I'm sort of thinking of making my 164 into a "164 super E".
I have plenty of D-jet stuff including manifolds, etc.
Any of you guys ever put MegaSquirt on a B30? How did it go?
Very expensive?
Any advice most gratefully appreciated!
--
George Downs Bartlesville, Heart of the USA!

I would also consider MicroSquirt, which is a cut down version of MegaSquirt. It is ideal for stock engines where you realised you are not going to spend heaps of money on blueprinting and all that kind of stuff, or you do not need 8 (12?) injector outputs. The only thing that's missing from MicroSquirt is idle speed control (i.e. PWM output), it only has an idle-up output to increase idle speed rather than regulate it. It runs the same software as the latest MegaSquirt, so fuel control is the same. They just removed some features that many people do not need.

http://www.microsquirt.info

Dang!
I always thought that after the M-41 and p/s conversion done to my 74, my job is done and I'll stop there and enjoy the car. You guys got me thinking of FI's now. I was happy with my ZS carb all these while. I guess the p/s won't be the last project on my 144!
--
...and the bricks keep on rolling

The motivation for many to MS their car is because once you push the turbo boost out of the realm of the reasonable, the stock computers (even Turbo computers) can't react adequately. Combined with radical changes to the hardware of the motor, mostly injectors a lot larger than original (to keep up with the increased air volume going into the motor).

For a reasonably stock normally aspirated motor, the advantages gained by going to MS are much smaller. The stock fuel systems (even carbs) just weren't *that* bad at doing their jobs. Of course, you can add O2 sensor feedback (wide or narrow band), add intricately configurable fuel and spark maps. But all in all, you are talking about incremental gains in HP and efficiency, assuming you do a good job of tuning.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic 245 + turbo

For the most part, I'd agree with you John. MS is good when you surpass the capabilities of the existing system.

However...I also think it is so much more current than the D-jet system in terms of control that one can only improve by going that direction. The definition is much more precise. I can only assume the fuel metering is much more precise, even with the stock injectors. One can run much smaller injectors without upsetting the apple cart. And, it's all programmable so you can tell it when and where to lean things out and when and where to pull out timing.

At risk of beating the proverbial dead horse, the strongest evidence I have is in my own situation with my 122. The otherwise stock B20E with unknown mileage and a header gets me between 35 and 40 mpg on the highway, and that's not just putting along at or below the speed limit. That't pushing along at 70+ mph...

Dale

And your thing has pretty high gearing too with those small tires on it...

Michael Towery's results with his 244 show that there is lots to be gained even on a system that's not too far from stock. Flat torque curve, and peak numbers that were around higher than before at the wheels. When going from 110-125whp, that's pretty decent. Not to mention the massive, flat torque curve, with a supposedly hot cam.
--
Kyle - 142, 145, and 244! - Oregon Volvo Tuners?

There is no ways one can compare D-Jet to MS. D-Jet is an open loop system with no feedback, similar to the stock carburettors. Actually limited because there are no tuning curves on D-Jet while with carburettors at least you can fit different profile needles! MS on the other hand uses an O2 sensor to dynamically tune itself.

Technically speaking D-Jet has more accurate computing than MS, because D-Jet is an analogue computer not a digital computer. But MS gives you precise and repeatable tuning of non-linear curves. On the same note, K-Jet was the most accurate FI ever being a mechanical analogue computer.

I don't mind the old D-Jet system, the MPS is adjustable three ways & the whole thing was fairly reliable & easy to fix. Downside is that it's only capable of feeding an extra 20% horsepower.

I bought a '74 wagon for $300 about 10 years ago & fitted it's K-Jet to my '71. During the last decade the only thing I've done to it was replace a noisy fuel pump. When it eventually dies, I'll likely put the D-Jet parts on it & convert it to MS. I like the idea of O2 feedback being able to adjust the mixture to suit a tank full of poor gas.

On the same note, K-Jet was the most accurate FI ever being a mechanical analogue computer.

I don't think accuracy is all that important for fuel delivery, it's a distant 3rd compared to spark & cam timing. Where injection pays dividends is it provides perfect fuel atomization everywhere from idle to the redline & you can use a tunnel ram manifold with it which is what most injection manifolds are.

I think you are confusing theory and practice there! ;)

And certainly, I don't mean to squelch the idea of MS'ing a B30, just doing some expectation management. I was going to MS my normally aspirated PV motor too, just to make tuning easier (DCOE's are arcane and expensive to tune). But then I found out a D-Jet manifold doesn't fit in a PV engine bay. Then I looked at the price of DCOE-style throttle bodies. And decided that for the price, the distributor and carbs work 'good enough'.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic 245 + turbo

In a PV I would also have gone for carbs due to mechanical constraints.

But you are right, my engineering degree that I've obtained at the top university in South Africa is too much theory for my 20 years of electronic design experience, since I am only working at one of the 10 largest exporting electronics manufacturers in New Zealand, designing electric fence energizers, scales, and milk meters which are sold worldwide (www.tru-test.co.nz). Theory must have gone to my head...

Not a personal attack, just making the point that when it comes to the way MS and other EFI works I know what I'm talking about. I can also tell you where MS has reliability design faults.

I would go for K-Jet if it was not for my electronics interest. K-Jet was dropped by vehicle manufacturers because adding emissions controls became too complicated, and throttle response was slow(er). Electronic parts also became much cheaper than those heavy metal parts.

You should be able to mod D-Jet control units. There's some Jag guys in the UK who say they can change the VE curve at 4 places & they are rather simple looking on the inside. I'll dig up a schematic.

I've got the schematic...

I'm lead to believe that each D-Jet control unit is pretty much the same except for the daughter card. Unfortuneately, I only have 6-cylinder boxes which are all the same part number.

You should put some 45's on the PV & see how fast it goes ;)

I may at some point. I just got the 40's and manifold and linkage for such a good price ($300-ish shipped). And they are already a lot better than the SU's ever were. Currently the spare car modding cash is going to the 245, but it's about done as far as things I want to do to it.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic 245 + turbo

Currently the spare car modding cash is going to the 245

Nooo! spend it on the car with a decent engine. :)

Eh - the 245 is quicker than the PV is at this point, despite carrying around 800 more pounds.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic 245 + turbo

Those little 40's would be holding it back from 2000rpm & up.

Why? If you want fuel injection, my 1975 has D-jet, and you could buy the whole car for almost the same price :)
It starts every time now, the cold start is working, and the plugs are white. The compression is so good, it pings on 87 octane gas! Need to get 89 octane, the manual states 91!!! The tranny still stalls the engine when going into reverse, but only when ice cold, once it is warm - no problem. There is still a slow leak under the tranny, but it only leaks when cold? Interesting how Volvo mated cast iron and aluminum parts.
Thanks, George et al for getting this wonderful machine back on the road. The butt warmer feels good on these 1991 cloth seats.

Klaus
--
1975 164E running? 1995 854T sweet 1998 V70 R work horse

This is the car I've had since 1971, taught the kids to drive in (heck,
RAISED them in, and a couple grandkids too!) so it is pretty dear to my
hort. I would like to get better performance and was thinking of going
to D-jet but since it is originally carbureted it would be kind of a pain
to run all the wires, etc. (I do have a complete harness though.)
(Far as that goes, I also have a complete D-jet engine, the whole enchilada!)
That would bring it up about 30 horsepower (175 vs 145) and with a decent cam
and some porting (which it already has) maybe another 10 or 20. And maybe
without making the gas mileage worse than it already is.

But maybe I oughta just go with D-jet. I already do have all that stuff.
--
George Downs Bartlesville, Heart of the USA!

If you have all the D-Jet pieces, put them on first. If you have a stock head & exhaust you'll likely find no benefit from Megasquirt.

They have/will select a different connector for the ECU, because the D-connector is a pain to wire up with heavy gauge wire. But you also get D-connectors with crimp contacts which you first fit to the wires and then press into the connector shell, which would make it much easier (if you have a crimping tool).

http://1800philes.com/mkit2.html

Very nice! Brand spanking new harness with all the proper fittings!

I was going to mention that a very slick installation could be done utilizing the stock D-Jet wiring harness. Just get a dead old D-Jet computer and yank out it's plug. Then make a small adapter harness with the MS plug on one end, the D-Jet computer plug on the other, and wires going between as needed. You could probably get most of the input and output you needed. But then the issue is the 35 year old wiring, which is probably the root of many a D-Jet car's woes.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic 245 + turbo

Many thanks! I'm checking with them.
--
George Downs Bartlesville, Heart of the USA!

Not yet, but please keep me/us updated with any news. I will be doing my B20B, which involves a bit more work, but first will pull the engine and replace seals and stuff, but first get an engine lift and stand...

So is your B30 carbed, D-jet, or K-jet? D-jet would be the simplest to change over, already having the electronic injectors. You can also fit other Bosch injectors in place of the original hard to find/expensive ones, keeping in mind that the d-jet used a low fuel pressure (thus only cheap hose clamps needed).

If you need any electronic advice, just ask. I am an electronic engineer at one of the top 10 exporting manufacturers in New Zealand.

By the way, in the mid 80's there was a Holden and Nissan (or Mitsubishi?) that used an engine with injectors virtually identical to Volvo D-jet. Different Bosch part numbers, but interchangeable and a lot cheaper being a Japanese engine. Think it was an RB30 engine or something, maybe RB28. Much easier to find in a good condition or even new!

Sorry to hijack the thread George, but Niel, are you still restoring your 73 164 or parting it out? I am looking for a Right-hand-drive working condition power steering unit for my 74 144. With age catching up, my mom (and me...)has been having difficulty parking the car in town. We also got the car new in 74, and she refuses to drive anything but the 144 after driving it for the past 32 years, so getting a 240 or any other car with a p/s already there is out of the question.

Or maybe you could point me into the right direction if I can get one from Australia. I am in Malaysia, so shipping cost should be quite OK either from Australia or NZ. Thank you in advance.
--
...and the bricks keep on rolling

No, I'm not fixing it up any more. Too much work, and NZ law is getting too strict to make it worth it. The PS is there, but I'm keeping it for my 144 (same problem as you...).

It is highly unlikely you will find any 140/160 parts in NZ, all of them are imported and were never available new. Volvo came here only with the 240 series. Australia, however, has lots of them but are likely to need a rebuild. Rebuild parts available from www.scandcar.com in the Netherlands.

The PS box is longer to the rear, so you will have to shorten the steering shaft. Should be easy if you just cut out a piece where the 2 half shafts meet (i.e. relocate the plate with the sheering bolts). Obviously you will need new sheering bolts as well, just get them from also from ScandCar. If you tell them what you are doing, they will help with the right stuff. Allso try them for a steering box and pump, but might be expensive. But might have good advice.

With my 144 the steering improves a lot by increasing the tyre pressure form the original Volvo spec of something like 20 to a modern spec of around 32. Modern tyres are different from 35 years ago (can't bother thinking about the difference right now, suppose to be working...). Also get the original spec wheel alignment and give it to your tyres place, don't trust their machine to have the correct spec for a 35 year old car that no one cares about. The only country-specific settings relate to how much the roads slope to the side, which affects if the car will try and pull to one side. But that is so minor, they can fine tune it if you take it back after trying a few days and you are not happy. Let them also check out all the ball joints and get them replaced if needed before you do wheel alignment.

All the best.

Thanks Niel. I was under the impression all this while that your 144 has p/s since it is an auto. I guess I was wrong. They only came with the 145 auto (for 74, that is)

Thanks for your advise. I'll check out with ScanCar. All the best with your 144 as well. Its hard to get rid of a car that has been around all your life, even harder if it is a 144!

--
...and the bricks keep on rolling

As far as I know there were no K-jet B30s. They used D-jet through the 75
model, which also had electronic ignition and Volvo's only electronic distributor
with injection triggering points. Mine is a carbureted B30F and I have an
identical engine complete with ALL the D-jet stuff, just a few serial numbers
different, thanks to Lucid.

I'd think your job might be easier if you could come up with a B20E or F head.
--
George Downs Bartlesville, Heart of the USA!

Unfortunately Volvo did not come to New Zealand until the 244 was launched, all the B20 FI heads are either in private import classics or written off long ago (we have a 6-monthly Warrent of Fitness inspection similar to the UK MOT). Only options so far is importing from Australia where the 144 was available new and still is very popular on those long streight desert roads, or import a reconditioned FI head from Europe at about the same price as getting mine modified in NZ, or if my head is still in good condition, which it should be after only 75k mi (genuine, my father bought it new in South Africa), then we can just modify it at work for free (very capable mechanical workshop!).

As far as I know there is a K-Jet B30 in my factory workshop manual, maybe it was not available in the US. I've also seen k-jet parts listed for the B30 in a European price list (company dealing specifically with Volvo classics).

The early V6 264 had K-jet but even my factory microfiche of 164 parts
does not show any K-jet parts. It does show both right and left hand drive.
It also shows other equipment otherwise unknown to me.
--
George Downs Bartlesville, Heart of the USA!

I can't see it being any more difficult than the B20E. If it's already an injected B30, you won't even have to mess with fuel lines. That was likely the most difficult part of my B20E MS install in the 122...

Feel free to fire me an email and I can fill you in a little more...

Dale

Really might not be *any* difference from a B20E install. Assuming you keep it batch fire, it's still just two batches, like the 4 cylinder.
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic 245 + turbo

"Assuming you keep it batch fire, it's still just two batches, like the 4 cylinder."

Hmmmm... that would be one thing I'd be wanting to get rid of if I went to all the trouble of conversion. I would think there absolutely has to be a horsepower gain when you get all 4 (or 6) injectors timed optimally. The batch fire just seems so... well... imbalanced. It ain't right, I tell ya! ;)

Gary L
--
1971 142E ITB racer, 1973 1800ES, 2002 S60 T5

The batch fire just seems so... well... imbalanced. It ain't right, I tell ya! ;)

There's a serious amount of irksomeness about it, that's for sure.

A friend of mine had a Triumph PI 2.5 with the Lucas timed injection. The injection was 180 degrees out of whack & after putting it right it made absolutely no difference!

I've always held the theory that injection increases power & torque because it uses a tunnel ram or IR manifold + the injectors provide optimum fuel atomization over the entire RPM range. Accuracy & timing seem a lot less important for fuel delivery.

Accuracy & timing counts the most for ignition & signifcantly for cam timing.

It honestly doesn't really make much difference at all. There's nothing wrong with having the gas sit there another .1 second. It's not like it has enough time to precipitate out of the air in the intake. It just mentally seems bad somehow.

Look at K-Jet, it's constantly spraying fuel, 100% of the time fer crying out loud!
--
'63 PV544 rat rod, '93 Classic 245 + turbo

Gotta agree with John on this. If a k-jet engine will idle with fuel flowing all the time, an efi engine will do better with fuel flowing part of the time...

I've got the B20E set up that way and it runs fine. The only time you might notice, and the "might" is big, is at idle. Anything above idle and the fuel has no time to settle. Nothing wrong with batch fire...

Mine idles nice and smooth...

Dale

So... all you batch fire advocates... if batch fire works so well, why are all the serious high output EFI race and production engines now using sequential injection? Hmmmm?

Gary L
--
1971 142E ITB racer, 1973 1800ES, 2002 S60 T5

Because they can? Remember, they've got completely programmable spark and fuel with resolution miles past what MS can do. Sequential injection can be used to cool down hot spots and funky things like that but I don't think George is concerned with that level of tunability...

Unless you're going direct injection, I see no benefit above a certain rpm. Do the math; at 1000 rpm each injector is firing 4 times every second. At 2000 rpm that increases to 8 times a second. Hard to distinguish when it's on or off above 3 or 4000. The definition diminishes and eventually it's a steady stream anyways. Sequential fire might be beneficial in a pulse-tuned intake up to a certain point...

Dale

Well, you've got you convinced. I'm not. ;)

The only problem I see with building a sequential MS system might be with tuning... finding the sweet spot(s) for injector timing to provide the most power "under the curve". The dyno time might run into some serious money.

And unfortunately, for my (Improved Touring race car) purposes, it's a moot point anyway; I can't legally make any significant changes to the existing FI system. :(

Gary L
--
1971 142E ITB racer, 1973 1800ES, 2002 S60 T5

To run sequential injection the way you describe, i.e., timed to perfection, you would have to have huge injectors but then you would have a lot of problem with controlling them for supply small amounts of fuel for idle or cruise. When you use the 'correct sized' injectors, they are nearly always going to be open longer than the intake valve.

The road cars I know of that come from the factory with sequential injection do so because it helps idle quality & emissions I tiny bit.

The race cars that use sequential use it so that they can optimize the mixture for each cylinder.

Probably at idle the manifold vacuum is high enough that the gasoline
vaporizes unless the charge is really cold.
Now on diesels it is another matter intarly.
--
George Downs Bartlesville, Heart of the USA!