240 General: New (to me) 1980 Volvo 244

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

It's what Volvos were built for Alan!

There's a lot to be said for the era your RB was entering, i know it was "modernised" with the Hall Effect triggered ignition but it was "born" at the start of the 80s where we saw significant advancement in ignition and fueling.

However, by the end of the 80s, Bosch seemed to lose their way a bit with their EFi/engine management and created circumstances where the engine had to turn over at least twice before the ignition was triggered. This could often cause an "FTP" - Failure To Proceed - for the simple reason it had flooded itself!
Before that the fuel ECU primed the fuel pumps, as soon as the engine moved there was ignition and hey presto, it fired first pot over the top which is about as good as you get from anything.

Never known why, some have suggested it's so the engine has a couple of turns to build oil pressure but if it's in good condition, oil pressure will be almost instant anyway.

Whichever way you look at it, part of the "golden era" of motoring.

I couldn't agree more Dave, sort of the zenith of the mechanical era (just about 1980) before electronic control systems took over.

Whilst I was out walking Bob this afternoon (and before the rugby - well done to England) I bumped into a near neighbour in the next street, an interesting chap (a mechanic by trade) who always has half a dozen cars and bikes in various states of disassembly and repair on his drive/garden. He has an Austin A35 (about 1955 I should think) which Bob and I had a bit of a look at. It is a nice little car, but just a bit too old to be really usable or maintained easily. A good example would be the Rostyle wheels it has from a MG Midget - because the originals were damaged and aren't available at any sensible price. The car only does 50 MPH, drum brakes, no PAS and lights that are no longer really safe - so whilst it is a nice car it isn't really user (the owner does run it, but not much for the reasons above).

The RB comes from an era where cars are usable on modern roads, and generally parts can still be had (no just Volvo, but if it was a Ford or a Vauxhall I'd say the same.

... I agree - 1980 +/- about 5 years was a golden era in motoring.

:-)

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by Othen

I couldn't agree more Dave, sort of the zenith of the mechanical era (just about 1980) before electronic control systems took over.

Whilst I was out walking Bob this afternoon (and before the rugby - well done to England) I bumped into a near neighbour in the next street, an interesting chap (a mechanic by trade) who always has half a dozen cars and bikes in various states of disassembly and repair on his drive/garden. He has an Austin A35 (about 1955 I should think) which Bob and I had a bit of a look at. It is a nice little car, but just a bit too old to be really usable or maintained easily. A good example would be the Rostyle wheels it has from a MG Midget - because the originals were damaged and aren't available at any sensible price. The car only does 50 MPH, drum brakes, no PAS and lights that are no longer really safe - so whilst it is a nice car it isn't really user (the owner does run it, but not much for the reasons above).

The RB comes from an era where cars are usable on modern roads, and generally parts can still be had (no just Volvo, but if it was a Ford or a Vauxhall I'd say the same.

... I agree - 1980 +/- about 5 years was a golden era in motoring.

:-)

That A35 sounds interesting Alan - the back axle and gearbox from the Midget should fit i believe and the A+1275cc engine also drops in. Apparently later front suspension from (a Midget?) something else donates better suspension and disc brakes and a Corsa i believe can donate its electric PAS, the alternators can be easily upgraded/retrofitted in place of the dynamo and lights are easily upgraded with LED bulbs so they're considerably brighter than when Joe Lucas invented the dim-dip system!

http://mez.co.uk/lucas.html

That would all make it more than capable of keeping up with modern traffic and a very usable car.

Of course it would take the edge off the character of the A35 but most of it is just more modern versions of what it already has.

Funnily enough, many Fords and Vauxhalls used the same dizzy cap, rotor, condensor and breaker points as your RB originally did.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

That A35 sounds interesting Alan - the back axle and gearbox from the Midget should fit i believe and the A+1275cc engine also drops in. Apparently later front suspension from (a Midget?) something else donates better suspension and disc brakes and a Corsa i believe can donate its electric PAS, the alternators can be easily upgraded/retrofitted in place of the dynamo and lights are easily upgraded with LED bulbs so they're considerably brighter than when Joe Lucas invented the dim-dip system!

http://mez.co.uk/lucas.html

That would all make it more than capable of keeping up with modern traffic and a very usable car.

Of course it would take the edge off the character of the A35 but most of it is just more modern versions of what it already has.

Funnily enough, many Fords and Vauxhalls used the same dizzy cap, rotor, condensor and breaker points as your RB originally did.

I don’t know that my neighbour would be up for changing too much on the car, it looks to be in pretty original condition (a bit battered, probably needs a new driver’s side wing - I’m not sure that is going to be easy to find). It is an interesting car though, I’ll try to find time to discuss it again with my neighbour if I bump into him again. He was very knowledgable of Volvos and likes the RB (he had nktivpced it driving around).

[john.wigley]

Are you sure that it is an A35, Alan? They used the 948cc engine and were actually quite nippy. I had an A35 pick-up which cruised happily at 60 MPH and could top 70 at a push. The earlier A30s were fitted with the smaller 803cc engine and lower gear ratios which gave them more modest performance.

The two cars were outwardly similar; the most obvious difference being the A35's larger wraparound rear window over the A30's smaller flat one. Both the A and the larger B series engines were eminently tunable and, as 'L.S.' says, the cars can be easily retrofitted with larger variants. They were also surprisingly good in the snow, on account of their light weight and narrow tyres.

Regards, John.

[Laird Scooby]

I knew i'd seen it somewhere, pgs 68-70 of the December 2020 issue of Practical Classics, a 3 page article on the A35 including a small esction on how to improve it, much of which i suggested above.

The current issue is Jan 2021 so no good looking for it on the magazine shelves of your local emporium, next issue is due out around 19th of this month and will be Feb 2021.

Anyway, i'll take some pics of the pages if anybody is interested?

[Othen]

Originally Posted by john.wigley

Are you sure that it is an A35, Alan? They used the 948cc engine and were actually quite nippy. I had an A35 pick-up which cruised happily at 60 MPH and could top 70 at a push. The earlier A30s were fitted with the smaller 803cc engine and lower gear ratios which gave them more modest performance.

The two cars were outwardly similar; the most obvious difference being the A35's larger wraparound rear window over the A30's smaller flat one. Both the A and the larger B series engines were eminently tunable and, as 'L.S.' says, the cars can be easily retrofitted with larger variants. They were also surprisingly good in the snow, on account of their light weight and narrow tyres.

Regards, John.

Good morn John,

The short answer is: no, I am not sure at all, in fact I'd forgotten about the A30 and just jumped to the conclusion it was an A35. The next time I'm passing that way with Bob I'll have a closer look (in particular at the back window). Bob was itching to get on with his walk when we stopped to chat with my neighbour yesterday, so we didn't get much of a chance to chat about cars.

I got the feeling it was a very long term project from the chap - but he seemed very knowledgeable (was a professional mechanic, I think on vans and commercials).

Alan

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

I knew i'd seen it somewhere, pgs 68-70 of the December 2020 issue of Practical Classics, a 3 page article on the A35 including a small esction on how to improve it, much of which i suggested above.

The current issue is Jan 2021 so no good looking for it on the magazine shelves of your local emporium, next issue is due out around 19th of this month and will be Feb 2021.

Anyway, i'll take some pics of the pages if anybody is interested?

... as I said to John, it could well be an A30. Bob normally walk that way in the afternoons, so if I remember today I'll have a closer look and maybe take a photo. Perhaps my neighbour will be around, in which case Bob may let me linger for a chat about cars (but Bob isn't interested in cars, only walks, chasing a ball and food).

:-)

[Dippydog]

Another way to tell the difference[as long as it's not been replaced]is the surround of the radiator grille the A30 had a chrome surround where the A35 was painted.

[john.wigley]

Originally Posted by Dippydog

Another way to tell the difference[as long as it's not been replaced]is the surround of the radiator grille the A30 had a chrome surround where the A35 was painted.

There were a number of detail differences, 'D.D.'; the earlier cars also had trafficators and the later ones flashers (although many were later retrofitted).

Alan makes some very good points regarding lights, braking, etc. It does indicate just how far we have come with equipment levels and our expectations of cars. Having said that the A30/35 was a huge advance over earlier cars.

Take lights: They had a 12V system and were fitted with the standard Lucas 7" dia units, which, while not brilliant, were both easily upgraded and light years better than the 6V pre-focus bulbs of the contemporary Ford Popular. I owned both and know which I would prefer.

Brakes: The A30/35 employed a hydro-mechanical system while the Ford was rod operated. Yes, they were both drums not discs, but that did not greatly affect their retardation from the modest speeds of the day, only made them more prone to 'fade' when used continuously on long descents.

Steering: We've become used to (over) servoed PS systems. Cars like the A30/35 did not need it because of their light weight and narrow tyres, so one less unnecessary complication avoided. It is the wide tyres of today that make PS an attractive feature. Volvo content: Neither our 1 series nor our early 2 series cars were so fitted and were not unpleasant to drive. Au contraire, the steering on my 245 GLT with PS felt distinctly 'light'.

Wipers: The Ford had a single vacuum powered device that slowed down or stopped when you needed it most, when under WOT when overtaking, for example. The Austin had both driver and passenger side wipers which were electrically powered.

I could go on, but those are the things that stick in my mind - I'm sure that there were others that others may recall. I think Alan summed it up nicely when he said that his R.B. hit the sweet spot in car design. It has the power, safety and most creature comforts that we have come to expect, while avoiding the (unnecessary) over complication of more recent machinery. Long may it remain so.

Regards, John.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by john.wigley

There were a number of detail differences, 'D.D.'; the earlier cars also had trafficators and the later ones flashers (although many were later retrofitted).

Alan makes some very good points regarding lights, braking, etc. It does indicate just how far we have come with equipment levels and our expectations of cars. Having said that the A30/35 was a huge advance over earlier cars.

Take lights: They had a 12V system and were fitted with the standard Lucas 7" dia units, which, while not brilliant, were both easily upgraded and light years better than the 6V pre-focus bulbs of the contemporary Ford Popular. I owned both and know which I would prefer.

Brakes: The A30/35 employed a hydro-mechanical system while the Ford was rod operated. Yes, they were both drums not discs, but that did not greatly affect their retardation from the modest speeds of the day, only made them more prone to 'fade' when used continuously on long descents.

Steering: We've become used to (over) servoed PS systems. Cars like the A30/35 did not need it because of their light weight and narrow tyres, so one less unnecessary complication avoided. It is the wide tyres of today that make PS an attractive feature. Volvo content: Neither our 1 series nor our early 2 series cars were so fitted and were not unpleasant to drive. Au contraire, the steering on my 245 GLT with PS felt distinctly 'light'.

Wipers: The Ford had a single vacuum powered device that slowed down or stopped when you needed it most, when under WOT when overtaking, for example. The Austin had both driver and passenger side wipers which were electrically powered.

I could go on, but those are the things that stick in my mind - I'm sure that there were others that others may recall. I think Alan summed it up nicely when he said that his R.B. hit the sweet spot in car design. It has the power, safety and most creature comforts that we have come to expect, while avoiding the (unnecessary) over complication of more recent machinery. Long may it remain so.

Regards, John.

Hi John,

The A30/A35 was not there when Bob and I walked past today, so the owner must have been out using it, which is good to see.

That was very kind what you said about the RB being in the sweet spot for car design, as far as running older vehicles is concerned. As you will know, my view is that earlier cars would lack a bit (drum brakes and so on) to be practical, whilst from the mid-1980s manufacturers started filling their cars with electronics that will (IMHO) end up being their Achilles heel. That is why I targeted the RB's era - and it will have the added advantage of being MoT exempt and tax exempt in 4 months time.

From my own perspective - I wanted an older car that I could work on, get bits for easily, improve a bit with readily available parts, wasn't too expensive to buy, drove more or less like a modern car, could keep up with traffic and was fairly safe, but without having any unnecessary electronics (the quartz clock is okay) - a 1980 Volvo 244 seemed to be the best compromise. There would have been are other cars that would have fitted the bill, but I'm happy the RB worked best for me.

We all like our older Volvos (otherwise we would not be here in the 200 series section) - probably for much the same reasons as I do.

:-)