Water from the exhaust on cold days…what’s that all about?

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by griston64

Not being used much will also be a major factor as the condensation will just sit and rot exhaust from the inside

That's true as well Mark. That said i knew an Astra once that was bought my a friend of mine, i did the work to get it through an MoT and took it for that MoT and it was surprisingly good underneath for the year.

Within about a week of him starting to use it, he was pulled over for driving the wrong way up a one-way street and breathalysed.
Once the car was recovered, it was parked on his mums front lawn - i advised him to move it onto her drive but he thought it would be fine there.

A year later he asked me to take it for MoT as he was getting his licence back again. On the ramps it was plain to see the grass hadn't been kind to the car!

On a slightly different note, i know someone who finds the lowest point in the exhaust system and drills a 3mm or 1/8" hole through the silencer at that point to act as a drain. Still passes the MoT as the leak isn't excessive but it keeps the inside of the silencer dry by draining it out.

[john.wigley]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

That's true as well Mark. That said i knew an Astra once that was bought my a friend of mine, i did the work to get it through an MoT and took it for that MoT and it was surprisingly good underneath for the year.

Within about a week of him starting to use it, he was pulled over for driving the wrong way up a one-way street and breathalysed.
Once the car was recovered, it was parked on his mums front lawn - i advised him to move it onto her drive but he thought it would be fine there.

A year later he asked me to take it for MoT as he was getting his licence back again. On the ramps it was plain to see the grass hadn't been kind to the car!

On a slightly different note, i know someone who finds the lowest point in the exhaust system and drills a 3mm or 1/8" hole through the silencer at that point to act as a drain. Still passes the MoT as the leak isn't excessive but it keeps the inside of the silencer dry by draining it out.

Having slept on my earlier post 'L.S.', I was just about to post the same tip, should 'AHKV' prefer not to go down the stainless route. From experience, the drain is much better than allowing condensation to rot out the system from the inside, and it can always be temporarily plugged using a self-tapper should MOT time be a concern.

Regards, John.

[AllHailKingVolvo]

Thanks all, your advice is much appreciated!

The exhaust is always dry after a run and the car uses no coolant, so all seems to be well. I’ll broach the idea of a stainless system with my wife (for it’s her car) once Christmas is done and dusted. I’d like to go stainless but if budget doesn’t allow, I’ll drill a drain hole as suggested.

I am so impressed with the car in general. It’s a really great example of a mid-period, pre-facelift 740. It had been laid up for six months or so when we bought it, so everything was a bit creaky and dry. New belts all round and a proper brake service were required, hinges and catches needed lubrication, tyres replacing and whatnot, but now it’s all up together it’s a beauty.

Still a few bits on the to-do list, as always with these cars, but that’s part of the fun!

I’m still dialling in the idle and cold start setup, and learning the wiles of the K-Jet, but it’s nearly there. A bottle of Liqui Moly injector cleaner has helped, but I think eventually I will need to replace the injectors. Thankfully a simple job on these cars!

It goes very well, the M47 in it is the smoothest example I’ve owned, and the real scoop is that it whips my petrol 940 on fuel economy. Owing to my stepsons’ additional needs, we have a very long school run to do (3hrs in total every day) and it was costing us £115 a week in fuel in my petrol 940. The 740 is doing the same miles for £87, which is somewhat unexpected! Easily the least thirsty petrol Volvo we’ve owned.

My old 740 saloon with B200F, cat etc was nowhere near that frugal, even with the cat gutted, and nowhere near as sprightly. Very interesting to see the differences between the K and LH Jetronic systems and the cams/heads fitted to the different motors.

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by AllHailKingVolvo

It goes very well, the M47 in it is the smoothest example I’ve owned, and the real scoop is that it whips my petrol 940 on fuel economy. Owing to my stepsons’ additional needs, we have a very long school run to do (3hrs in total every day) and it was costing us £115 a week in fuel in my petrol 940. The 740 is doing the same miles for £87, which is somewhat unexpected! Easily the least thirsty petrol Volvo we’ve owned.

My old 740 saloon with B200F, cat etc was nowhere near that frugal, even with the cat gutted, and nowhere near as sprightly. Very interesting to see the differences between the K and LH Jetronic systems and the cams/heads fitted to the different motors.

That bears out what i've always maintained Phil that a n/asp engine will give better economy than a turbo unit developing the same power.
Depending on the source, power figures for the B230E vary from 131-135bhp, usually most quote 133bhp. The B230FK is 135bhp but the turbo only makes a big difference if you're "enthusiastic" on the loud pedal. Before that when it's not really on boost, it's just a low compression n/asp engine so isn't as lively for the same amount of fuel as a high compression n/asp.

Good to hear it's performing as a proper Volvo should though!

[griston64]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

That bears out what i've always maintained Phil that a n/asp engine will give better economy than a turbo unit developing the same power.
Depending on the source, power figures for the B230E vary from 131-135bhp, usually most quote 133bhp. The B230FK is 135bhp but the turbo only makes a big difference if you're "enthusiastic" on the loud pedal. Before that when it's not really on boost, it's just a low compression n/asp engine so isn't as lively for the same amount of fuel as a high compression n/asp.

Good to hear it's performing as a proper Volvo should though!

B200E is 121 bhp. 0-60 13 secs and top speed 109.....I'd call that stately

B200F is 110bhp with a 0-60 of 13 secs but a massive..... (wait for it ) top speed of 112. I would imagine to get to that top speed you would need to set off fortnight in advance. Luke had a drive in my B200F and said words to that effect

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by griston64

B200E is 121 bhp. 0-60 13 secs and top speed 109.....I'd call that stately

B200F is 110bhp with a 0-60 of 13 secs but a massive..... (wait for it ) top speed of 112. I would imagine to get to that top speed you would need to set off fortnight in advance. Luke had a drive in my B200F and said words to that effect

I was under the impression "Mrs Phils" was a B230E Mark - could explain why there's a difference though, the lower powered cars (of any make) always seemed to perform better on K-Jet than L/LE/LH-Jet, especially when Laambda sensors got involved!

Going on your figures, the B200E is 10% more powerful than the B200F, i daresay Volvo geared the B200E slightly higher than the F to take advantage of the "extra" power. Perhaps a 3.91:1 diff instead of a 4.1:1 diff.

[griston64]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

I was under the impression "Mrs Phils" was a B230E Mark - could explain why there's a difference though, the lower powered cars (of any make) always seemed to perform better on K-Jet than L/LE/LH-Jet, especially when Laambda sensors got involved!

Going on your figures, the B200E is 10% more powerful than the B200F, i daresay Volvo geared the B200E slightly higher than the F to take advantage of the "extra" power. Perhaps a 3.91:1 diff instead of a 4.1:1 diff.

It is 10% more powerful but it's no faster 0-60 and it's a slower top speed

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by griston64

It is 10% more powerful but it's no faster 0-60 and it's a slower top speed

That's why i think they may have used a 3.91:1 diff instead of a 4.1:1 Mark. You know what Volvo are like for using different diff ratios!

[Familyman 90]

Originally Posted by griston64

It is 10% more powerful but it's no faster 0-60 and it's a slower top speed

Is there any difference in-gear?

[AllHailKingVolvo]

Interesting stuff, thanks gents!

I found my B200F cars (240 Torslanda manual, 740 estate X2 automatic, 740 saloon manual) were all slower-especially the autos!-than the B200E, or at least felt that way. The 240 was the sprightliest, but had had an A cam fitted at some point so wasn’t quite on an even playing field!

It’s very interesting that the 200E is more powerful but has an identical 0-60 and lower top speed. I’m not sure where it’s using it’s horses! It definitely feels punchier but I can’t quite quantify where. My D24 engined car for example is adequate around town but really shines on the motorway-it has acceleration from 60-85 that pins you into the seat, but only in fifth. The B200E doesn’t seem to have one particular hotspot in the powerband, in fact if anything second can feel a bit flat when pulling away on an incline, but it generally feels peppy, and will only get better as I fettle it further (hopefully!).