Volvo RWD 140-160 Forum

INDEX FOR 1/2026(CURRENT) INDEX FOR 6/2016 140-160 INDEX

[<<]  [>>]


 VIEW    REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Here you go... 140-160 1971

Idrive a 71 142E with an M41 and a 4.10.1 rear end. When I had the limited slip rebuilt recently, I went with the 4.10.1 instead of the 4.30.1. The decision was based on highway driving preferences. The car was a rocket 20 years ago with a 4.30.1 rearend when I autocrossed it.
The 1971 142E alone was provided with a 2 inch drivetrain which can handle more torque than the other 140 setups of the time. The same U joints that are used for the 164 6 cylinder.
I have an IPD street cam with a lightened flywheel. I have double valve springs with a balanced engine rebuild. My last gas milage on the interstate at 75mph was 25 mpg. The car is lowered on IPD springs. It is a wonderful highway cruiser with plenty of high speed acceleration for passing.
I would make your selection of the rear end based on what you want from the car when you drive it. If you want stoplight acceleration and faster low speed response from your car, go with the M41 and a 4.30.1. If you want to have an outstanding highway cruiser, go with the M41 and a 4.10.1
--
Antique Swedish Steel (Never Rusty) Silver 71 142E






THREADED THREADED EXPANDED FLAT PRINT ALL
MESSAGES IN THIS THREAD

New M40 rear end ratio question [140-160][1971]
posted by  b4_ford  on Fri Jun 8 17:21 CST 2007 >


<< < > >>



©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.