• General
  • 200 Series T5 - Research, Thoughts and Caveats

So, my interest has been piqued in the T5 5speed into a 200 series. I'm sure there are loads of articles out there and TB has a few, but I am more interested in the Australian perspective of doing such a conversion. @Nicko you touched on this the other day, but I am keen to flesh out the idea and put some meat on the bones of a pathway that appeals.

Some of the 'blurb' from Wonkipedia and the appeal:

A five-cylinder engine gets a power stroke every 144 degrees (720° ÷ 5 = 144°). Since each power stroke lasts 180 degrees, this means that a power stroke is always in effect. Because of uneven levels of torque during the expansion strokes divided among the five cylinders, there are increased secondary-order vibrations. At higher engine speeds, there is an uneven third-order vibration from the crankshaft which occurs every 144 degrees. Because the power strokes have some overlap, a five-cylinder engine may run more smoothly than a non-overlapping four-cylinder engine, but only at limited mid-range speeds where second and third-order vibrations are lower.

agus:

In 1995, a high performance model, developed in part with Porsche, was released and designated the T-5R. The vehicle was based on the 850 Turbo, utilizing the B5234T3 engine with a special ECU (Bosch #628) that added an additional 2 psi (0.1 bar) of turbocharger boost pressure,[2] giving the engine an extra 18 hp (13 kW; 18 PS) for a total of 243 hp (181 kW) and 221 lb·ft (300 N·m) of torque. The engine was mated to a 4-speed automatic transmission. The T-5R was renowned as a sleeper car; despite its boxy, understated appearance, it boasted a drag coefficient of 0.29 and was capable of accelerating from 0 to 60 mph (97 km/h) in 5.8 - 6.0 seconds (depending on transmission and body type). The top speed was electronically limited to 155 mph (249 km/h). The vehicle came standard with Pirelli P-Zero tires, providing lateral grip of 0.88 g. The engine tuning was co-developed with Porsche, as was the transmission and other powertrain components.

But which one to choose:

  • B5234T3 T3 with different EMS
  • B5234T4 T4 Motronic
  • B5234T5 T4 15g Motronic

Every cylinder added beyond five increases the overlap of firing strokes and makes for less primary order vibration. An inline-six gets a power stroke every 120 degrees. So there is more overlap (180° - 120° = 60°) than in a five-cylinder engine (180° - 144° = 36°). However, this increase in smoothness of a six-cylinder engine over a five-cylinder engine is not as pronounced as that of a five-cylinder engine over a four-cylinder engine. The inline-five loses less power to friction as compared to an inline-six. It also uses fewer parts, and it is physically shorter, so it requires less room in the engine bay, allowing for transverse mounting. A five-cylinder engine is longer and more expensive to manufacture than a comparable four-cylinder engine, but some manufacturers feel these costs are outweighed by its greater capacity in a smaller space than a six-cylinder. From the standpoint of driving experience, five-cylinder engines are noted for combining the best aspects of four- and six-cylinder engines. They generate more power and torque than four-cylinder engines, while maintaining better fuel economy and "pep" than six-cylinder engines. Five-cylinder turbos have been used on more than one occasion in sport and racing applications for their balance of performance qualities. The Volvo S60 R has a 2.5 litre turbocharged inline five-cylinder engine which is capable of generating 300 brake horsepower (224 kW) and 295 lbf·ft (400 N·m) of torque across a large amount of its rpm ranges. The new Ford Focus RS performance car uses the same Volvo 5-cylinder engine, developed (by Ford) to very similar power levels, and is one of the most powerful FWD production cars ever created. Another example of a high power 5 cylinder car is the Audi RS2, with its 2.2 turbocharged engine making 311 hp.

and then why not consider:

  • B6294T but other than being a six like this baby...

Mental, yes, and I wonder what your thoughts are?

http://www.streetfire.net/video/volvo-242-with-5-cylinder-turbo-engine-430hp_152070.htm

B5244T B5254T B5254T2

Are the really solid turbos to build a modded whiteblock on. Stronger internals and more room to expand than the more highly strung HPT's and should be much easier to find in good nick as they came on a wider variety of cars. General T5 adaption should work but haven't actually done any research on that.

I think the biggie is the sump. Seems the T5 sump is full depth all the way and the RWD whiteblock 6 is more like a red block style. As for motors I would think a V70 T5 would be the go if you want to use the volvo ECU. They are OBDII compliant while the older 4.3 motronic is not. The latter 19t or 16t equipped motors don't run the overboost system either.

nicko said: I think the biggie is the sump. Seems the T5 sump is full depth all the way and the RWD whiteblock 6 is more like a red block style.

Yup. Article on TB says same. Thanks Nick. Would like a compromise between the four and the six (power/NVH power/consumption)

As for motors I would think a V70 T5 would be the go if you want to use the volvo ECU. They are OBDII compliant while the older 4.3 motronic is not. The latter 19t or 16t equipped motors don't run the overboost system either.

Inksi may have already offloaded that one to @egads (she/her), but I like the thinking.

Thanks for the input, Chasps :)

egads said: In general though, doooo eeeet!

What he said :P

Would be an interesting build. I've always been keen on dropping a B4194T or B4204T5 in a 360. Just more straight up donor car, swap the lot over (ECU et all) and make something fit with the torque tube. From what I've seen lately though with my brother dropping a 202 in an old Corona.... Stock electronics aren't always the easiest route.

Nice! Yeah, had a mate put a 186 in a Mercedes W123 (300) for shits'n'giggles!!! Mad thing it was...

I reckon an upright late model V70 T5 or 6 would be lots of fun. I'm thinking get the gearbox with it and wiring and then start playing B-)

Do the engine mounts line up with a 5cylinder in a 200series?

Not that I am aware of. Particularly if doing a vertical mount (more room on steering side). Just read a couple of articles and both had to make custom mounts of one form or another ;)

Ergo:

Engine mounts

If you're using any flavor of 850 motor, 960 upper mounts will bolt on. These will greatly simplify hanging the engine. The mounting bosses are already present on the block and three out of the four holes on each side are threaded. If you are not comfortable drilling into your engine block, it is not absolutely necessary to tap those two holes - the mounts will hold fine with just three proper bolts. If you choose to tap the holes, they already have pilot holes drilled and need to be tapped to M8x1.25 thread. If you instead opted for an S70 motor, you may have issues with the passenger side mount. I can't speak for MY97 motors, but the 98 S70 engine Alex has sitting around does not share a single passenger side mounting boss with either of the 850 engines we have. If you are building custom upper mounts then this is a moot point, but it's critically important if you're looking to cut down on fabrication work.

Lower mounts need to be fabricated. No bolt-on solution exists. Captain Bondo here on the board made some very simple and functional lower mounts that my brother and I shamelessly ripped off when we did the swap in my car. They are just two pieces of box section. One side is pictured here. Note the use of 240 rubber isolators between the upper and lower mounts.

Hanging the engine in this fashion will provide a very stable mount. You can easily get away with using the cheapest 240 rubber mounts. Polyurethane versions are completely unnecessary.

It's important to note that since a whiteblock is normally mounted to tilt 11 degrees toward the passenger side, 960 mounts will offset that and provide perfectly horizontal mounting surfaces.

The positioning of the engine in the bay is largely contingent on the presence of absence of power steering. A manual steering rack is significantly thinner than a power rack, and will allow a nice, deep mounting position. A power rack necessitates the removal of some oil pan webbing as well as a less ideal overall placement.

source: http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=163457