Has anyone installed a B234 engine in a late model NA 200 series?

Not having to do plumbing and intercooler would make it a much easier swap. And more room under the hood from then on for general maintenance.

Also--if the 234 uses the same ECU and wiring as the 230 NA, that would make the job simpler. In fact, if these stayed the same, seems to me there wouldn't be a whole lot different. I guess the big question is, could the NA fuel management system serve up enough fuel to satisfy the heavy breather?

I suppose the air intake might take a little work--I've never looked good at a B234 installed, so I don't have a clear picture of how it compares to the standard NA. Throttle linkage?

I suppose either the M47 or AW 70 would be a straight bolt-up? Or not?

Does anyone know the torque and HP of a B234 compared to the turbo?

Yeah, I know about the interference issue. I have not yet found the perfect solution but this might be doable. And b234 engines seem to be available. If they haven't lunched the valves, how's their reliability otherwise.

Thanks for any help you can provide.

Doug Harvey

One important point to mention is that the 16V engine is not a direct swap in to a 240 - the head-mounted distributor will not fit back against the 240 firewall.

Like Philip mentioned, you won't get the power levels of the Turbo, although you will be close. Volvo rated the B234F at 153HP, and torque was somewhere in the 140's, just slightly more than the 8V B230. This engine pulls very strongly at mid-to-high RPM. You'd need the whole engine, manifolds, wiring, FI computer, etc... it was all slightly different than the 8V motor. There aren't many more ponies to be found, though, so this project is sort of an end in itself. Swapping in a stock Turbo is only the beginning.

If you can't resist the lure of the 16V, you may be able to build a hybrid with a little work. The B234 head will bolt on to the B230 block. Add the manifolds, a special timing belt, and your stock FI may be able to adapt. There are some guys around the net who have built up such motors.

--
Speed Racer, '83 240 R, '74 164 E, '93 940 OL1 (Manchester, CT)

check www.16.brinkster.com

I have seen such a conversion. It is a good project, although I am not sure that it is a lot easier than a turbo conversion. Maybe a little easier. Horsepower will be almost the same, though it is easier to get more hp from the turbo motor. The turbo motor will have significantly more torque. The 16V motors did use different ECU programming and different injectors, compared to non turbo motors. Perhaps the non turbo computers and injection would work, though. You could always try. I would probably rate a 16V as being about as complex and high maintenance over time as an 8V turbo. But give it a try if you find one cheap along with all the parts you need for the conversion, and like doing projects. I like turbos. A 16V turbo would be nice, but that job is a bit complex and expensive to do really well.

Were I doing a 16V conversion, I would probably stick with a manual trans and low rear gears, as the 16V are a bit soft on the bottom end. Turbos are, also, but the newer turbos (90-95) are more responsive than the older ones (81-89). You could always add a higher stall converter and lower rear gears if you do use an AW71 auto (non lock up).

Philip Bradley