• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

940 Mpg boost?

I found roughly 1-2mpg drop with a Yakima and fairing, not sure what the oem one does.

8-10 in town? WTF man, something is wrong with that for sure. I do better than that in town with E85! My quote of 19-20 is 50/50 highway and in-town, the 26 is straight shot on the highway.
 
LH3.1, M47, 3.31 rear axle - 27 mpg average year round. No aero mods or any other mess. If I removed the factory "roof rack" (a joke, really), maybe I could pick up 1 or 2 more mpg. I only use premium gas - LH3.1 is lean burn and likes the good stuff.
 
worn b18/b20 hybrid and I was at 26 hwy running it at 13.5 cruise... 122 wagon 4.56 and an m41.... after more tuning, now I see pretty close to that in city.
 
Sheesh did this guy use plastic/rubber or is my eyes so bad that I can't tell the difference between metal and other materials anymore?

Looks like big panels are matte plastic, which makes sense as a weight savings. Smaller panels are either gloss plastic or painted metal.
 
LH3.1, M47, 3.31 rear axle - 27 mpg average year round. No aero mods or any other mess. If I removed the factory "roof rack" (a joke, really), maybe I could pick up 1 or 2 more mpg. I only use premium gas - LH3.1 is lean burn and likes the good stuff.

93 245, LH2.4, m47, 3:31 all stock (t cam though) and I've gotten 26mpg a few times. 87 octane too. Wondering if I'd benefit from 91 octane in it?
 
93 245, LH2.4, m47, 3:31 all stock (t cam though) and I've gotten 26mpg a few times. 87 octane too. Wondering if I'd benefit from 91 octane in it?

I wouldn't say it's necessary, but the owner's manual in my car says:

"Volvo engines are designed for optimum performance on unleaded premium gasoline with an octane rating, AKI, of 91, or above...The minimum octane requirement is AKI 87 (RON 91)"

So, I use what they recommend. On my brother's car, with LH2.4, the owners manual recommended 89 rather than 91.
 
My 93 940 would get 26 on the highway. My 95 would get 23. Tracked over many miles and conditions. Only difference was lock up torque converter.
With your mods I bet your torque peak rpm has shifted away from your cruise rpm. Best efficiency is near torque peak so get that as low as possible.
 
....I bet I could squeeze 33-34 with that lame chrysler ignition and L-cam from the 82 b21f-9 Cali cars. And drive 58mph

My 242 has a b21f-9 with the ignition setup you describe.
In regular commuting on roads with varying 35-50 mph speed limits, and a totally filthy air filter, 32 mpg. Roughly 400-415 miles per fillup of 12-13 gallons on 87 octane **** gasoline.
Granted, the car is n/a and manual, but on the highway i would be really surprised if i couldn't break 34 without modifying anything. My 98hp is good for something!:cool:
When I took the skid pan off to work the car, and didn't reattach it, i lost almost 5 mpg.
 
The biggest fuel sucker by far in that package is probably the slushbox.

About 15 years ago my mom's '86 245 started having problems with the AW71 so I converted it to a M47 manual gearbox. The fuel economy jumped from 23mpg to 29mpg on the highway.

20 mpg for a turbo with automatic is pretty typical. The turbo motors are lower compression, you've got a performance cam in there, and the car was never known for particularly good fuel economy to begin with.
 
The biggest fuel sucker by far in that package is probably the slushbox.

About 15 years ago my mom's '86 245 started having problems with the AW71 so I converted it to a M47 manual gearbox. The fuel economy jumped from 23mpg to 29mpg on the highway.

20 mpg for a turbo with automatic is pretty typical. The turbo motors are lower compression, you've got a performance cam in there, and the car was never known for particularly good fuel economy to begin with.

Did you change rear end to the 3.31?
 
Jesus, 360 delorean....I want that.

My 700/900 cars get around 14mpg converted to US gallons... that's 17l/100km to us metric folks. I think that's just the best you can get with a Volvo. They are a hybrid of a tank and a tractor after all, why sweat it. I can. get it as low as 13l/100km on a 16v turbo cruising down the highway and see it as an accomplishment... LPG prices help, though. But US petrol prices are like 3x less than here, so I wouldn't sweat a second and just drive the hell out of it...
 
Jesus, 360 delorean....I want that.

My 700/900 cars get around 14mpg converted to US gallons... that's 17l/100km to us metric folks. I think that's just the best you can get with a Volvo. They are a hybrid of a tank and a tractor after all, why sweat it. I can. get it as low as 13l/100km on a 16v turbo cruising down the highway and see it as an accomplishment... LPG prices help, though. But US petrol prices are like 3x less than here, so I wouldn't sweat a second and just drive the hell out of it...

Dude i'm sorry but you might be mistaken. 93 940, AW71, Regina, (unknown rear) can get up close to 25mpg if well maintained. w/o proper O2 sensor the mpg will drop to 16-17mpg easily.

I'm really interested in under car aero mods. Been looking under my car and seems alot can be smoothed out to lessen drag.
 
^^^ What he said.

I easily average 23mpg in mixed driving; I've gotten up to 27mpg average on exclusively highway driving.

1995 940 N/A with Bosch ignition and an AW71L (no idea on the rear gearing).
 
Back
Top