I am considering adding a 740/940 to my stable for a commuter car. I would like to stick with the B230F or B230FT as I am familiar with that from my 240 experience. Was 1995 the last year for that?

How much different is the B234 (16 valve) and what has been your experience with it?

Thanks,

Tom

The choice of engine really depends on what type of driving you will be doing. If mostly short trips around town, I'd stay away from the Turbo since you'd never get it warmed up and if you did it needs a proper cooldown as well. Not the best choice for blasting from garage sale to garage sale.

The B234F is a sweet runner; more HP without the potental problems of a turbo. But it is an interference fit as mentioned. But so are most engines these days so you would be no worse off than if you purchased a newer FWD Volvo. I just changed the belts on mine for the first time. Not a bad job to do. The hardest part, actually, was getting the fan bolts and fan off! Next hardest was getting the A/C belts off. The actual timing and balancer belt change was relatively easy.

Mine is a stick shift and is a gas to drive. I don't know how an auto would be because it really only comes into its own above 2500 rpm. Automatics and engines with low torque at the bottom end are not good matches.

The B230F is a fine choice if you are just poking around town or are not looking for acceleration. Even if you are, why not start with a B230F and hop it up? I don't see why you couldn't get it up to about 150-180 HP if you can get it to breath better.

Anyway, see http://billgarland.mcmaster.ca/volvo/volvohome.htm for a database of what models were made when. It is seasonably accurate for North America. Let me know if you see mistakes.

Cheers,
Bill Garland

Bill, I'll confirm your suspicions. A B234F with the AW72L auto tranny is really not the best combination for in-town driving despite the lowered 1st/2nd gear ratios.

You're bang on, nothing impressive happens below 2500 rpm, in fact it's a bit of a slug. In city driving you simply don't get it wound up above 2500 very often unless you're a total lead foot driver or like to play with the shifter. On the highway it's another story. The power curve and gear ratios are well matched except for that damned lock-up torque converter. When driving uphill, it has a tendency to hunt up and down when you're at the shift point which is speed related (~50 mph) rather than torque related. Also, if you use the gas pedal to force a downshift from 5th gear (actually lock-up 4th) it's like hitting the overdrive switch, you'll bypass 4th altogether and drop down to 3rd which is likely way more torque and rpm than you wanted. So you back off the pedal and it goes back into 5th and so on with the tach really dancing around.

Tom, if you're on the highway a lot then go ahead and get a B234F with the auto trans, it's great. Otherwise, if you want a B234F then go for a manual trans, if you can find one (they weren't common).

-Dave '89 B234F/AW72L

"Mine is a stick shift and is a gas to drive. I don't know how an auto would be because it really only comes into its own above 2500 rpm. Automatics and engines with low torque at the bottom end are not good matches."

The B234F automatics were equipped with the AW72L. Different ratios for more off-the-line grunt, and a lockup converter to help highway mileage.

There's also a 4.10:1 rear axle. Also helps off-the-line go.

Overall, the car is a fine ride. Smoother than the turbo, but slightly less powerful. Slightly more maintenance than a B230F, almost the same as a B230FT, but never a costly turbocharger to replace.

Stick with the B230. If the 234 loses a timing belt bad news, bent valves, holes in pistons. A few hp just aint worth the risk.

B234 has 16 valves and requires rigorous attention paid to timing belts, tensioner and oil pump bolt. If you can do that, then you get a more powerful engine with more torque and good performance.
Last year for the B230 in North America was 1995. Avoid any thought of a 960.