Volvo 265 GLE with B27E 6 cylinder engine, why buy it and why not?

I'm considering buying a volvo 265 GLE from 1980.

I did some reading on the Internet and was shocked that the V6 engine was
probably the worst block volvo has ever produced. (thanks to peugeot and
renault I guess) I read that regular maintenance is required to keep it
running like
changing the oil every 4500 km max. (that's 3000 miles) That's a lot!
The problem is that i don't want to buy a car with engine troubles. How can
I check to make sure the engine is still okay?

Anybody has tips when checking out a 265?

I live in the Netherlands and prefer a 265 on LPG (autogas). Should i worry
considerably more about a 265 on LPG that one running on regular fuel?

 

I recently bought one the same, it had an engine rebuild about 10 years ago
(not sure what that involved nor how many kms). The car has done over
350,000 kms - the odometer isn't working. It runs well, uses no oil and
about a third of a cup of water per week - I think that is through a small
weep hole in radiator. Volvos, especially older than 1986 are dead cheap
here because lead replacement petrol is being phased out in Australia, and
many ppl fear cars which were expensive new. I am wondering how adaptable
any four cylinder engine would be if and when this one gives up, but it
seems to me that will not be any time soon.

 

The main problem is wear between the camshaft and rockers. If the
engine is not ticking loudly, and the valve covers don't look like
they've been disturbed recently, then it's probably OK. If the valve
covers have been off recently, then the wear may have been "adjusted
out" which makes it quiet for a few kilometers until more wear occurs.
With the valve covers off, the wear is obvious if it's there.

Also these engines suffer from minor oil and coolant leaks, and service
is expensive.

--
Mike F.
Thornhill (near Toronto), Ont.

Replace tt with t (twice!) and remove parentheses to email me directly.
(But I check the newsgroup more often than this email address.)

 

They can be ok engines with luck and meticulous maintenance but they're a
*real* pain in the butt to service, particularly for someone used to working
on normal Volvo engines. Personally there's no way I'd buy a car with that
motor in it, but if you're willing to take the gamble, work on it yourself
(good luck finding a mechanic who will mess with it) and don't mind scraping
knuckles and rethreading stripped out holes in aluminum, poor fuel economy
and low resale value then go ahead. If the rest of the car is in really nice
shape it's a good candidate for a motor swap to something better.

Oh yeah, as with any engine, running on LPG should be beneficial, you can go
much longer between oil changes, though LPG cars are very rare over here so
I have little direct experience.

 

James, do you know off hand which motors are interchangeable (without being
held responsible)? I guess the most likely would be the 240?

 

Don't do it,have 3 V6's in my parts pile,paid 20.00$ running, to use interior
in my 140's> Enough said? Bill

 

How do you mean, "to use interior"? Is that you use them in 140's because
they are cheap, but you shouldn't use them... because they are cheap?

 

Well none are directly interchangeable, but it's not a huge job to drop in a
4 cyl from any 240/740/940 Volvo. The most direct swap would be to a B21F or
B21FT with K-jet injection (assuming that's what the 6 has in your area).
Then you should only have to swap the motor (with injection stuff attached
to it), bellhousing or transmission, mounts, fan shroud and perhaps some of
the auxillary equipment.

 

Hm, still sounds a bit messy. I thought there might be a chance one would
just drop straight in, oh well I paid less than the price of an engine
rebuild for the car and it runs well now. But hey, even though this may be a
bad Volvo motor it has already lasted as well or better than most other
engines I have had (including one rebuild whatever that involved)...
priorities for buying a 25 year old car can be quite different than for
younger or new ones - a big one is how long since it has had (the probably
necessary) major work done. That could put an important area of the car
right back with a 5 or 10 year old.

 

Well if you already have the thing then just take good care of it, I've
heard of a few that have lasted quite a long time, many more that have
suffered an early death but you might just get lucky. As far as motors in
general it might not be so bad, it's not really a Volvo motor which is
perhaps why it has a relatively bad reputation with Volvo people accustomed
to motors lasting 250-300k miles and putting up with a lot of abuse. As much
as people including myself have complained about it, I doubt it's much worse
than the V6 in say, a Ford Taurus.

 

I have a 1980 264GLE...

And for spares, I have a 1978 264GLE, a 1982 264GLE and
a 1982 265GLE.

I'd always assume that it is no good regardless.

Consider what engine you're going to fit when you throw
the PRV away. If you are able to leave the PRV in the
car for a year or two, you're ahead.

I ran the PRV in my '80 264 on LPG _only_ for some time
before it dropped a bottom bore sleeve seal and dumped
coolant into the sump...

The engine bay is quite large, and will accept all sorts
of 4cyl, L6, V6 and V8 engines. Chev V8s are a good fit
and are quite cheap to run on LPG.

I really should update my web site...

 

Most people will just tell you to avoid the V6 if you want trouble
free motoring.

I ran a '78 260 with a B27E for a while, and didn't have any of the
oiling/camshaft/overheating problems that they have a reputation for,
and apparently the engine improved later on in its production when it
became the B280, but it never gained proper reliability.

Although I found the car enjoyable to drive, the engine is a tight
squeeze under the bonnet, making access difficult, and it is very
thirsty. People who know, recommend a turboed 2.3 as a better option.


--

Stewart Hargrave


For email, replace 'SpamOnlyToHere' with my name

 

Thirsty isn't wrong...

I improved the economy of my 264 by replacing the B27E with a
350 Chev! Mind you, the change of diff ratio (to 2.47) was a
big part of the economy improvement.

Goes a lot better, too.

 

Something is truly wrong with the design of an engine if an old fashioned
domestic V8 provides better fuel economy!

 

Part of the problem was that the V6 _always_ struggled on hills
and at 110km/h on a freeway.

Oh, and there is a _lot_ of tweaking to be done on the V8 yet.
It's been in the car for a few years but I still haven't got
around to doing much work on it. It hardly even gets driven.
:-(

 

Even a N/A 4 cyl feels ok most of the time, was the V6 car heavier? Or was
this with a slushbox?

 

The factory listed weight for a 264 was 1390kg.

Like almost every V6 Volvo in Australia, it was auto. So is the
V8 that replaced it.