Engine Choices

Post by **Lonewolf** » 22 Mar 2004 01:35 pm

I've been shopping around for a project
engine to put in my 360.
Now, I've found a B230F at the wreckers and he wants $600 for it. I had been saving up for
this, but saw a drivable '83 760 GLE with a 2.8L V6 in it... for $600.
Soooo... is there like ANY remote possibility of it fitting under the hood of a 360? If it could fit i
would very much like to know.

Post by **Black_360_GLT** » 23 Mar 2004 02:37 am

Why not use a Rover 3.5 V8 (if you could get
one to fit)

You wouldnt even need to change ECU wiring loom etc, as the Rover engine has LE Jetronic
(same as 360 GLT)
They have 190bhp as stock, and with a bit of tuning 250bhp isnt unreasonable.
Greets
Al

Post by **Lonewolf** » 23 Mar 2004 10:41 am

LOL, funny you should mention that seeming my dad has one
in the driveway... i doubt it'd fit.
To be honest, If i was to use a non volvo engine it'd be a 13B rotary (its a scary thought that
this 1.3L engine once held its own against the V8 supercars) upgraded to a 20B. But due to
the regulations in australia (probably overseas also) there is more paperwork than you care to
look at when using engines from other manufacturers.
And its just personal preference, Everyone i've seen is talking about or having done B230FT
engine swaps, i'm just looking to raise the bar a little bit... and it'd be pretty cool having an
almost 3L V6 in a shoebox sized car.
The only hybrid parts i'm gonna be using are not engine related and i'm trying to keep it that
way.

Post by **foggyjames** » 24 Mar 2004 03:22 am

3L V6 in a shoebox? Have you seen the Renault Clio
V6...now that's a shoebox!!
I believe both 760 (PRV) V6s and V8s have been fitted. Anything is possible if you try hard
enough. I'm only going for a B230ET/FT because I can't be arsed to do anything harder!
cheers
James

Post by **Lonewolf** » 24 Mar 2004 06:54 am

lol, point taken. I guess i'll report back in a 2, maybe 3
months on how much fun i had in fitting it. Are they a solid engine? If theres enough space for
a turbo, i'll be fitting one with LOW boost (maybe 5psi) just so its installed and i can finish off
the intake/exhaust.

Post by **foggyjames** » 24 Mar 2004 02:37 pm

Are PRVs solid? Not compared to a redblock, but they aren't
that bad either (just redblocks are very solid!). Make sure you change the oil every 3000
miles...
cheers
James

Post by **Lonewolf** » 30 Mar 2004 02:04 pm

Ok then, I asked after reading something implied them to be
ordinary in the reliablity dept.

Post by **Black_360_GLT** » 04 Apr 2004 05:28 pm

There are enough forums and posts on the net about the
PRV engines to keep you away from those engines for life.
Al

Post by **ravennexus** » 24 Aug 2004 02:28 am

try and find an old 79-80 240 with b23E, it'll be a H cammed 140hp beasty. then run some headers off it, and use your stock intake.

oh and yes Most PRV's suck, but the B280's are ok, crossbolted mains are good for around 500hp, and cams can be had from emimmeme (forgot how to spell there name) it's mainly cam oiling issues that is the prob. and the B280's are better for that.

Post by **5lab** » 24 Aug 2004 08:35 am

the 2.8 760 is no quicker than the 2.3 turbo, im guessing that a 360 would be the same..

Post by **V6 Man** » 24 Aug 2004 03:41 pm

If you do fancy a V6 try for one out of a '87> car as these will be the B280, a far superior engine to the B28 that you were considering (it is also easier to work on).
A B280E has LH2.2 injection and 170bhp with a nice useable power/torque curves. It is recognisable by having a fuel rail per bank of cyls and the throttle body is at the rear of a 'bunch of sausages' shaped inlet manifold. The B28 has two rectangular runners to its intake manifold and has the throttle body nestling in the V.

The V6's, whilst not as powerful overall as the 2.3 turbos, is easier to live with in the real world due to the spread of power. I can keep up with tweaked 740Ti's despite the power disadvantage and an Auto box. There is also the benefit of a nicer exhaust note.

Your easiest conversion by far is going to be a N/A 2.3, with the Turbo models next and the V6's behind that (just trying to get hold of a manual bellhousing will be hard enough).

Post by **foggyjames** » 26 Aug 2004 02:48 am

To be honest, I'm seriously considering fitting a PRV (maybe the 24v version?) instead of a turbo when the time comes. I mean a turbo is so last year....

cheers

James

Post by **Fuse** » 26 Aug 2004 02:12 pm

Depends... V6 with twinturbo, better than plain V6.

Post by **Lonewolf** » 26 Aug 2004 02:36 pm

Mercedes C-111, beats any v6 twin turbo period (or V-12 for that matter), shame they had a few problems with it twisting forged driveshafts like liquorice and tearing any attempt at a carbon composite driveshaft

Yes the B6304 twin turbo would be a nice engine but ive been challenged to cram a non turbo into a 360 engine bay, that could be bad enough but then to find space for 2 turbos? hehe... good luck
speaking of which i had my rego inspection today... and aside from a customer reversing his truck into the rear of my car(lucky my speakers werent hooked up) i was told the engine mounts and exhaust manifold need replacing... sounds like a good time for an engine swap if insurance doesnt just call the car a write off and let me buy another one (2 360GLT's in 6 months... i'm having a real good run here heh)

Post by **DaButcher** » 24 Sep 2004 08:16 am

Black_360_GLT wrote:Why not use a Rover 3.5 V8 (if you could get
one to fit)
You wouldnt even need to change ECU wiring loom etc, as the Rover engine has LE Jetronic
(same as 360 GLT)
They have 190bhp as stock, and with a bit of tuning 250bhp isnt unreasonable.
Greets
Al

you will _never_ get this much hp out of this engine!
the rover 3.5, with special carb, headers, overbored, etc. (cost $$$$$$), will perform about 220hp.

You can not tune it much above 220hp, without SERIOUS $$$$$$$$$$$ (talking many thousand $ here)

I know this, since I have done a great deal of research on this area!

if you want 250hp, the cheapest is to:
b230et + chip + b230ft turbo-manifoil + sports-exhaust + sports-filter++
or:
b230ft + chip +....++

or you can use the b6304, chip, cat-removal and then you are there.
the b6304 is n/a and uses WAY less fuel!

The rover 3.5 has a terrible fuel-consupmtion! (orignal a buick design)

Engine Choices

Engine Choices

Engine choices

Re: Engine choices