|
I don't necessarily think the 122's are cooler or better than the 1800's, you're right, it's just my preference. I've got a '73 1800ES, and don't get me wrong, I love the car.
I think stock, the 122 is better handling than the 1800, and I think the 140 is better than the other two. Others may disagree....stock, the 1800 is a little sluggish on the steering and suspension. The 122 and 140 handle well, but I've had the opportunity to drive the 140's much more.....however, I was in a 122 and was forced to do some really gnarly maneuvering on I95 in Providence, RI (before they did all the construction), and the 122s got us through...and it was stock.
About putting in a b21ft in a 140---I wouldn't put that very high on your list of things to do, if on your list at all. Although the late model 140's share the same transmission tunnel as the 240 series, the engine bays are not as accomodating, mainly due to the suspension setup. The 240's use struts, which creates alot more room in the engine bay. I could go on and on about this, as there's alot of gray area, but basically, you're looking at a canted engine in the b21ft, and an upright engine in the b18/20, which then forces you to 1.) modify the front crosmember to accept the b21/23x as it's supposed to go 2.) swap a few parts from the b20 to b21/23x, mount it upgright while having to do custom exhaust work and engine mounts with both methods.
For a beginner, I'd stick to the stock engine, and play with it a bit....springs, lifters, etc.
Swapping transmissions isn't as straightforward either. Remember bellhousing configurations are different on b21/23x and OHV engines.
The 1800 is a very unique car in that it only has 4 removable body panels: Hood, 2 Doors, rear hatch/trunk. The rest of the body is made up of individual panels, but these have all been welded together and sculpted into essentially 1 piece. Because of this, they're like Thomas' English Muffins with all the nooks and crannies....and rust in these areas over time can mean headaches of proportions that you may not want to get involved with right off. 1800's are one of the most difficult cars body-wise to work on as so much welding and cutting is involved to remove metal to get to the source of the rust. I don't want to dissuade you from one but knowing about the car and it's faults will help you find one worthy of restoring. It took me over 10 years to land my
ES. Of course, price was a huge factor, and finding those 1 in 1000 deals takes time. So the long of the 1800 is LABOR costs!!!!! Even if it's your own time.
The 140 is the easiest to work on body-wise as it has the least amount of curves of the 3. The 122, like the 1800 has (albeit alot less) hard to reach spots where rust starts, so learning where to look and then taking the time to give every 122 you look at a thorough examination, will help you find a car that will last...
Am I partial to 140's? Yes, of course. Why? Maybe because they have sort-of been forgotten by many Volvophiles, and if I were going to focus on a vintage Volvo, I figure the 140's are the least expensive, since there is the least amount of interest in them. Although, that's changing.
In the end, it's up to you and what will make you happy. If you want to learn the basics mechanically, then the 122 and 1800 are almost identical. So is the 140 if you stay away from 73-74. Go with a carbeurated car, learn to tune the engine, ignition, fuel system. They all posess simple heating and charging systems as well as reasonably straight-forward wiring. If you're looking to work on this yourself, you may find more reward what I'm saying. When you get into fuel injection and the late model 140's, it gets more complicated. And, there's nothing wrong with Fuel Injection, if it works properly. Parts for FI systems can be expensive and hard to come by...but there's a huge wealth of knowledge here on the board, so don't be afraid to use it. There are no stupid questions, so ask away.
|
