Saabscene Saab Forum - Saab Technical Information Resource banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I believe this is the bottom end of the B234R ... it's one seriously stout engine! Instead of just putting on main caps and bearings to hold the crackshaft, it appears to be cast as one solid piece that extends below the crank and just cracked/split/machined into two seperate pieces! Wild stuff!

The pictures are from Nordic Tuning's page one the buildup of the 2.5t GT.



Dubbya~
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
I'm suprised this hasn't interested more folks performance wise. I think it would be kind of cool to discuss differences between the blocks. But perhaps no one has seen many of the newer blocks torn down like this? I have a hunch this engine may be the LongBlock 2.3L as it doesn't appear to have the "cog-wheel" crank trigger. Not sure though. For all I know it's the B235 ...

Surely some of you know what the differences are. Maybe someone can dig up pics of all the blocks and we can pinpoint differences and post them in the B-series blocks thread.


Dubbya~
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
I'm not an authority on the differences between the long block and the newer B234's, but I do know this superficial difference: the early ('91-93, here in the 'States) long blocks were painted red, the later B234's were black. Here's some pictures of my '98 B234R when I had it ready to be installed in my '94 Aero and one of Fredrik's (MapTun), which has about 200 hp more than mine (~310 hp)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
Originally posted by ylee coyote:
[qb]ok adrian I do not think it is a 234...
who knows what it is[/qb][/b]
It looks to me like a 90-93 B234 "long block", certainly having seen the bottom end of mine properly for the first time yesterday, the engine in the picture looks very similar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
The long block does look quite a bit more robust towards the bottom end. But both engines have the same number of bolts holding the crankshaft to the rest of the block. So sheer strength wise there may be little difference.

Noise is one of the big differences with a "bedplate" ... it's generally significantly reduced. I'm curious ... my B235R's oil pan looks more or less like the B234R ... and it's a rather noisy engine. The B235R makes quite a bit of chatter ... does the 91-93 2.3L seem quite as loud? With the bedplate it should sound much smoother ... I know the 2.5t GT from Nordic sounds quite smooth mechanically.

The B234R still looks very very stout. I shrunk down ylee's pic and posted on my webspace (ylee feel free to link from mine if you like) ... and here's a comparison between it and an older Chrysler 2.5L turbo:

B234R


I am curious ... ylee are you using tubular headers for this turbo? It looks to have the same exhaust flange as stock, and in the garrett catalog the GT30 uses a pulse split housing. Not sure if it's a special housing to suit the cast iron manifold, or just a different version of the GT30 turbo.

Anyway ... all nifty stuff. Wonder what the B235R block looks like. Just had a peek under the car and looks more or less the same as the B234R ... but you never know.

Dubbya~
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,925 Posts
I have to agree with Leon, and also if it's a 234, where are the balance shaft tubes, look at wylies pic, they are very obvious there. The second picture of Adrians, showing the block upside down on the bench, is a different engine to the top picture. It still doesn't have balance shfts though, it's more like a 202.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,215 Posts
 are you using tubular headers for this turbo?  [/b]
'fraid not...
spent so much on the rest of it..gearbox ,rack bushes ,front front wishbone bushes.. and all the engine work.. my budget was spent
(would have loved them tho...)
maybe next upgrade !!
so it is running a std manifold
btw when we took the origonal off it was cracked in about 6 places !!
here is it in the middle of installation..

http://free.one.picturehost.co.uk/Jan28109.JPG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Originally posted by Neil(CS2.3T):
[qb]I have to agree with Leon, and also if it's a 234, where are the balance shaft tubes, look at wylies pic, they are very obvious there. The second picture of Adrians, showing the block upside down on the bench, is a different engine to the top picture. It still doesn't have balance shfts though, it's more like a 202. [/qb][/b]
It's a Chrysler 2.5T that I used for comparison, and it does have ballance shafts, but they bolt into the oil pan.

Is it possible the first three years of the 2.3L didn't have ballance shafts? I think there may be one ballance shaft tube on the left of that pic, but obviously Rob from Nordic is using a Saab engine. The head bolts straight on, the crankshaft (if you look at the specs on their page) is the same size as stock 2.3L, the bore has been extended to 3.66", but that's still near stock, and exactly the same as the 2.1L Saab engines.

Anyone with a -93 2.3L 9000 care to take a gander under their car? If the oil pan has more than 15 bolts it's a B234R like ylee ... if it has 14 then it's the engine you see in the first picture.

And ylee ... tubular headers will help your low end spool up waaaay more than an ECU re-map if they are ceramic coated tube headers. Heat wrapping wouldn't hurt either. The more heat you keep in, the more exhaust velocity ect. I'm sure you know all that, but just in case someone else is reading this for informational purposes.


Anyhow ... someone with an early 2.3 check your oil pan! And confirm ballance shafts or not?

Dubbya~
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,925 Posts
My car is one of the first CS 2.3's. Jan 92 and it is red and definately has two balance shafts showing on the outside of the engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,215 Posts
tubular headers will help your low end spool up waaaay more than an ECU re-map[/b]
yes but ...
tubular headers cost $$$$$
ecu remaps $ 0.0

The map is far from optimal given it has been designed for a normal head flow characteristics..
and mine will flow a little better methinks
so a remap it will be ....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Here's a pic of the engine together ... I don't see any ballance shafts either ... there had to be some Saab engine that we don't know of. But Nordic doesn't even say what engine they used! Just that it's a straight inline 4 cyllinder.




Dubbya~
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
There was also rumoured to be a 2.0 that didn't have the ballance shafts on the N/A GM900 in 1994 ... if the old 2.3L had the bed plate and they used the same bedplate in that naturally aspirated model ... then conceivably ... could that naturally aspirated engine have the bed plate but without ballance shafts? Or was it just a B202 just like in the C900, but crammed into a GM900?

Dubbya~
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,676 Posts
The first assumption is correct. Over here, normally aspirated '94/'95 2.0 litre N/A 900's and 9000's did have a version of the 'short' engine without balancer shafts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,925 Posts
But getting back to the pictures in your first post. The first block you show is not the same as the red block in the second picture. I dont know where the first block comes from but it doesn't look like a saab block. The second block,red, looks like a 202 engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,044 Posts
The long block does look quite a bit more robust towards the bottom end. But both engines have the same number of bolts holding the crankshaft to the rest of the block. So sheer strength wise there may be little difference.

Noise is one of the big differences with a "bedplate" ... it's generally significantly reduced. I'm curious ... my B235R's oil pan looks more or less like the B234R ... and it's a rather noisy engine. The B235R makes quite a bit of chatter ... does the 91-93 2.3L seem quite as loud? With the bedplate it should sound much smoother ... I know the 2.5t GT from Nordic sounds quite smooth mechanically.

The B234R still looks very very stout. I shrunk down ylee's pic and posted on my webspace (ylee feel free to link from mine if you like) ... and here's a comparison between it and an older Chrysler 2.5L turbo:

B234R


 [/b]
Okay, whats the circular bit on the left with slots cut out for??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,216 Posts
It doesn't look like any of the Saab engines up to B235 to me. These engines are all pretty similar and didn't change in fundamental design over the years. What it does look like to me is a Rover K-series engine, which is all-aluminium and has a "long-bolt" design where bolts are passed through the cylinder head, through the block and down into the sump (or the bolts might pass upwards - not sure...) holding the entire structure in compression and making it tremendously strong. I believe this engine has a bottom-end design like that shown in the photo.

I can't find any photos from that angle, but there are a couple of photos of this engine here. Note the similarity in shape and position of the engine mounting bracket shown in these photos and also the one above.

Alternatively, I don't know a lot about the Ecotech engine the new 9-3 engines are based on but they might use a similar design.
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top