The message to which you are about to reply is shown first. GO TO REPLY FORM



 VIEW    REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE Replies to this message will be emailed.    PRINT   SAVE 

Maybe, which would explain good performance .... 200 1981

posted by  Ken C on  Fri Oct 21 11:51 CST 2005
Author: [PROFILE] [EVERY POST] [THREADS] [BEST POSTS] RSS Feed     [IGNORE ALL POSTS]
last visit: Fri Oct 24 11:39 CST 2014
[RELATED]

The turbo motor, without the turbo, should be pretty disappointing, because one of its main variations (from a normally aspirated, or n.a., engine) is that it has a much lower compression ratio, maybe only 7: or 8:1, to tolerate the turbo's boost. But this will be disappointing without the turbo -- the n.a. engine is around 9:1, and I would guess that a 7: or 8:1 engine would put out maybe 80 horsepower.
Other differences, i.e., ignition and fuel mapping, abound as well.

So it's probably better that the whole engine was replaced with a n.a. version -- at least you've got a GL car :-). Just hope you didn't pay too much, thinking you were getting a turbo.

Good luck.





USERNAME
Use "claim to be" below if you don't want to log in.
PASSWORD
I don't have an account. Sign me up.
CLAIM TO BE
Use only if you don't want to login (post anonymously).
ENTER CAPTCHA CODE
This is required for posting anonymously.
OPTIONS notify by email
Available only to user accounts.
SUBJECT
MODEL/YEAR
MESSAGE

DICTIONARY
LABEL(S) +
IMAGE URL *
[IMAGE LIBRARY (UPLOAD/SELECT)]

* = Field is optional.

+ = Enter space delimited labels for this post. An example entry: 240 muffler


©Jarrod Stenberg 1997-2022. All material except where indicated.


All participants agree to these terms.

Brickboard.com is not affiliated with nor sponsored by AB Volvo, Volvo Car Corporation, Volvo Cars of North America, Inc. or Ford Motor Company. Brickboard.com is a Volvo owner/enthusiast site, similar to a club, and does not intend to pose as an official Volvo site. The official Volvo site can be found here.