Volvo V8 Forum

INDEX FOR 1/2026(CURRENT) INDEX FOR 7/2001

[<<]  [>>]


 VIEW    REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE    PRINT   SAVE 

Any downsides to the 302 5.0 swap?

posted by  tvpierce on  Thu Jul 7 13:16 CST 2005
Author: [PROFILE] [EVERY POST] [THREADS] [BEST POSTS] RSS Feed     [IGNORE ALL POSTS]
last visit: Tue Apr 8 06:40 CST 2014
[RELATED]

Quote: "I have considered a Turbocharged 740 or something, but I think I'd rather go NA since it seems to be a much more reliable means of power over the TUrbo."

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of a V8 Volvo... and I'm seriously considering taking one on as a project.

But it's hard to beat a '93-'95 940 Turbo for daily driving & reliability. These are half-million-mile powerplants (maybe more!) And the AW-71 tranny is about as bulletproof as they come (not that it would hold up to V8 power, but it's more than adequate for the B230FT).

You should ba able to find a '93-'95 940 Turbo in excellent condition for $5000. You'd be hard pressed to make a V8 Volvo reliable for that kind of money -- and that's if you do it yourself.

Just some food for thought.

Jeff Pierce
--
'93 945 Turbo ( one kickass family car ! ) 197K miles, '92 Mercedes 190E (my daily driver) 170K miles, '85 Jeep CJ-7 w/ Fisher plow 225K miles, ’95 Lawn Chief






THREADED THREADED EXPANDED FLAT PRINT ALL
MESSAGES IN THIS THREAD

New Any downsides to the 302 5.0 swap?
posted by  Stanley Rockefeller  on Sat Jun 18 17:13 CST 2005 >


<< < > >>



©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.