane be done to both the 8 and 16 valve lumps but I'm sure costs are the issue.

A 2.3 8 valve will just bolt in to the 360 and give a nice gain compared to the 2ltr.

Perhaps it's not that indicative, but the guys making 400+ on S/V40 T4s have found that the car is actually less lairy with the huge turbo and more power, since the power comes in more gradually thanks to the slower spool time. I notice that with Ryan and Nick's (Dirtbike on Tbricks, with a LHD turbo 242) cars, too.

Totally agree that the best bang-for-buck is a 2.3 8v NA, especially if you hot it up a bit.

cheers

James

You also gain top end power when you free the engine from those restricting stock turbos. Less backpressure is always good with turbos.. more power on same boost levels and engine runs cooler, which means you can run even more boost and more advance. \o/

Wow! Interesting stuff, guys!

2.3 8v it is then! I'm all about cheap and easy.

The cyl head on the B234 was developed in conjunction with Porsche (as Foggy says it's the precursor to the whiteblock head), not Cosworth. I think the reason people think Cosworth had a hand in it is that Cossie did 2.0 and 2.3 16v's for Ford - coincidendtally the same size as the Volvo 16v engines.

The really scary part is that the B234 head pretty much bolts right up to a Ford 2.3 block

cheers

James

Scary. I wounder which head has the best flow in std form?

V6 Man wrote: I think the reason people think Cosworth had a hand in it is that Cossie did 2.0 and 2.3 16v's for Ford - coincidendtally the same size as the Volvo 16v engines.

I thought that they helped develope 16 valve head for Mercedes. I knew that they did 16 valve head for Fords 2 liter YB block. Never heard about head for 2,3 liter block. Well we live and we learn something every day.

No, it does not raise the rev limiter. (atleast not by 1000rpm) it increases overall " under the curve area".

I have not yet bought the chips, but I am going to when my 945 Turbo sells...

(Why not stick to the 945 and sell the 745? The 745 s cheaper and the 745 won't get me the money the 945 will)

To be fair, I'm not sure Cosworth did do a 2.3 16v....there was a 2.3 8v turbo (like the B230) on the other side of the pond, but it wasn't anything to do with Cosworth.

You're quite right....they did a 2.3 16v for Mercedes, for the 190E - good thinking! That's probably where that story originated from.

cheers

James

Cossie 190... yes please... when the non f*cked ones come down to a reasonable price Why is it anything under 4 figures has generally been wrapped round a tree at least 3 times?!?!

Driving a Merc? Not in a million years! Maybe a BMW, but only one of those old 635CSI's...
For now, stick to Volvo and pimp it!

foggyjames wrote:To be fair, I'm not sure Cosworth did do a 2.3 16v....there was a 2.3 8v turbo (like the B230) on the other side of the pond, but it wasn't anything to do with Cosworth.

Yeh, the Lima engine or "turbo pinto"... see a few on ebay every now and then. A Ford-Volvo hybrid turbo engine would be cool, but only if someone else bothered to build it.

That already exists - it's called the 2.5litre 5 pot turbo (now taken over as the 'T5') as fitted to the C30/S40/V50/C70 and the F*RD Focus and Mondeo. Volvo design, built at the F*RD Engine Plant in Bridgend, Sth Wales.

Haha.. Cool!

I know nothing about the motor industry, so I'm going to ask why go to the hassle of having a Volvo designed engine if it's going to be built at a Ford plant? Surely it would be easier for them to churn out more Duratecs (or whatever) instead?