Remaped S80/XC90 T6

[Georgey dee]

Has any one remapped thier S80 or xc90 T6? Any experiences, tips or prefered companies?

Any comments welcome.

[Georgey dee]

That'll be a no then.

[chf]

Originally Posted by Georgey dee

That'll be a no then.

Had an XC90 D5 remapped .... interested ?

[Georgey dee]

Who did the re-map? Has it made much difference? Have you had any problems??

Trouble is with the XC90, not many people Mod them.

[Nocomplaints1977]

I have an Upsolute chip in my S40 T4. I know its not an T6 but the chip gave pleasing results, my S40 T4 (200BHP standard) is now just as quick as the Focus ST (235bhp - using the 5 pot Volvo engine incidentally lol) so their claimed increase up to 236bhp seems on the money and cost me £295 fitted at my address. They do one for the T6 and this is the site. http://www.upsolute.com/eng/index.html. Simon Coe is the chap who did mine, very friendly and comes out to your house to do the work. Just look under Product Database, Volvo etc and its listed there. Think the increase is for your T6 would be 272bhp to 317bhp and 280ft/lb to 332ft/lb torque.

Hope this helps.

Gaz

[foggyjames]

It's a real shame the T6 hasn't had more publicity, as I bet it's every bit as good as the smaller units...but bigger!

There's a guy in the US has just put a T6 motor in a 960 (replacing the 3.0 non-turbo version which cracked a liner within 10 minutes of seeing boost), and it has a turbo from a large lorry on it. Assuming he runs a reasonable amount of boost on it and winds it out to ~8krpm, it's going to be hard to avoid making over 500bhp, and I suspect with a bit of tweaking it'll be nearer 1000 than 500.

cheers

James

[shimon340]

A bit of thread resurrection as I found this one via google.

Did the first generation S80 T6 have VVT from the start ie was it a RN series from 1999. 1999 is the switchover from N to RN series and those engines feature VVT and larger cast liner spacings, increase cylinder head cooling amongst other things. Overall, that means headgaskets arent interchangable between N and RN series.

Did the 960 mentioned here use an N series straight six with a turbo? I guess bespoke mapping?

The 960 was used as the testbed for the twin turbo T6 engine which was used in the S80. Volvo called the engine the performance concept or something internally. Also, the S80 T6 prototypes were manuals but Volvo decided the character of the S80 T6 was more suited to rapid but relaxed driving hence the automatic only version. Volvo could of made the manual into the S80R quite easily especially with the fact the T6 is capable of higher power than the launched 272bhp. Volvo also may have been worried about stealing sale from the S60/V70R so the T6 would have needed a significant bhp update.

I've been told by Volvo that liner cracking is due to excessive cylinder temperatures resulting from incorrect aftermarket mapping which could have been the cause here. This is rather than the excessive pressure being the cause. Also, there is potential for casting defects for OEM mapped cars which crack liners. Liners tend to crack on cylinder 3 and at the top as this is where the excessive heat builds and thermally stresses the casting.

The RNs had cast liners of a different material plus better cooling.

The Ford RS claims of a redesigned cylinder head and gasket for the RS come from the fact that engine has a RNC block with S60R internals, an RNC head with R camshafts and R series spec (RN family) head gasket.

So whilst Ford's press release isnt untrue, they have really just raided Volvo's parts to evolve the RNC 300bhp engine for the RS.

Of course, the Volvo C30R prototypes developed 350bhp and there's now the Polestar one at 400bhp

[foggyjames]

Yes, I believe all S80s used the RN from the start. Rupert has a 1998 registered S80 2.9, and that has the 204bhp VVT engine (B6294FS3...FS2 being the 180bhp 960 engine?).

There are two 960 Turbos in the US which spring to mind. One originally used a B6304, but cracked a liner soon afterwards. It's suspected that the crack was already there, but boosting the engine caused it to expand rapidly. He then replaced it with a T6 bottom end mated to a 960 head (to remove the VVT). There is another, but I have no idea of exactly what it is...3.0 or T6.

There's another guy who has a T6 engine in a 245. I'm not sure, but I have a feeling he's just using the original head and has locked the VVT.

I think the M65, being so compact, might well have struggled to hold the torque of the turbo version.

Volvo probably would say that the cracked liners are due to aftermarket mapping, wouldn't they? While re-maps are bound to exert more stress on the liners, redblocks don't fail with a 30% power increase...or a 400% power increase, for that matter!

In my opinion, the 2.5 T5 engine was a step too far, bore-wise. While in standard T5 / ST trim they appear to be fine the number of 300bhp R engines (both standard and modified) which suffer cracked liners suggest to me that they pushed their luck. I *really* hope Ford have cracked this for the RS, or Volvo are going to look very silly, given their reputation for reliability and durability.

The current trend for 2.5 R models which fail is to swap the engine out for a 2.4 T5 unit, which has no liner cracking issues, even when re-mapped into the 325-350bhp range.

If you look at the history of the whiteblock family, it's clear that there were concerns regarding bore. High pressure turbo versions of the 4, 5 and 6 cylinder engines all had smaller bore than the highest power normally aspirated versions.

I think it's fair enough to expect to have to at least look carefully at replacing wet liners with burlier items when increasing power significantly (100%+), but there should not be failures at ~30% (or even standard) as there are with the 2.5 R models.

cheers

James

[volvogoteborg]

Hello

An interesting conversation and I have some information to add.

Firstly with regards the general comment of Volvo not trusting aftermarket mapping and working for an OEM, no OEM would trust mapping that they didnt develop themselves. Its a very complicated process with understandable risks. Aftermarket tuning is highly variable in its quality as well as the extent of tests completed to ensure the physical conditions within the cylinders meet the OEMs and engineering standards. This is why maps which are signed off by an OEM (re Mountune map for the Volvo engined Focus RS500, Heico approved map for the special edition V70, Polestar performance maps etc) are significant developments.

Aftermarket mapping being blamed for cracked liners isnt just Volvo ducking out of responsibility. Rather, it's based on their own experience and knowledge of the risks inherent from incorrect mapping (including a review of aftermarket maps from certain companies). One might retort that Volvo can't test or verify and sign off as BAD every aftermarket map, but work has been done to at least learn that some maps are BAD as Volvo well knows also from knowing what sort of maps are needed / should be avoided for their own engines. It is quite unlikely an aftermarket company could have such an extensive knowledge as the original OEM to write an aftermarket map with such confidence. In the whole process, its too easy to dismiss the in cylinder peak temperature and pressure and just focus on the power and torque output.

With regards the cracking of liners, there are two causes.
Firstly, excessive in cylinder temperatures will thermally stress the liners and the result is eventually they crack. This tends to affect cylinder 3 as well. Increased cooling understandably can help, to a point but if the map is that bad only extensive cooling improvements would resolve. (NB RN has better cooling to the tops of the liners and head than the N)

Noted your point about the 81 and 83mm bore. The turbos having the 81mm bore is more to do with peak pressure for those versions until they were sure the 83mm ones could last.

The other issue is casting defects leaving liners inherently weak and prone to fail. The RN engines have different liner material to the N series too. So, cases can be divided into aftermarket tunes which failed liners and stock cars which have unfortunate casting defects in the liners.

Comparing the whiteblock family to the redblocks needs to take into account the fact the reds are solid block whereas the whites are an open decked design. The desire to tune and engine for more power needs to take in the more comprehensive consideration of cooling and engine components physical limits. But it is quite well established that the redblocks are very durable. The whiteblocks are a different family and design in their entirety but not to say Volvo's design intention was to make them any less durable. On the contrary. Plus the N series was designed from the outset to also be a diesel engine. Sadly that didnt happen until 2002 and the S60 even though such units existed way back in the 1980s as part of project Galaxy and the X100 family of engines. Of course, they werent common rail. Also as an aside, there were redblock evolved/type diesels in the 70s. Those also didnt make it sadly.

Cracked liners on standard mapped cars is worrying and I understand that concern. In light of all the information re bad mapping cracking liners, I wouldnt question Volvo's original mapping though.

With regards the 300bhp RS engine which is an RNC with R series (RN engine) internals, I too share the concern that this engine need to perform very well so as not to embarress Volvo. Rest assured, the RN series featured different liner materials to the N series and later overall stronger liners. I appreciate that still leaves questions as to why S60Rs can suffer from cracked liners but the volumes need to be taken into consideration. Some of the OEMs I've work for suffer from cracking cylinder heads as a very common occurance. Fundamental design issue or casting problem and also something far more common that the (potential) R concern and still they (the other OEMs) didnt do anything about it. Defects per production numbers is important here plus the fact R series owners are far far more vocal and active than others. Swedespeed for example has the R forum as its most busy and popular and yet in the same breath, US forum members will comment that the S60/V70R failed to sell in high numbers. The forum distorts the actual market presence.

I have confidence that the risk to liners for the RS is not a problem especially given the upgrades of the RN engines over the N and also further extra improvements.

The other good thing about the N series is that being open decked, sleeves can be replaced as per those from Darton which also feature in the K-Pax 500bhp S60R. So clearly, there is an eventual limit to the cast liner.

Your point about the M65 is interesting but indeed it could easily handle the 272bhp T6. Something to look into is if Ford amended the M66 for the RS even though it develops the same output as the S60R which used the M66. Is the RS transmission is different over the ST then are Ford maybe opting for the D5's M66 casing with ratios suitable amended for the RS. Be careful with Ford's press releases as they like to sound like they developed all this new stuff for the RS. Its an aspect of the truth and white lies and really the parts are all Volvos. Quaife diff is a newbie but not that Quaife didnt already have it on sale and Volvo owners using it as a retrofit!!

Re the 960s, interesting info and makes sense to have a T6bottom end for more strength but an RN T6 cannot have a N head fitted as the liner spacing is different (0.8mm on the RN, 0.6 on the N)

Your point re 300bhp pushing the 83mm bore of the S60/V70R too far is interesting but I have to admit I dont know the exact timing of further amendments to the RN/RNC block to comment if the whole R or some of the R or none of the R were pre these further improvements.

If you really want to push a whiteblock engine, go for a closed deck Darton sleeve setup as per the 500bhp K-Pax racers.

However, a curve ball to that discussion is the Volvo-Yamaha co-developed V8 which now sees itself developing 650bhp in twin turbo form in the Noble M600.

Nice talking to you Foggyjames,

[volvogoteborg]

....also the S60R/V70R engines have different timing belt tensioners and water pump sprokets so as to use the same timing belt and idler as the standard engines and yet allow the water pump to spin faster thereby giving the improved cooling mentioned in the R's press releases.