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 

Right on. 700 1987

My 90 has a mitsu with blowoff valve, and it dumps oily air (sometimes oilier than others!) on the elbo above the turbo. The bypass valve on the 87 is a lot cleaner and quieter. I like the bigger Garrett on the 87 too, although the 90 mitsu turbo spools up quicker. I have a feeling the mitsu is overheating the air at around 14psi though...the Garrett wouldn't be nearly as bad.

Point is, if you have a bypass valve and it works, leave it alone. The only advantage I see on the bov is it appears to be cheaper, a lot fewer components than the bypass valve and its associated plumbing. If you go to a mitsu, you would have a bov. If you retrofit a newer engine with a garrett without an integral bov it might be easier to fit an aftermarket bov as opposed to rigging up a bypass system. That intake hose on the 87 is almost $200 US these days, the bypass hose molded into the intake hose probably adds significantly to the cost.






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.