240 General: New (to me) 1980 Volvo 244

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

Maybe but how many have sold at those prices Alan? Change your search criteria on ebay to only show completed items and see what they really sold for.

It's all well and good seeing what people are asking but i prefer to see what they actually sold for.

Well I know that of course Dave, which is why I said: ‘even at a third of that I'd still be at my break even point’.

The point is that the CI system would be best broken up into components if I’m not going to use it.

Even if the RB sells this month I still might use the B230 motor and AW71 transmission in something else.

:-)

[BicycleBoy]

K-jetronic reallly is misunderstood, particularly the durability and repairability of the components involved.

Here's an informative video from back in the day, VHS tape distortion, received pronunciation and all...

https://youtu.be/a4fJAfXYxWk

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by BicycleBoy

K-jetronic reallly is misunderstood, particularly the durability and repairability of the components involved.

Here's an informative video from back in the day, VHS tape distortion, received pronunciation and all...

https://youtu.be/a4fJAfXYxWk

Seem to recall seeing that video many moons ago, fairly sure it was one of the Bosch videos. All good stuff, the K-Jet was definitely a unique system in its simplicity and reliability. It rivals or betters the old skool diseasel for simplicity and reliability, if not betters it as there are no glow plugs to worry about.

The trouble is, people became obsessed with computers as a concept and when Bosch started singing about how many computers they used in their EFi, the K-Jet was unceremoniously dumped, possibly because aftermarket sales were slow (due to the reliability) and because they could foresee plenty of aftermarket sales for EFi including ECUs and many sensors.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by BicycleBoy

K-jetronic reallly is misunderstood, particularly the durability and repairability of the components involved.

Here's an informative video from back in the day, VHS tape distortion, received pronunciation and all...

https://youtu.be/a4fJAfXYxWk

My observation (as something of an outsider) is that opinion about the K-Jetronic CI system is split into two camps: those who believe it to be simple and reliable , and those who do not. The YouTube video has rather convinced me that it is far from simple and full of potential points of failure.

Another observation (again, as an outsider) is that I read many threads about components of the CI system failing in these pages, but I can only remember one (Bob from Dublin's slow running adjuster screw falling out - and him finding it again in Tesco's car park a week later) of a carburettor failure.

A third observation is that there seems to be a thriving market in second-hand and reconditioned components for the CI system, whereas apart from the odd diaphragm I don't see the same with carburettors.

I don't have to decide yet (I'm fortunate in having at least a month before I may (or may not) start the B230/AW71 transplant), but my observations are bringing me to the conclusion that trying to integrate the CI system into a motor car not built for it would be needlessly difficult. I also conclude there there will always be people out there that need a replacement thermo-time switch, auxiliary air valve or warm-up valve.

Don't get me wrong: I like the idea of people running complex, high pressure fuel injection systems on their oldish motor cars - I may well have some spare parts to sell them one day :-)

Another lovely day in paradise.

Alan

[Laird Scooby]

It's simpler than a carb Alan! With fewer moving parts it is inherently more reliable, those who condemn it as unreliable generally have no concept of how it works and the reason their car has broken down is because they've been meddling in things they shouldn't.

As previously mentioned, adding it to your 240 would be fairly easy and it was after all designed, as was the L-Jetronic as being a retrofit system by Bosch meaning it can easily be fitted to cars that didn't have it.

Also there is a much more prosaic reason that you don't see so many carb bits advertised - there aren't that many cars around now with carbs and those that are, generally have a generic set of spares - the market has already been cornered on these by the "big boys" and not many people these days know what does what in a carb.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

It's simpler than a carb Alan! With fewer moving parts it is inherently more reliable, those who condemn it as unreliable generally have no concept of how it works and the reason their car has broken down is because they've been meddling in things they shouldn't.

As previously mentioned, adding it to your 240 would be fairly easy and it was after all designed, as was the L-Jetronic as being a retrofit system by Bosch meaning it can easily be fitted to cars that didn't have it.

Also there is a much more prosaic reason that you don't see so many carb bits advertised - there aren't that many cars around now with carbs and those that are, generally have a generic set of spares - the market has already been cornered on these by the "big boys" and not many people these days know what does what in a carb.

Well, we will just have to agree to disagree about all those points. There is no way I'll be convinced a system with 11 separate components (LP pump its wiring and return line, HP pump with its wiring and control, accumulator, fuel distribution meter, air flow meter, injectors, warm up valve, auxiliary air valve, cold start valve and thermo-time switch) is simpler that one with just three (mechanical fuel pump, anti-dieseling valve and carburettor).

I completely disagree that adding the CI system to the RB would be simple. I had a look at it today: the RB doesn't have a return fuel line or anywhere for it to go back into the petrol tank, it doesn't have a LP pump (apart from the mechanical pump - and the CI system negates the use of that) or any wiring, relay or control for one, it has no HP pump or any wiring/relay/control and the engine bay wiring loom doesn't accommodate any of those CI system components that require power or the ability to send a signal somewhere else (I'm sure about that - I made the wiring loom myself).

The reason not many carburettor replacement parts are advertised is (I believe) because there are very few soft components prone to wear: in the case of the 175 CDUS just the diaphragm and perhaps a few gaskets and O rings (that can either be made or are generic).

Let's just agree to disagree then.

Another lovely day in paradise.

Alan

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by Othen

Well, we will just have to agree to disagree about all those points. There is no way I'll be convinced a system with 11 separate components (LP pump its wiring and return line, HP pump with its wiring and control, accumulator, fuel distribution meter, air flow meter, injectors, warm up valve, auxiliary air valve, cold start valve and thermo-time switch) is simpler that one with just three (mechanical fuel pump, anti-dieseling valve and carburettor).

I completely disagree that adding the CI system to the RB would be simple. I had a look at it today: the RB doesn't have a return fuel line or anywhere for it to go back into the petrol tank, it doesn't have a LP pump (apart from the mechanical pump - and the CI system negates the use of that) or any wiring, relay or control for one, it has no HP pump or any wiring/relay/control and the engine bay wiring loom doesn't accommodate any of those CI system components that require power or the ability to send a signal somewhere else (I'm sure about that - I made the wiring loom myself).

The reason not many carburettor replacement parts are advertised is (I believe) because there are very few soft components prone to wear: in the case of the 175 CDUS just the diaphragm and perhaps a few gaskets and O rings (that can either be made or are generic).

Let's just agree to disagree then.

Another lovely day in paradise.

Alan

That's not a fair comparison Alan, there are many components in the carburettor (a complete fuel system) that can fail, not to mention there is NO air flow meter in a K-Jet system!

That leaves only 10 components going by your list and i'm pretty sure i could find 10 wearing items in a carb that will all give trouble at some point without trying too hard.

In a sidedraught Constant Depression carb such as the Pierbug, you have a diaphragm which can wear and sprout pinholes. Then there is the damper piston and rod, needle, cold start enrichment device, float, float needle valve and its seal, throttle butterfly spindle seals, anti-run-on/dieseling valve - that's 10 without trying.

If you ask the owner of the donor vehicle, you may find he has the loom that should just plug in for the fuel pumps, i'm not sure on the 240 series but on the 740 i believe the sender unit also supports the in-tank (LP) pump and provides the return line into the tank as well as the low pressure high flow output from the in-tank pump.

Many of the components you've cited as being separate on the K-Jet are in fact integral with the fuel distributor so listing the various components that are prone to failure in carbs is a more fair comparison.

There are easy ways to pick up feeds for the electric pumps and also provide cut offs for them in the event of an impact, engine stalling etc and the cold start injector/thermotime switch take their feed from the starter exciter feed so the CSI only operates for a maximum of 8 secs (if memory serves) under a certain temperature when the engine is in fact cranking. Other than that, it's not used or needed.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

That's not a fair comparison Alan, there are many components in the carburettor (a complete fuel system) that can fail, not to mention there is NO air flow meter in a K-Jet system!

That leaves only 10 components going by your list and i'm pretty sure i could find 10 wearing items in a carb that will all give trouble at some point without trying too hard.

In a sidedraught Constant Depression carb such as the Pierbug, you have a diaphragm which can wear and sprout pinholes. Then there is the damper piston and rod, needle, cold start enrichment device, float, float needle valve and its seal, throttle butterfly spindle seals, anti-run-on/dieseling valve - that's 10 without trying.

If you ask the owner of the donor vehicle, you may find he has the loom that should just plug in for the fuel pumps, i'm not sure on the 240 series but on the 740 i believe the sender unit also supports the in-tank (LP) pump and provides the return line into the tank as well as the low pressure high flow output from the in-tank pump.

Many of the components you've cited as being separate on the K-Jet are in fact integral with the fuel distributor so listing the various components that are prone to failure in carbs is a more fair comparison.

There are easy ways to pick up feeds for the electric pumps and also provide cut offs for them in the event of an impact, engine stalling etc and the cold start injector/thermotime switch take their feed from the starter exciter feed so the CSI only operates for a maximum of 8 secs (if memory serves) under a certain temperature when the engine is in fact cranking. Other than that, it's not used or needed.

Thanks Dave - but as you know I don't agree. Let's leave it there.

There is a chap coming all the way from Manchester to look at the RB tomorrow - Eeeeek!

Alan

PS. the good thing is I don't need to negotiate on price - not only is there a lot of interest, but I don't need to sell :-)

[360beast]

If the RB sells that B230 would look lovely sat in the engine bay of GAM

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by 360beast

If the RB sells that B230 would look lovely sat in the engine bay of GAM

........... especially running K-Jet.................