Turbo Inferior to Non Turbo??

I've heard that a turbo engine will wear itself out before a non turbo
engine. I've heard that it's better to downgrade to an older non
turbo than keep a newer turbo because it will last longer. I've heard
I should sell my car before things get really bad. My car is a '90
and started to accumulate some problems. But will selling it and
buying the non turbo version (give or take a year or two) guarantee me
more years of dependable transportation?

 

Well a turbo engine puts out more power than the same engine without a turbo
so it's a given that it'll wear out a bit faster. The thing is, Volvo
engines are legendary for being extremely durable, and with decent
maintenance the engine will normally outlast the rest of the car, turbo or
not. The turbo engines require a bit more stringent maintenance but the
extra power is WELL worth it IMO. I can't speak for the condition of your
car, but mine is currently a bit over 283,000 miles, still running great
with the original turbocharger.

If your car has been reasonably well taken care of I suggest taking care of
the little problems before they accumulate to the point that the car is a
beater with so many problems it's not cost effective to repair. If you sell
it and get a different car, you're just as likely to encounter the same
problems under the same conditions. As these things get older, it becomes
all about how well they were taken care of. I once saw a very tired 740
Turbo in a salvage auction with something like 738,000 miles on it, the
shift lever on the automatic transmission was worn down from hand contact
and the interior was in tatters but it said it still ran.

 

While all this is true, the high-pressure turbo found on some 740s has a
propensity to dump all of the engine oil down the exhaust if the seals get
worn. I'm assured the low-pressure turbos are bulletproof, however.

 

All 740 and 940 Turbo cars have a high pressure turbo, the LPT didn't appear
until the 850 series IIRC.

From experience, the Mitsubishi turbos used on some of the 700 and 900 cars
do seem to hold up a little better than the Garrett turbos, but either one
will last a long time if run on synthetic oil changed on schedule.

 

I thought that was what was happening to my '85 with about 220K miles at the
time. What was actually happening was that the crankcase ventilation was
getting restricted and the crankcase pressure was forcing the oil to back up
in the return pipe until it spilled over into the exhaust. Cleaning all the
ventilation parts - even the giant hoses - fixed it.

After 240K miles the original turbo is still rolling along.

Mike

 

No, certainly in europe the all the 700's were 2.3TI HPT's with 185 and
latterly 190 bhp.

When the 900 came along, there were the following engines: (all 8 valve red
blocks)

2.0t 135bhp
2.3t 155bhp
2.0T 165bhp
2.3T 190bhp

The 2.3 16valve was available for a short time in the 940 SE with I think
160bhp, 4 sp+od manual box, but didnt last long, as it was considered way
too short on torque for the typical 900 owner. (then volvo did the 2.0 20v
in the earlier 850 which was the same!!)

Tim..

 

Not in Europe.

 

Interesting, in North America all 700 and 900 turbo cars had the same
engine, B230FT rated at 160HP. 700 was available with a manual transmission,
but all 900 series cars are automatic.

 

We run two 740 turbos both are sweet .When some fool tries to jam you up
the back of a parked car or pass and run you off a narrowing lane theres
nothing like the turbo for safety .I bought the turbos for safety not speed
..Any jap car can go fast but when you have a kangaroo jump out in front of
you at 110 klm an hour its nice to have the handling and safety of the turbo
740.