Just recently acquired a 1993 Volvo 940 wagon.

It starts ok from cold, then dies after a few seconds. Then if you start it again, it will run fine at idle for as long as I've cared to let it run. When you drive, it is extremely slow to accelerate. Gas pedal seems to have little impact on RPM, BUT once you get it up to about 30MPH, it's fine. That takes about 2 city blocks to do, but then it's fine. Like nothing ever happened. Slow down and occassionally it will lose power, then gain it back slowly starting at about 40 meters.

I'm getting the following codes off the self-diagnostic tool: Port2: 2.2.3 (bad signal to/from IAC) and 1.3.2 (battery voltage too high/low); Port6: 1.4.3 (bad wiring to/from KS).

Today I'm going to clean the IAC, test the wires, try my best to reach the KS and check the wiring, and check all the fuses cause I've seen strange problems fixed by new fuses.

The previous owner had replaced: The fuel pump, fuel pump relay, full tune up, the IAC, and a few more things. The engine is beautiful.

Odometer reads 245k, but the engine was completely rebuilt at 150k. 2 owners, this car is amazing...if only I could get it running.

If you've heard of this before and may have an idea, please throw it my way. Otherwise I will update on what today's tests bring.

 

While the voltage code is a concern, I'm not worrying about that today. It seems the problem I'm having now is either air or fuel, so I'm checking air first. Also going to check all the tubes, my 92 240 wouldn't start until I found the hole in the air re-uptake hose and patched it, now runs like a champ.

 

a 93 could be bosch or regina, it could be a 16valve (always bosch), it could be a turbo (also always bosch)

KS ? (not 100% awake after turkeyday yesterday, my acronym matching engine is down).

I'd be checking the crank position sensor wiring for sure. also checking all air path stuff between the MAF/AMM and the throttle body (assuming its Bosch... Regina has no MAF)

 

Why would you rebuild a b230 at 150K? That would bother me... I don't think that's a good thing.

IAC only matters at idle...
What's the actual battery voltage?
What's a KS? Knock Sensor? That's not at play either...
Sounds like you may have a timing problem (skipped tooth?).
I'd look at the Fuel Pressure Regulator (many issues caused by it during "starting warm" conditions).
OBD1 is not a very reliable system. I'd clear the codes, see what fresh ones come up.
No 16v in 1993 in the US, not that it would matter...

 

I didn't do the rebuild, but I may also be misusing the term "rebuild". Basically it had the tuneup, cleaning, flushing, and refilling that dreams are made of. It's in phenomenal shape for it's age, other than the acceleration issue...

I also should have put more detail in here. It's a non-turbo wagon. My 92 240 is a turbo, and all cars should be volvo turbo's.

Today I ran through Chilton's trouble shooting steps. Conductivity of everything in the air system, fuel pump and relay are brand new. Cleaned the MAF, conductivity was optimal. Then I lift the car (a whopping 13" with my floor jack), and see small drops of gasoline forming on the bottom of the tank cover.

It appears to be coming from the tank, top front area. I opened the tank access behind the 2nd row seats, and no smell, no gas, no nothing. Checked the lines to the engine, clean as a whistle. So it looks like there's a crack/hole in the tank. Which sucks. Going to the store to get a big enough gas can to drain this thing, and then I can shed some light on the issue.

 

Few points of clarity:
yes KS was referring to Knock Sensor, and you're right, that wasn't at play.

I checked the IAC because it dies at idle on the first start, but not subsequent starts. Wanted to check ohms.

I cleared the codes and got the IAC and MAF, and air intake leak. That kinda makes sense to me if air is getting into the tank along with the gas. Could also be bad codes. I'm gonna see what's leaking, fix it, and update.

 

engine rebuilding means tearing the engine down to the block, and remachining everything thats worn (cylinders, etc) and then completely rebuilding it. there's also a 'top end' rebuild, which is basically a valve job. none of my Volvos have ever needed more than a head gasket.


no 240's were sold as turbos in the US at least since the early 80s. was this turbo engine a transplant from a 740/940 ?

 

I thought Turbo replaced GT as a trim option in 1981 and was used until 93? It's original to the car.

 

in the USA at least, there were no 240 turbos once the 740 got established. in 1987, when we bought our 240 new, there was just DL and GL trim levels and the differences were pretty slim (GL that year came with sunroof, leather seats, power windows, and tach plus separate clock, and 'corona' alloy wheels).

 

Did some more research on my cars and found out some interesting things. One is a '92 240, the other is a '93 940. Both are actually turbo's, both are factory original, and both were made in Gothenburg during the same month of the same year. Based on the very old paperwork I have for the 240, it appears to have been a special order at a dealership in CA. I'd have to assume something similar for the wagon. The only major mod listed for the VIN is an SRS system installed into the car by Volvo of Dallas in 2003. There are stickers on the frame that confirm.

Somehow 2 cars made in Sweden in August of 1992, one being the last run of the current body style, the other being the first run of the new body style, both factory original Bosch turbos not for sale in the US, wind up in my driveway 21 years and several thousand miles away.

I'd like to know more details, but in the meantime that's all the VINs could get me.

I was able to patch the tank after draining it, it was a hairline perforation and I was assured the patch would hold likely beyond the arrival date of a new gas tank. We'll see how that goes, but fortunately I don't drive this one much. Still has more air in the system than it should, that may be my fault due to the way i drained it, but I'm going to fix that tonight and start checking the air hoses and vacuum tubes for perforations/holes tomorrow.

Before I post in the future I'll do more looking, I had just bought the wagon and panicked a bit when I couldn't find the problem. And when I do post, I'll put in all those pesky little details, like original bosch turbo.

 

93 940 turbos were certainly sold in the US. 92 240 turbos in the US? never, thats a really rare car.

 

Pretty interesting cars you have there...
If you post the VINs I might be able to get some more info on them...

 

A good friend of mine works for a company that makes appraisal apps for car dealers, he ran the VIN's and found basically everything I know. I'm at work and don't have them on me now, but I'll try to remember to post them later if you think you could find more out.

Problem update: Drove the 940 to work today with minimal issues. I had to start it 3 times, but once warm it ran fine. At idle it acts fine. Move it into D or R, and it sputters when you very first press the gas coming out of a stop, but within 20 feet or so it's almost like a blockage is removed from the injectors and the car goes great. It chokes, then it's almost like it catches it's breath and recovers wonderfully. I added B12 to this tank of gas, I'm going to let that run through, and I'll clean the injectors and throttle body Saturday, and continue my search for cracked air hoses.

 

some of the guys here have access to old volvo serial number databases that have car by car details, something the standard VIN decodes don't cover.

 

So I took it to work Friday morning and it drove great. On the way home, the acceleration problem was terrible. In neutral, the engine responds to the gas pedal. In drive, it stagnates at 2000 rpm, feels like something is restricting or blocking the fuel, and eventually catches,accelerates, shifts and is fine. When braking, and only when breaking, the low oil pressure light comes on. That moment is when the car is most likely to die, although it usually doesn't. It also dies during turns, but I think they are both issues related to deceleration.

To make it more fun the problem virtually goes away when the turbo is on, but then the rpms are too high and it's hard on the car.

Then the temperature drops to 27 degrees outside and I find the heater blows ice cold. Coolant level is good, engine temp is ideal, if a tad slow to warm up (so is my 240). I think this is the heater blend door. I have no idea where that is and can't find much online, but I'll follow the hvac system til I find it. The chilton manual doesn't even show it, but the part is real and these are the symptoms.

So...

The in tank fuel pump and fuel pump were replaced by previous owner 2 months ago. About 12 gallons of gas with B12 chemtool have gone through the engine with no real impact, so it's down to the fuel pressure regulator, or a vacuum leak. 2 of the hoses on the fuel rail look like they could be original to the car, so those have to go. There's also the really long metal hose that recirculates air, gonna check that and patch it too, as needed.

Other than that I'm running out of ideas.

 

Sticky fuel pressure regulator? Or the wrong one. Maybe a shorted coolant temp sensor. I didn't see that one listed here. There are two sensors, one for the gauge and one for the EFI system. The one for the EFI is what you are after. It's under the intake manifold near cylinder 3. It has the same type of connector as what is on a fuel injector (a 2 contact 'junior timer' style). That is what my green book suggests for poor engine running when cold. Mine book is for an older year, but it would still make sense. If the engine thinks it normal temp, but really it's cold, it will act lean. Your symptoms sound lean.

If you can, I'd like to see pics of your cars, both under the hood and of the body in general. I've never heard of a 92 240 turbo, besides a home brew deal.

 

the cold heater is more likely the heater control valve, rather than the air dampers. on a 240, there's just a damper on the 'floor' air, one for the 'defroster' air, and one to switch the source from fresh to recirculate. ALL the air that passes through the system goes through the heater core, so if its not warming up, then the heater valve isn't opening up. on our 87 240, the heater valve is mechanical, uses a 'bowden cable' to open/close. on a 740/940, its vacuum actuated. its possible a 92 240 switched to vacuum, as I know there's a new heater control panel in the last few years of production. all of them use vacuum to actuate the various damper flaps listed above.

 

Thanks Titan and Pierce. I'll try to get pics and VINs up as soon as I can, I posted this and then my week went to crap so I haven't been able to do that.

It's funny that you mention wrong Fuel Pressure Regulator. I pulled mine yesterday from the 940 and it looks old. It certainly wasn't replaced with everything else that was done to the fuel system. I'm ordering that today, will update.

I was up late doing research last night, and the heater door actuator doesn't make sense. Primarily because I can't find any written record of someone ever having to replace one. I was pointed continually to the 'heater water water control valve'. I assume that's the same thing you're talking about, Pierce. It's vacuum actuated, and looks a heck of a lot like the FPR. That was recently replaced, but that doesn't mean the part that was put on works.

We're bogged down in ice here, so I'll order parts now, and start work once the thaw begins. Pics will come with the next post hopefully.

 

Well, just ordered the parts, and it is in fact the Heater Control Valve for the '93 940 Turbo. I haven't purchased a Chilton manual in years. I bought one when I got the 240 because it was only $20. I think that $20 was wasted.

Also ordered a new FPR, we'll see what happens. Thanks again.

 

ah, I mixed things up last night. on a 740/940, the *ORIGINAL* heater valve probably looks like this...



my car had a replacement thats actually a Chevy valve, and looks like this,



and I just replaced that with the updated volvo factory part, also availabe as 'VDO', like this,



this last one has better control range on my car, with the chevy one setting tthe heat **** to like 30% gave me nearly full heat, while this other one, 50% is warm, 100% is hot, which makes a lot more sense to me.