|
700/900 Series General Forum for the Volvo 740, 760, 780, 940, 960 & S/V90 cars |
Information |
|
960 2.5 m90Views : 1317 Replies : 23Users Viewing This Thread : |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Aug 31st, 2018, 14:20 | #1 |
Senior Member
Last Online: Apr 16th, 2024 22:22
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Glasgow
|
960 2.5 m90
I've got a 97 3.0 960 auto, it's led a tough life and Ive been planning a resto over the winter, thing is I started to cost up what needs done and its going to cost a small fortune, bushes for the rear end are nearly £900 alone! I had planned to buy a spares car for panels and trim etc and saw one last night, thing is I have realised it would make more sense to improve the doner car than save mine, it's in much better condition.
The doner is a 2.5 manual so I figured even better, bin the 2.5 and fit my 3.0, thing is I was completely underwhelmed on the test drive, it was completely gutless and after driving my auto for 6 years it seemed very unrefined. Manuals are obviously quite sought after however am I missing something, I thought a manuel 3.0 would be the best of both worlds but now I am not so sure. So, do I stick with the auto box in mine or convert the manual car to 3.0,has anyone else this swap, any advise would be welcome! |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to monty400k For This Useful Post: |
Aug 31st, 2018, 14:23 | #2 |
Senior Member
Last Online: Mar 25th, 2022 06:54
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Southampton
|
Build your car to suit and sell the spares leftover to hopefully break even?
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to LPTJoe For This Useful Post: |
Aug 31st, 2018, 15:16 | #3 |
Senior Member
Last Online: Apr 16th, 2024 22:22
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Glasgow
|
I suppose the point I am making is, considering how rare manual 960s are should I ditch the auto box because ultimately a 3.0 manual will be better car or not, money isn't too much of an issue, just want to ensure its spent on the right base, I reckon it would take 3k to get mine restored, the manual car would cost half that
|
Aug 31st, 2018, 17:05 | #4 |
Member at Large
Last Online: Sep 8th, 2019 11:46
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Southampton
|
How well looked after is the 2.5 engine - may need a service to give you back what little horses they had from stock.
I have a 2.5 960 manual, and ALL the power is at the top end. They start to actually pull at 4k rpm. Can't imagine that engine with an auto... Just my experience from a sample of 1 PP |
Sep 1st, 2018, 01:13 | #5 |
Senior Member
Last Online: Apr 16th, 2024 22:22
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Glasgow
|
Missing the point, I should have made it simpler, 3.0 auto or 3.0 manual, discuss
|
Sep 1st, 2018, 07:45 | #6 | |
Premier Member
Last Online: Feb 16th, 2024 13:43
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Na
|
Quote:
Do you like automatics or manuals, that’s all that really matters. It’s not important what you read, it’s what you want as it’s your car. I would expect a 3.0 auto to be smoother than a 2.5 manual, I think that’s the whole point. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to XC90Mk1 For This Useful Post: |
Sep 1st, 2018, 11:18 | #7 | |
Premier Member
Last Online: Yesterday 12:22
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Lakenheath
|
Quote:
Would it not be a better idea to find yourself another 3.0 auto 960 and keep your current car as the spares mule?
__________________
Cheers Dave Next Door to Top-Gun with a Honda CR-V & S Type Jag Volvo gone but not forgotten........ |
|
Sep 1st, 2018, 11:58 | #8 | |
Senior Member
Last Online: Apr 16th, 2024 22:22
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Glasgow
|
Quote:
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to monty400k For This Useful Post: |
Sep 1st, 2018, 13:26 | #9 |
Member at Large
Last Online: Sep 8th, 2019 11:46
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Southampton
|
Ah, got you...
I think an early 3.0 would suite a manual - earlier cams come 'on' at much higher revs which an auto wouldnt let you access without a shift override. Late 3.0 more suited to an auto with their lazy low end torque delivery. Other thing to consider is the state of the manual car you are testing. if the fluid hasn't been changed in a while and the shift bushes and g'box mounts are knackered it is a horrible experience. Each one of those i addressed made it better and better. Have yon considered a keeping your 3.0 as a auto and adding paddle shifts to give you manual shifting? PP |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ThePurplePanther For This Useful Post: |
Sep 4th, 2018, 14:30 | #10 |
Grumpy git born too late!
Last Online: Mar 20th, 2024 01:04
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Between Derby & Nottingham
|
I currently drive a 2.5 manual and it's rather sluggish until you get to 4k RPM like TPP said (then really gets a shift on!)
I previously owned an S90 with the 3.0 (detuned 180bhp) with 4 speed slushbox. That got going at around 3.5k RPM, especially in "Sport" mode. Having also owned a 940 Turbo (which I adored), I miss the low-down power/torque delivery from a turbo engine (which lit up between 2k - 4.5k) If I were you, I'd fit the M90 to have a 3.0 manual, then fit a turbo to make it a 960T: best of both (and also what I plan to do soon!) Cheers
__________________
1997 965 2.5 SE Manual 1996 944 Classic 2.3 LPT - SOLD/BROKEN/SCRAPPED 1997 S90 3.0 - SOLD to doingitsideways 2021 Škoda Octavia Estate L iV PHEV (Company) |
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jonnyf90 For This Useful Post: |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|