Just got back from driving the C306 Fire Rescue truck. All I can say is WOW!
Ok, it's no speed demon. FOR NOW. But it's a stout six cylinder four speed that has tons of potential on many different levels.
The engine ALONE is begging for many upgrades. Exhaust is but one. Air cleaner and intake manifold.
Sending the heads out to have hardened seats for unleaded use. NEW valves with possibly larger valves installed. PLUS flowing the heads will work wonders. That, combined with a different bumpstick...
This could increase hp to around 200 hp as a minimum. I think the rest of the parts could withstand that, but would have to completely inspect EVERYTHING before doing all these changes. Perhaps an aftermarket OD unit that could give a really good drop in revs, thereby making this a killer highway vehicle. The OD could be put in line with the rear drive axles ONLY, so that IF you wanted to 'lock her up' in 6x6, just make sure the O/D was in the 1:1 position. Otherwise, anywhere from .50:1 up to about .75:1 would give a much better upper end. And I don't think you would actually LOSE anything from the off road side, as long as OD was still in 1:1.
With a few other tricks I and my mechanic have up our sleeves, this COULD be a killer truck.
Again, on many different levels.
SO, WHERE AM I GOING WRONG???
Has anyone ever flowed the heads?
Has anyone ever flowed the heads?
Gunsmith, NRA firearms instructor, chef, gardener, medic, computer whiz, philosopher, mechanic, bartender, janitor, and security specialist
No offense taken Juergen. But I've been there, done that.
This vehicle was used by the Swedish Fire Department. I am confident that it probably NEVER did any serious off roading. Did they make use of the ability to carry weight into places no other vehicle could have gone?
Probably so.
Will I make use of this truck DIFFERENTLY than anyone else? ABSOLUTELY!
If that's all you can criticize about my ideas, then I guess I'm going in the RIGHT direction. Again, I am NOT looking for high speed. Just the ability to make the engine work easier, better, cooler, longer, harder. Pick your adjective. But this truck won't see MUCH off road work. At least, not intentionally. And I LIKE my vehicles to have the ability to get out of their own way. I'm kind of FUNNY like that.
At 51, my heavy duty off roading days are behind me. I enjoy other things. I am about to embark on modifying the LAST vehicle I will ever modify. To be a platform as a photography stand. A vehicle that can come and go in heavy snow with NO PROBLEMS. The list is long and varied, but NOW WHERE does it include serious ROCK CRAWLING.
Dude, one man's ceiling is another man's floor.
Thx for the input though.
This vehicle was used by the Swedish Fire Department. I am confident that it probably NEVER did any serious off roading. Did they make use of the ability to carry weight into places no other vehicle could have gone?
Probably so.
Will I make use of this truck DIFFERENTLY than anyone else? ABSOLUTELY!
If that's all you can criticize about my ideas, then I guess I'm going in the RIGHT direction. Again, I am NOT looking for high speed. Just the ability to make the engine work easier, better, cooler, longer, harder. Pick your adjective. But this truck won't see MUCH off road work. At least, not intentionally. And I LIKE my vehicles to have the ability to get out of their own way. I'm kind of FUNNY like that.
At 51, my heavy duty off roading days are behind me. I enjoy other things. I am about to embark on modifying the LAST vehicle I will ever modify. To be a platform as a photography stand. A vehicle that can come and go in heavy snow with NO PROBLEMS. The list is long and varied, but NOW WHERE does it include serious ROCK CRAWLING.
Dude, one man's ceiling is another man's floor.
Thx for the input though.
Gunsmith, NRA firearms instructor, chef, gardener, medic, computer whiz, philosopher, mechanic, bartender, janitor, and security specialist
My experience is that engines last longer if you run a large displacement at low compression/low overall HP. This is contrary to what you plan.
If you do all these modifications, keep the HP where it's today and "transfer" all the improvements into higher low end torque you have improved the engine for offroad use.
One example is the Pinzgauer gas engine. 2.5l, 87/90HP. They could have made it into a 150-170HP engine w/o problems but then the low end torque would have suffered. What they designed is an engine which has more low end torque then modern Diesels for cars.
Offroad all what counts is torque at low RPM, on the highway you need HP for speed.
The only other option would be to raise the HP and at the same time significantly increase the gear ratio, to the point where the top speed (in lowest gear) remains the same.
Juergen
If you do all these modifications, keep the HP where it's today and "transfer" all the improvements into higher low end torque you have improved the engine for offroad use.
One example is the Pinzgauer gas engine. 2.5l, 87/90HP. They could have made it into a 150-170HP engine w/o problems but then the low end torque would have suffered. What they designed is an engine which has more low end torque then modern Diesels for cars.
Offroad all what counts is torque at low RPM, on the highway you need HP for speed.
The only other option would be to raise the HP and at the same time significantly increase the gear ratio, to the point where the top speed (in lowest gear) remains the same.
Juergen
Engines LAST LONGER if they don't suffer from extreme torture (high rpms or lack of proper oiling) and are properly maintained.
As I am sure you are aware the Volvo six cylinder uses 9:1 compression ratio.
By flowing the heads and replacing the cam with the automotive one, I am CONFIDENT that while there will be rise in both HP and TORQUE, this will ONLY make it a better engine. Or are you saying that the engineers who designed this particular engine did so in such a manner that they were on the 'cutting edge' of engine viability? In general, if that were the case, the aftermarket engine component industry would have never been formed.
AGAIN, I'm not after massive low end torque because I'm not going to do much serious off roading that will require massive amounts of low end torgue. I'm trying to build a 'bullet proof' vehicle, because I plan to go into the back country on my own and don't wish to deal with broken parts, especially engine problems when I'm out in the middle of nowhere. That's why I favor the portal axles, the water cooled six cylinder engine and the four speed tranny.
Trust me when I say that if instead of purchasing this vehicle I went with the OTHER vehicle we are looking at and I purchased the GMC 23 foot RV then I would have no way of going off road at all. IT would be a great photo platform, but a TERRRIBLE 'soft off road' vehicle.
By 'soft off road' I mean that if I get into soft sand or other situations, the Volvo will handle it where the GMC would have me breaking out the shovels and ramps. Plus, given the GMC has a 454, front wheel drive and weighs about four tons, the Volvo is again a better choice.
It's kind of like the question my wife asked me a little while back. "If I won the lottery tomorrow and I bought you a new C6 Corvette, would you modify that also?"
Can you guess my answer? It was "ABSOLUTELY".
I have the "I don't do stock" disease. SO I modify all the vehicles I've owned (there has been a LONG LINE) over the past thirty years. Of course, over half of them have been bought out from underneath me by someone who does NOT have my vision and has a lot more money than I do.
Hey, I ain't rich, but I ain't stupid either. If someone offers me twice as much as I have in a rig, it's GONE. I can always do it again. Generally I just move on to the NEXT vehicle with a new vision in mind.
I'm just NOT into the rough and tumble world that is xtreme off roading any more. Besides, after you've gone seventy miles an hour sideways on a dirt road on the way to your favorite off road area, I don't have a lot of 'issues' to deal with in the off road arena any more.
Does ANY of this make any sense to you?
As I am sure you are aware the Volvo six cylinder uses 9:1 compression ratio.
By flowing the heads and replacing the cam with the automotive one, I am CONFIDENT that while there will be rise in both HP and TORQUE, this will ONLY make it a better engine. Or are you saying that the engineers who designed this particular engine did so in such a manner that they were on the 'cutting edge' of engine viability? In general, if that were the case, the aftermarket engine component industry would have never been formed.
AGAIN, I'm not after massive low end torque because I'm not going to do much serious off roading that will require massive amounts of low end torgue. I'm trying to build a 'bullet proof' vehicle, because I plan to go into the back country on my own and don't wish to deal with broken parts, especially engine problems when I'm out in the middle of nowhere. That's why I favor the portal axles, the water cooled six cylinder engine and the four speed tranny.
I'm not out to make some huge ROCK CRAWLER. It's not where I'm at any more. MAYBE some camping in the wilderness, but again I am designing this to be a mini RV with minor off road capabilities to get me to places where I can then use it as a photo platform.This vehicle was used by the Swedish Fire Department. I am confident that it probably NEVER did any serious off roading. Did they make use of the ability to carry weight into places no other vehicle could have gone?
Probably so.
Will I make use of this truck DIFFERENTLY than anyone else? ABSOLUTELY!
Trust me when I say that if instead of purchasing this vehicle I went with the OTHER vehicle we are looking at and I purchased the GMC 23 foot RV then I would have no way of going off road at all. IT would be a great photo platform, but a TERRRIBLE 'soft off road' vehicle.
By 'soft off road' I mean that if I get into soft sand or other situations, the Volvo will handle it where the GMC would have me breaking out the shovels and ramps. Plus, given the GMC has a 454, front wheel drive and weighs about four tons, the Volvo is again a better choice.
It's kind of like the question my wife asked me a little while back. "If I won the lottery tomorrow and I bought you a new C6 Corvette, would you modify that also?"
Can you guess my answer? It was "ABSOLUTELY".
I have the "I don't do stock" disease. SO I modify all the vehicles I've owned (there has been a LONG LINE) over the past thirty years. Of course, over half of them have been bought out from underneath me by someone who does NOT have my vision and has a lot more money than I do.
Hey, I ain't rich, but I ain't stupid either. If someone offers me twice as much as I have in a rig, it's GONE. I can always do it again. Generally I just move on to the NEXT vehicle with a new vision in mind.
I'm just NOT into the rough and tumble world that is xtreme off roading any more. Besides, after you've gone seventy miles an hour sideways on a dirt road on the way to your favorite off road area, I don't have a lot of 'issues' to deal with in the off road arena any more.
Does ANY of this make any sense to you?
Gunsmith, NRA firearms instructor, chef, gardener, medic, computer whiz, philosopher, mechanic, bartender, janitor, and security specialist