Any 960 buying advice please

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by rogerthechorister

I should have stayed with 940s - or got a range Rover or Disco. Ironically I got my first 7/9 series rather than a Stage 1 Land Rover V8 LWB that I was being offered at the same time principally because of fear of the thirst of the detuned Land Rover v8, but I could have got that up to over 150bhp and converted to gas for far less than the Volvo has cost me. Or I could have persevered with my 2.6 LWB Series 2 Land Rover that had eaten its gearbox, and put a vane supercharger on that - the CR was low enough that no head work was needed - and then gassed that.

Another alternative to the Land-Rover products is a Jeep Cherokee/Grand Cherokee.

Prices are on the up at the moment for Mk1 Cherokees but if you find a decent Mk2 Grand Cherokee with either the 4.0 straight 6 or the 4.7 V8 you might well find it's already been gassed.
When i had my Mk1 4.0 Cherokee, because it was on LPG it was the "weapon of choice" for anything involving distance, i was getting high teens, low 20s in terms of how much it drank but all at 50p/L so the same as getting high 30s/low40s in terms of the distance per £ spent on fuel compared to petrol.
Very capable as a tow car (didn't even notice a 2160kg trailer and car combo, even up hills like Everest!), LSD as standard on the back axle (Trac-Lok diff aka Dana 41 or Volvo 1041), normal diff on the front plus all the usual "toys" such as air-con, power everything and leather interior.
Driving position very similar to a Range-Rover with all the spec but a lot cheaper.
One thing to watch is HGF on the V8s though, often the cooling system gets neglected and that is trouble for the V8 powered models. They sound nice though, especially running a Cherry Bomb!

[rogerthechorister]

Mk 1 4 litre Cherokee quite capable but rust. And thirst, as you say. The V8s have a dreadful reputation for reliability and also AFAIK eat their gearboxes - and rust. I would have liked to try an original Wagoneer but they also rusted and tended to eat the transfer box/centre diff.

[Laird Scooby]

The V8s have that rep because of the head gaskets and as you say, they can all rust. Find a solid one that's been Ziebarted/Dinitroled from new with a gas conversion on it and you're laughing though.

I don't think the Wagoneer was officially sold in the UK and besides, you'd have the extra problem of woodworm to deal with!

Joking aside, the Mk1 Cherokee is the one to go for if you do think in terms of a Jeep, yes they have their problems but like a lot of cars/trucks with inherent problems, most that are around now with a good few miles under the rubber have had those problems sorted.

Failing all else, get a V8 Disco or similar and gas it if it isn't already. These days LPG is a DIY proposition, most of it is common sense although reading/inwardly digesting the contents of COP-II would be a good idea. Some insurers will insist on a certificate, many don't. The fact it has made it through an MoT and not blown up by the time renewal is due is often enough for them!

Slightly tongue in cheek but you get the idea.

[rogerthechorister]

My mate Romany Ken had endless **** with his Disco - some essential computer kept insisting that it would not go and even disconnecting the battery did not reset its brains.

[960kg]

The 1996 Volvo 960 CD was suppose to of been the best Volvo of all....the `97 model by then had a more plasticky feel inside.

The CD was the top of the range then with everything and a sound system that would literally blow the roof off if possible in superb performance and clarity.

Mine was the 2.5 170bhp straight 6 cylinder which came with the same Multilink Rear Suspension as the 3.0 litre 201bhp. with the Fibre Glass transverse spring.

The rear axle ratio was lower on the 2.5 to make up for the lower power output but in practice i did prefer it as the torque from the 6 cylinder from a standstill was better than the higher bhp engine. But at high speed on the M way you could see the fuel guage just about go down because of the higher revs.

Comparison with the 940 as standard...there was none......the 960 being in a class of it`s own, superb comfy interior with all electric everything and with good handling for a barge but better than the 940 ...they all wallow in the corners but the 960 being heavier was better.

I have owned x2 740, x2 940 all 2.3 litres and a 940 2.0 litre Turbo Wentworth and the 960 was best of all.

Fuel on my 2.5 was 30mpg at 70mph and 19 around the houses on recommended 95 ron fuel.

Only bad thing was the door cards.......apparently these years Volvo changed their supplier and the top corners are always puckered up due to sun heating them on the later models this was cured.

As regards the engine ....very reliable but can suffer from the dreaded oil pickup pressure from the sump through the O rings (which distort and leak) to the top cams resulting in a type of clatter as the revs rise. It was cured by replacing with x2 O rings in the groove between the sump and engine surfaces.

The Gasket on the Inlet Manifolds had a problem with leaking and giving a slight gentle misfire at idle. It was hard to diagnose because of 6 cylinders but the easy giveaway was that the original factory gasket was Pink and the better replacement was Green.

The other problem could be when the handbrake cable breaks....don`t let a dodgy garage do the replacement as they bend the cable to get it in place and it will break after a couple of weeks.......the proper way to replace it is Lower The Fuel Tank and then the cable can be passed over it this is the Dealer way and it will not break afterwards.

Of course my experiences only after 5 yrs of ownership. The higher fuel consumption far out ways any expense for breakdowns as they are so reliable.

[Bloater]

Hi

Just a quick note to say thanks for all the posts, they’ve been really helpful.

I’m now the owner of a 960 estate and have been getting to know it for the last week or so. It’s really growing on me and I’m just hoping this is a sign of things to come.

Thanks again

Bloater

[barkster1971]

I have a 2.5 960 and there is no torque. It revs well but is pretty slow. My 940 had V90 seats which are the best seats. Better than 960 seats and much better than leather 940 seats. The 940 handling can be much improved easily .
A 960 engine is a bit too thirsty for the same power as a mildly tweaked 940 turbo engine.
I have been impressed by my Belgium built 740 quality wise and don't forget most redblock engines are non interference.
For the ultimate Volvo I would have a 1995 960 manual with the D5 engine.
I was very impressed by my d5 engine as I had it remapped and the torque and fuel,economy was awesome. However it being in a lesser quality V70 and transverse it was a pig to work on.

[Laird Scooby]

Correct me if i'm wrong but aren't the 2.5 and 3.0 white block engines of Ford derivation?
If so it sounds typically Ford, plenty of power from an over-square, high revving lump but not much in the way of torque so you have to work the engine hard to get the best out of it.
Usually makes economy suffer as well!

[Prufrock]

No they aren't Ford* engines. The white block or B6304F was developed as part of Project Galaxy which began in the late 1970s and included the development of a range of modular engines.

The B6304F was the first available engine which made it's debut in the 960, followed by the five cylinder units in the 850.

Jon.

*nothing wrong with Ford engines by the way...all the Duratecs especially are very good.

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by Prufrock

No they aren't Ford* engines. The white block or B6304F was developed as part of Project Galaxy which began in the late 1970s and included the development of a range of modular engines.

The B6304F was the first available engine which made it's debut in the 960, followed by the five cylinder units in the 850.

Jon.

*nothing wrong with Ford engines by the way...all the Duratecs especially are very good.

Thanks for that, gives me renewed faith in the white blocks.

As you say, nowt wrong with the Ford engines but the Duratecs are from a very confusing set of origins :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Duratec_engine

Marketing gone mad methinks!