1970 Volvo 142 Automatic - Speedshop

The car is being built as a Amaturbuild.

That means that here in sweden you can register the car with big modifications to engine and chassis.

My car will keep the modelyear 1970 as the cars first registration.

The plan is a capable streetcar with trackambitions.

Then a fair bit of changes is needed to be made.

The recept for now is:

Engine - 6cyl 190hp(original , will be higher ).
Clutch - Audi 2,7T.
Gearbox - Audi A6 5-speed.
Propshaft - Passat/Audi.
Reardif - Passat/Audi with Torsen.
Rearaxle - Audi A6 , double A-arms.
Frontaxle - Volvo 142 , double A-arms , widened.
Steering - Volvo 240 rack , adapted to 142.

Chassis spindle front - Mercedes with 60mm drop.
Brakes front - Mercedes Alu fourpots.
Brakes rear - Audi Original , with built in handbrake.

Yes thats the plan.

Have been getting parts for a while now.

So soon its time to build some real stuff an test it.

I need to build a extra frame in the rear.

That's for supporting both the new rearaxle and extra subfram.

The cars original subframe ends under the rear seats.

I will leghtend that original subfram and make it go all the way to the rearaxle mountingpoints.

All this to support the rear so that it will handle the new Power.

Then as extra support i will make an extra subframeconnector that will binde the floor and underframe together.

This subframconnector will also connect to the front for extra support.

Apr 15, 2014 21:56:58 GMT raymond63 said:

This will be very interesting, some others have tried to change the steering to a rack, but none I've seen with succes. Mainly because of the Ackermann steering geometry. Did you solve that..? I sort of compared it with my MGB. It's older than the 140, has a rack, and it can handle modified V8's, so would not be a problem in a 140 too..

Looking forward to your results on the car.. (looks a lot better than mine as is..)

btw, I was contemplating a rear suspension from a 700/900..

The problem.....at least the one of the steeringrack is that the original frontaxel is very narrow.

Between the lower controlarms there is only 30-40cm so a normal "rack" is too wide.

Then there is the problem with how they are mounted , the rack will not get centered front to back.

The "rack" then sits too long forward and then can create some strange fenomenon.

And third , the original spindles are the main problem for ackerman.

In the standard setup Ackerman is in the "pitman" arm.

Now with new spindles it will be in the steeringarm.

All of this will be altered.

I have to cut and weld my frontaxle and make it wider.

That's because the wider tracking of my rearaxle.

So the problem with the narrow mounts will be solved.

The problem with centering the steering "rack" will also be rectified by cutting out the crossmember/beam.

Ackerman will be taken care of with the new spindles that have bolted steeringarms , adjusted together with the steeringrack in the right Place.

I hope anyways.

So you can see that the frontaxle is not going to be like the standard one.

I have been thinking about this and it looks OK i theory.

I have one extra complete frontaxle that i am going to test on forst.

With this axle i am going to create a jigg to cut and weld it in.

BUT , i have been wrong Before

That's the only way to learn , old or young , learning is fun.

Apr 16, 2014 11:46:34 GMT raymond63 said:

What about a narrower rack? And if needed, shorter arms.. Like I mentioned, the MGB (Wich I have also)had this set up from the beginning. The rach simply mounted on brackets welded to the front suspension member, which is less wide as the 140 one.. and the whole set including the spindles is obviously correct on that car..

My first thoughts earlier therefore were using the spindles and perhaps the rack too on the 140.. no cutting and welding at first, maybe lengthening the connecting arms on the rack..

I did find a picture of a 140 racer once, tried to contact them but never received a reply..

some stuff here..

www.forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?s=ce21dcc2f35f8e6ea4350a017206915e&t=133106&page=7

and a collegue Volvo-ist..

retrorides.proboards.com/thread/46950

P1800..

forums.swedespeed.com/showthread.php?166555-Swedish-Ops-Front-Crossmember-Suspension-Update-Pics

That's easy to answer.

I don'twant to use a narrower rack then needed.

I Think that i need to anyways but that will be clear when trying it on!

The best would be to use a rack that has shorter ratio but is standard length.
To be able to regsister my car as a "Amateurbuild" i need to change enough on the car.
And since i need to make the tracking wide to fit my REAR AXLE , why cheat and not change the steering then?

The rules say that i need to change enough to register it with the changes i want , engine , front axle , rear axle and more.

So the plan.......well if there is one is Volvo 240 rack and maybe Corsa Electric servo.

I am going to make my front axle wider.

So that it will fit the tracking of the rear axle.

In doing so i need to make the front to fit the car.

That's why , so its not that i don't want the narrow rack totaly.

It's more that its not so wise to buy a steeringrack now and not knowing if i need it.

We will se

WHY using a rack from an MG when there is better options in Sweden.

IF i need to use a shorter rack then i will shorten a 240-rack and fit to the car.

MG and englishbuilt stuff are more expensive here then Volvostuff.

And in my way of seeing it maybe not as good on a volvo either.

And IF i need to change it then maybe a VAG product may be up for it.

That's IF i need to change the rack to behind the beam.

I know nothing about this until i have tried it.

Thanks for the links thou.

I will check hisout and steal some ideas.

Maybe even regster and put my project thereas well


I can't see why you got this hangup about this , absolutely no offence?
It's only good that i do not need to trouble around with the narrow track and narrow steeringrack.
I only see it as good that i can make it better.

Keep on coing with some ideas , its good that someone is looking at what i do

Testing testing.

Small steps.

One step forward & one step back......one step forward & one step back

There is something going on anyways.

Neverending story about the steeringrack.

Testing and contemplating and more testing.

Right now testing the rack behind the front beam.

The Engine has the oilpickup in front when monted as i want it.

So then there will be a gap between Engine and gearbox.

Perfect for the steeringrack to be......kind of.

Testing testing.

Reved up my machine.

And choped of my front beam.

As i said earlier my front beam is to narrow to fit my goal.

So i had to make room for both steeringrack and fitment for the rear.

There is welding......not so pretty lookning but its only inside the beam.

Here with testing of the steeringrack.



From the upside.

May 7, 2014 4:16:11 GMT The Jackeria said:

Looking forward to seeing where this goes, I've considered a VR in my Toledo before now (partly because I have a VR engine sat in my garage doing nothing), just I don't know many/any RWD only gearboxes that would mate upto it without buying an adaptor from Australia. Looks like your going 4WD with the one you've got on there, good luck.

Its RWD on my setup.

Have not figured out how to yet.

I will weld up the centerdiff and go only RWD.

But i have to make som stubbs to block of the holes left by the front driveshafts.

May 8, 2014 1:32:39 GMT The Jackeria said:

Ahh I see, so is that an r32 set up?

I don't understand?

Its a 2,9L VR6.

Then a adapterplats from a VR5.

Gearbox from a Audi/Passat 4x4(Quattro/Syncro - same gearbox different name).

Rearaxle from Audi A6 Quattro / Passat Syncro.

The gearbox will have the centerdiff welded up to 100% lock and will give 100% drive to the rear.

The front diff will remain stock to start with but the axles will not be attached , hopefully i can remove the axlestubbs.