• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

Block mounted distributors for LH 2.2 700's

R

Rene Svastal

New member
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Location
Toronto, Canada
I have the B23FT in my LH 2.2 equipped 745. Right now I'm using the head-mounted distributor, but I'd like to try a K-cam, so I'm going for the block mounted distributor. What distributor will work with the 745 ignition? The 240's (86-88 ) have the same plug, as do the B23FT (84 760T) distrubutors. Are they plug and play? I'm not worried about physical fit, that's OK.

Thanks,
Rene Svastal
 
Is there any disadvantage to switching from a head mounted dist to a block mounted dist. I'd apprediate having easier acess to my dist.
 
May i recomend a adjustable cam gear if your gona use the K cam.
I have had called my 242 more names in the last week then any car put together tryin to get the timing right for the motor.

And what are the advantages /disadvantages to the the block mounted and head mounted distributors.
 
hmm in 240's you just plain cant use the head mounted dizzy... it doesnt fit w/o some banging on the firewall : why bother?

just get a 240 immediate shaft and a 240 distributer and you're in business. a relatively simple swap. (not for the average diy who doesnt know what the immediate shaft is... rofl)

am i wrong on this?

as for comparsion between the rear mounted dizzy and block...

i have no idea. they werent trying to save money on shorter sparkplug wires! rofl
 
I think Volvo used a head mounted dizzy for 2 reasons:
1)possibly to improve access on the 400 series cars (Well, Dave Slater, is that it?)
2)looks cooler than an old, primitive, block mount.

Could be other reasons relating to drag on the balance shaft, it's hard to say. But on many pushrod motors the distributor is run directly off the cam, so they could have been going back to that. Or they thought it looked cool.
 
"cooler looking"

yeah but there's a ugly flat spot where it belongs... eh.

if you had no PS, no AC and clean-style intake (as in not the vaccumn-hose full k-jet or the LH that has so many wires... the one that's practiaclly just a fuel rail and injectors and the manifold... no wires and shite...

a rear dizzy would really leave the engine naked... easy to work on and ...

naked
 
I don't think there is any disadvantage to a block mounted dizzy. Both the 240 B230F and 740 B230F made the same amount of power. It is possible that the intermeadiate shaft driving drags on the motor a tiny bit more than a head mounted cam driven dizzy. I wouldn't worry about it, it's better to re locate the dist then to butcher the firewall of a 240.
 
I would think the reason for a head mounted dizzy is to save money. You need a cast and machined distributor for the block mounted engines vs a bit more machining for the head mounted ones. I can see no diff in performance between the two as they are both driven by the timing belt. Having the pickup on the flywheel is a theroretical advantage as it removes the variations in timing induced by the timing belt moving around (stretching and flexing). Carmakers are driven by the need to save money, saving 5.00 on one car doesnt sound like much but multiply that by a couple hundred thousand. Dan242tic
 
:roll: Why would he be butchering the firewall of his 240??? He clearly stated that he drives a 745... and thats why he needs to switch to block mount so he can try the K-cam... geeze
 
hmm
machinging a k-grind (which doesnt have the slot for the rear dizzy usually) is a pita for a non-machinist... i guess you could trust somebody to do it for you...
we're just debating about putting block dizzy instead. it fits the 740 just fine, and no machinging required... but thats up to whoever does this type of thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top