Does anyone have a Road test of the 2.0 480ES ?

[Ulrika480]

Does anyone have a roadtest or full performance figures for the 2.0 version of the 480 ? I've got several on the 1.7 but none on the 2.0 used in the ES, GT and Celebration?

Thanks

[Captain Slow]

You can see some of the figures on the website:

http://www.volvo-480-europe.org/volvo48 ... ngine23=on

[Ulrika480]

Thanks. I've got a couple of brochures with the key stats, but haven't seen any road-test of the 2.0 at all in the UK.

I guess the UK motoring press had already made its mind up by 1988 on the 480 after the Turbo had come out, and didn't think it was worth testing the 2.0 ?

[Van]

I believe the figures on the website are credible. Mine will do 195kp/h and I've done only one standing acceleration test ever, but that first try clocked 0-100 in 10.2 seconds and I'm sure those 4/10th could be cut somewhere.

[David]

Why did they introduce the 2.0? Especially when it is not much more powerful than the 1.7, which in itself should have been more than adequate for such a small car. I read somewhere that it was to compensate for the 'power sapping' catylic converter but I read somewhere else it was that they simply 'ran out' of 1.7 litre engines?!

[Van]

The 1.7 really was underpowered. And yes, when the cats came power was sometimes down to only 90hp or so. While the figures seem pretty much the same, the 2.0 has much more low down torque and does deliver the power the 1.7 does not have. The 2.0 is faster, drives more relaxed and is more economical.

Originally for the 480 series just the turbo was planned. It had to be a comfy cruiser for the US. When they couldn't sell it in the US the plan had to be changed and they thought for the Europeans the non turbo 1.7 would do. Major criticism then was the lack of power so they had to return to the turbo idea and sell it as a performance car.

[Ulrika480]

I take it that non-one has a road-test report on the 2.0 ?!

[David]

The 1.7 really was underpowered. And yes, when the cats came power was sometimes down to only 90hp or so. While the figures seem pretty much the same, the 2.0 has much more low down torque and does deliver the power the 1.7 does not have. The 2.0 is faster, drives more relaxed and is more economical.

Originally for the 480 series just the turbo was planned. It had to be a comfy cruiser for the US. When they couldn't sell it in the US the plan had to be changed and they thought for the Europeans the non turbo 1.7 would do. Major criticism then was the lack of power so they had to return to the turbo idea and sell it as a performance car.

Thanks, interesting information there. Just wondering, my old 1.7 ES had a 'Lambdasond' symbol on each side of the car. What was so special about the Lambda that they needed these symbols. I assumed it was performance related but maby not?

[Van]

The Lambdasond measures the amount of oxygen in the exhaust and reports it to the engine to adjust the fuel/air mixture as optimal as possible. The better the combustion the less pollution. Maybe that indicating it suggested environmental friendliness? Every car has one today.

[Captain Slow]

Maybe that indicating it suggested environmental friendliness? Every car has one today.

That was/is my understanding. I assume that it was one of those things Volvo did before many other manufacturers and hence thought they would broadcast it with a badge.

[Ulrika480]

I take it that non-one has a road-test report on the 2.0 ?!

[Ettore Bugatti]

You wouldn't no for an answer?

I haven't seen one, there are some tests of a the facelift 440/460 with the revised B20F engine.