http://www.hotchallenge.se/tips.html http://www.real4x4.com/wwwboard/messages/7098.shtml xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Posted by Linden Engineering Inc on November 27, 2003 at 13:10:50: In Reply to: Pinz vs C303 posted by Bob on November 27, 2003 at 11:20:49: > Thanks ever so much for the great comments from everone! Now another > question, what about the Volvo C303? So far Vince Sweeney seems to be the > biggest promoter of the C303, and from talking with him he loves his. How > does it compare with the Pinz and what do you other C303 owners think of it? > It looks to be another fine choice like the Pinz. Hello Bob We promote them, in fact we have five on the lot currently and have sold a good handful of late. Comparing the two, a Pinz and a C303 is a matter of personal preference as to what you find appealing, so here for what its worth here is my observations. The Steyr product is QUALITY,it ouzes the stuff from every aspect, I often think of the cost it took to produce such a vehicle 30 years ago.The Volvo on the other hand is not quite so up there in the league.To illustrate that, corrosion of the body is a BIG thing to be aware of when considering a C303. So far as mechanical units are concerned the Volvo is out there in the front so far as parts availability & cost ratios are concerned. Owning a Volvo means you can source parts from a multitude of suppliers.The engine is an 8 bolt crank version of the legendary B30a engine installed in the 164 Volvo car.You can convert it to FI if you can/have the "knowledge". For the engine lots of parts are available EXCEPT for some reason std pistons & some oversizes ,camshaft bearings,& other engine engine miscellanea. Engine tune parts are available from Napa, Car Quest, and the like. Prices are cheap compared to Steyr. The clutch is series 111 Landrover currently $219 complete kit from Rovers North. The gearbox is ZF 4 speed same version/variant as Pinz.T/case is Volvo source.With exposed drive lines you can see what you get,the U/J's are the same as Chev half ton pick up truck. So from an owner's perpective with limited mechanical aptitude the Volvo is less intimidating than a Steyr. The axle are Salisbury (Landrover use those)with a Volvo portal drop box attached to the end.What I don't like is a rubber boot used to seal the front drive shaft into the portal box.Its prone to splitting, fairly easy to change but overall "bloody horrible idea".!! Brakes are Landrover cylinders again easy to get from Rovers North at about $60 a pop.Brake lines are prone to corrosion so check them out rigorously. The Steyr has air cooling and is SIMPLE & very easy to maintain, the Volvo is liquid and needs an upgrade if you live in higher ambients like Colorado summers. We install an upgraded core to improve things. Where you win with a Volvo is there is HEAT in winter, but bugger all ventilation in summer the rear gets like an oven in spite of a hatch on Mil variants. Passengers complain about not having a sliding window in the rear. Overall the interior of the Volvo is like a police paddy wagon.(needs modification, like windows) The Volvo on the road is a delight to drive, bit "longer legged than a Pinz" and its 6 cylinder engine is less "busy" so its relaxing and quiet to drive on the highway.Just the sound of the tyres "wha wha whahing" underneath. It may be a better daily driver to some, really a matter of opinion/preference. Off road its a bit wide for Colorado mountain type trails, the Pinz on the other hand is a bloody marvel in tight spots its turning circle has just gotta be the best. Over rocks the Volvo wins hands down and in deep mud/slosh it has some advantages but the radiator tends to get plugged with mud deposits reducing cooling if you get too rambuncious. Costs are currently favorable to buy, for both.Soft top Volvo $11k, Steyr 710m the same, tin top Volvo $14K 710K about the same. In the end it "hosses for cosses" (horses for courses) you have to decide. My advise go try them both for an hour on the highway & off road, then make your mind up. Again one mans meat is another's poison.Need I stae more! Dennis To: pinzgauer@yahoogroups.com From: "Dennis Williams" Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 20:18:29 -0700 Subject: RE: [pinzgauer] Not quite so simple (was Volvo VS Pinz) Reply-To: pinzgauer@yahoogroups.com Hey Guys I just have to chime in on this subject. We are probably the one of a few shops that has worked on these Volvos in the US. There is a lot of well meaning comments mentioned by everyone on this subject. I think the Volvo is a great truck and parts are more plentiful EXCEPT for some crazy incredulous items. I will give you some examples. Engine: Std pistons & rings non existent for the eight bolt flywheel version engine. The same goes for cam bearings on either the 6 or 8 bolt flywheel versions. I have tried not only here in the USA , but also in Sweden, Denmark and the UK. We are currently installing a FI engine into a c304 from a 164 totally rehab'd but we had to use .030 o/s pistons because that's all we could source. Moving on to the front drive line I consider the methodology of sealing the front drive shaft trans axle as it exits the main case to the stub axle, frankly short on innovation. If it splits or gets damaged you lose the axle oil! As an English friend would say its "muckment". The Pinz is far more rugged worthy in this area. What I do like is its available torque and it only needs a 4 speed Trans to keep the power flowing. I do like the general availability of aftermarket parts in spite of my previous comments. On the road and over Tundra type terrain or probably desert like conditions it's nice, fast, and quiet to drive, although for my taste it's a bit cumbersome on tight trails. The Pinz is an agile little bugger and you feel much more connected to the surface below you. Having said that, I do have a Land Rover Series customer who took a c303 loaner we let him have whilst we put a diesel engine in it. He drove it to Moab from Denver, Rallied it with the Jeep crowd and drove it home. One complaint, his kids in the back thought it to be claustrophobic! Mechanical problems None! We sold the truck several days after getting it back, we have'nt seen it since.(that's 6 months ago) I don't think the quality measures up to a Steyr, but overall it is less intimidating for the amateur mechanic to own and repair. Over rocks and boulder strewn trails the Volvo is tops (Pinz don't like boulders!)and deep tank full of mud slurry the Volvo just charges through it. If I was going to own one over the long run, I would be inclined to install another engine for parts availability. I have offered a 4.3 Chev Vortec to it and its looks like a 5.7 would fit with a little shoehorning. Cooling is a problem even with the original engine but putting the Rad" in the engine compartment might just do the trick (a la Astro Van set up). I suppose I could even go mad and find a diesel for the re-power but then where's the payback??? So there you have it----Pinzies you just gotta love "em. Dennis To: From: "Alan Barrow" Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:16:40 -0500 Subject: [pinzgauer] Not quite so simple (was Volvo VS Pinz) Reply-To: pinzgauer@yahoogroups.com OK, here we go again, you'll get a wide variance on this subject. When I first started my decision in '99 I thought I wanted the Volvo. After some research, I ended up with a pinz. Some of that had to do with availability, but some of the decision points are still valid in my mind. I'd love to have both, but I can't, and I'll keep the pinz. To some of your specific points: > Volvo wins hands down. Who there..... big feller.... I'll respect your opinion here. I'm not sure I agree. I have a hard time with blanket statements in general. But it's a pinz forum, so it's fair to have to put up with a contrarian view or two. > More power, True, from an HP perspective. I'm not sure it is true from a slow-speed torque perspective. The pinz engine was purpose designed for the pinz package. It works well for that. If you want a race truck, highway commuter, or tow a giant camper, etc, it would be easy to want more HP. But for my use I have never felt under engined. In fact, offroad use with the pinz I feel is better/easier than most alternatives due to it's torque curve. I'm sure someone will post the Volvo is good offroad as well, and it might well be. I can't argue, I don't own both. But the Pinz engine performs reliably and well for what it is designed to do! People I know who have driven both the TD and the gas pinz usually favor the gas engine for offroad usage and reliability. On-road, noise, etc, and the VW TD get's high marks. I used to think I wanted a diesel. My current view is that I've come to appreciate the pinz engine, trust it's reliability and simplicity. There are some upgrades worth doing, none of the difficult or expensive. > articulates alot better,ALOT Beaten to death. I run with one rear spring per side, and do not feel the articulation issue is a limiting factor. Eric will tell you to add weight, which also appears to work well. Don't let the rock buggy syndrome fool you, if you are ok with trailering everywhere then the extreme articulation might be fun. But it's not for me. Besides, the new wave in rock buggies is independant suspension, fully locked vehicles. IE: articulation does not matter when fully locked. I scanned an article about one if someone is interested. And the articulation has a price with road roll. Personally, I feel it's a matter of learning how to drive the pinz, payload, and possibly spring rates. Vince mentioned "slight suspension upgrades" on the Volvo. Very few have tackled this on the pinz. > quieter, This could be an issue. I've not heard from many softtop Volvo's. Quieting the pinz has been well discussed, and as I run superswampers the tires are the loudest part of my pinz anyway. > better clearance (across the whole axle)ect ect ect. Are you sure? Specs I've seen are 15" for the Volvo. I believe the pinz is 16" at the diffs. > Pinz are probrably better though on really really narrow trails. Pinz is pretty nimble and fun to drive offroad. > That is there only advantage. They are smaller. I believe there are others: - Availability - General condition for given price - 4 speed tranny on the Volvo VS 5 speed on the pinz. - The pinz xfer case is syncronized. (Don't know about the volvo, but I've not heard it mentioned) - Engineering. The pinz is a pretty well engineered truck. Look at the insides of a Dana-44 and then the pinz axle. Dana-44's are cheap, and are considered weak for general offroad work. There are many other areas that I feel the pinz is better engineered. None of this negates the HP/easy engine availability issue of the Volvo. But I believe the pinz is better engineered and the overall quality may be higher. - Modular design, including the capability to swap the diffs front to rear. - The Volvo softtop is hideously ugly. There, I said it. The hardtop is OK, but the pinz looks like a well designed vehicle. The Volvo looks like it was designed by an 8 year old. I'm talking lines. A box is a box, but the pinz manages to pull something off the volvo does not. Note: this is not generic volvo bashing, I think the Suga is the coolest looking vehicle I've seen! But the Steyr engineers have some awfully clean engineering to their credit, including the Audi TT, etc. - Maybe Volvo just does not know how to market. But I think it is significant that the Pinz survived largely unchanged into this century, and appears to be growing in it's usage when the Volvo had a very short production run. > OH yah and if you have to brake hard at high speeds. Volvo wins again. I don't have direct experience here. We've discussed pinz performance at length recently. I will say that if it was a huge deal you could spend the bucks and convert a pinz to the TD hubs and brakes. Might be a wash with the higher selling price of the volvo's for the same condition. I might try yanking the 4wd lever during my next panic stop, it's a great idea someone mentioned! > Parts are at any Napa store or good parts store plus dealerships, and are > alot cheaper than the Pinz. Volvo wins. While this may be true for engine parts, and possibly dana-44 internals, I've seen the opposite to be true for everything else on the volvo. In fact, my observation is that the whole parts supply chain for the Volvo is far more limited than the pinz. Combine that with the condition of the Volvo's I've seen imported. Even Vince alluded to body issues on his and to quote his site: "Most left alive today are military versions. The civilian marketed models often suffer from heavy rust damage. Nice C303's that are worth my time to import, are difficult to find." Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have Vince's truck. It is very nice. But look at the work he did to it to get to that point. (there used to be a page). Let me be clear, I'm sure Vince can fix you up with a good truck. But my observation is that the overall condition and availability of the trucks is significantly different than the pinz. It's enough that I know a couple of dealers who elected not to head down the Volvo path for that reason. The condition issue may change if Swiss pinz's dry up, but we are quite lucky with the value the pinz presents. Another observation is that I do not see near the signs of proactive maintanence as you see on the swiss pinz's. This may have changed in the last few months. But when I made my decision a very rough volvo with significant body rot was more than an extremenly clean pinz. My bed, doors, canvas, etc had been replaced on the pinz. We think the brakes and hub seals had as well. This is not uncommon with swiss trucks. Given their duration of service compared to the Volvo, the proactive upgrades/maintainence appears to have been more common. The few pinz specific parts I've had to buy have not been out of line with typical German/Euro car parts. (I've not had to buy a transfer case, however!) Nearly all of my routine maintainence parts are Napa sourced. OK, another viewpoint. I'd love to have a volvo, and will be happy to roadtest and right up an objective review given the opportunity. Long-term loan would be welcome. Until then, my view is the pinz is a very capable vehicle, one of the best value's around for usability, offroad capability, and reliability. Have fun! Alan To: From: "Alan Barrow" Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 20:44:55 -0500 Subject: Re: [pinzgauer] Not quite so simple (was Volvo VS Pinz) Reply-To: pinzgauer@yahoogroups.com Willem-Jan writes: > Volvo guarantees parts service until 2010 or 2015 (there are still > Volvo's in service right now, the surplus units are the result of a > reorganisation (read: more than half of the army is dismissed). That's good to know. My comment was based on parts availability in the US. If the factory is willing to deal with individuals it may not be an issue. I know engine and other mechanical parts are easily sourced from Volvo or Rover. And there is lots of surplus in Malayia. My understanding is that body, trim, interior, etc was much harder to come by. To my knowledge there is not an equivilant to Swiss Army/SoCal/Expedition Imports/Eurotruck stocking parts for the Volvo in the US. Maybe it's easier in Europe. I don't think Vince stocks extensive parts, but I may be wrong. > When you went looking in 1999, the Swedish military had not sold off > any Volvo's....that started in 2000/2001....;)) Hmmmm, have to think about that! Valps and Sugga's were available earlier, which started my quest. There was info on the web on the C303, they were already in civilian hands in the pacific, and word that C303's would be coming available in the US at some point. There was a good bit of Laplander specific info on the tech forum board which started in May 1999. (Still appears to be one of the better Volvo info sources) There was also at least C303 one owner on the Yahoo list (onelist at the time) late 1999, early 2000 (Stephan Nillson), and vince himself posted in early March 2000: "They are built more conventionally than the Pinz but are still great trucks (with lots more suspension flex!)! The main problem with them is the fact that VERY few were ever built. I think the years of production were something like 1976-1980 ?? They have Dana axles that were modified with drop down hubs and vacuum lockers, and use a standard Volvo 6cylinder with 117hp and 165ftlbs!!! ...if only that were in the Pinz! The older yet smaller brother to it, the 3314, 202, or "Valp" it not the same at all. It is very conventional... no lockers or reduction hubs. A 303 is worth somewhere around $11k and the 3314's are about $8000 (in general!)" So I don't know about the exact timing of the military releases, but they were in private ownership in '99 and early 2000 for sure. My guess is that they were civilian versions, cause they were available! Malaysian army C303/C306's were also becoming available in the 90's as they phased them out for (get this) Pinzgauers. :-) Many are still in private ownership I understand. I was in Norway February 2000 and considered trying to import a Laplander, even found one in a Norwegian auto classifieds. But the condition was not good, and the price was (even then) higher than the pinz. The Valp was well known in Norway as well. Rust was a big issue for both. I thought about waiting, but the more I explored the pinz, some test drives made me realize I should give the pinz serious consideration. For those who are looking to compare pinz VS Volvo, Dennis made a quite informative post on Vince's board: < http://www.real4x4.com/wwwboard/messages/7098.shtml > He mentions one item I had mis-stated..... I made reference to Dana-44's. Dennis indicates the axles are Salisbury units. Maybe it was the Valp with Dana's? Either way, I'm not sure I consider the axles better engineered than the pinz solution. Think about it: Each ring/pinion is carrying half the load of a conventional axle. It's overkill for sure. The portal reduction hubs may help the lighter Volvo axles a bit, but you are still dealing with conventional (small) half shafts I believe. For what it is worth, I found it interesting that a C303 was present (in spirit at least) in the 03, and possibly 04 Dakar rally. A Volvo XC (Crosscountry) used a C303 frame, axles, and xfer case in the race. Check out: http://www.dakar2003.nu I followed the 04 Dakar, but did not see them. Again, I'd love to do a comparative analysis of both the C303 compared to the pinz. But for now I'm happy as can be with the pinz. (OK, I do wish I had the Volvo's heat for winter, but prefer air cooled for summer) Have fun! Alan To: pinzgauer@yahoogroups.com From: "Mike" Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 06:48:52 -0000 Subject: [pinzgauer] Re: Not quite so simple (was Volvo VS Pinz) Reply-To: pinzgauer@yahoogroups.com The axles are rated at one ton. These are no light weight axles and are not Dana 44s with portals added! Not only are the Axles 1 ton rated they also have the portal gears which put about 30 to 45 percent of the actual load on the axle shafts! Now thats one stong axle and could run circles around any Pinz axle pound per loaded pound! Dont get me wrong. The Pinzgauer is a great off road vehicle. But the Volvo is better in most cases. Articulation means tire contact with the ground. The more tire contact the more traction you have. Both vehicles are more capable then any other 4X4 or 6X6 in the U.S.! I'm sorry I really pissed some people off. Remember its only my opinion and thats all. But it sure has made for some good reading! Keep the Rubber side down folks! To: "The Pinz List!!" From: Vince Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 02:44:26 -0500 Subject: [pinzgauer] Re: Not quite so simple (was Volvo VS Pinz) Reply-To: pinzgauer@yahoogroups.com >Combine that with the condition of the Volvo's I've seen imported. Even >Vince alluded to body issues on his and to quote his site: "Most left alive >today are military versions. The civilian marketed models often suffer from >heavy rust damage. Nice C303's that are worth my time to import, are difficult >to find." Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have Vince's truck. It is very nice. >But look at the work he did to it to get to that point. (there used to be a >page). Let me be clear, I'm sure Vince can fix you up with a good truck. But my >observation is that the overall condition and availability of the trucks is >significantly different than the pinz. It's enough that I know a couple of >dealers who elected not to head down the Volvo path for that reason. The >condition issue may change if Swiss pinz's dry up, but we are quite lucky with >the value the pinz presents. Thanks for the comments Russ! If you get up this way, we will have to do some wheeling. Alan, I'll skip commenting on everything to save room for Pinz posts since I know is pisses some people off... but I just HAD to say: Your after-thought was right, the 303 axles have nothing to do with Dana 44's, those were the old Valp's "or Laplanders, 202's, 3314's" axles. (If I posted the wrong thing a few years ago, I must have confused the trucks when I was typing. ;) ) The axles are not light in any way, by the way, and certainly not lighter than a Pinz axle. I'd guess they are stronger actually. They are heavy duty things which weigh in at about 400 lbs each! The 303 has diffs that are interchangeable like the Pinz. My red truck, and the tan for sale, had newer (and zinc plated!) bodies installed in the '90's. I didn't need to do anymore work to it than I would have to do on a Pinz (stripping and painting) and many Pinzies have newer bodies as well. I thought mine looked pretty darn good when I got it http://www.real4x4.com/Volvo/My303.jpg at least as good as any Pinz I've seen but with a funky camo paint job. (new body, new doors, no rust anywhere). The condition of the 303's I deal with can easily be compared to the low mileage 710K's that have popped up which look almost new. This is my personal page- http://www.real4x4.com/project303.shtml The Pinz varies it's under diff clearance with weight, tires, and spring wear. The 303 has a constant 16" under the diff, and more average clearance elsewhere. Under diff clearance is only a little part of what matters anyway. At least both trucks have more than a Hummer overall! :) Anyone notice how Hummers get "pancaked" way too easily... that happens because they have no additional clearance in the middle unlike the 303 and Pinz. As for the looks, it's funny since I often hear comments about both trucks. Some guys have called me saying they liked the 303 lines a lot more (esp. after seeing it in person), and some say the Pinz is more cool. But the most common thing people say about either is how "ugly" they are, meaning, I think, 'Interesting and visually hard to accept at first'. Though in person I think the Sugga is the most intimidating (ugly?) looking 4x4 ever made! I know the guy that built that Volvo DAKAR Cross Country. They had something go wrong in the transmission early on. Though their Land Rover Tdi 130 support truck did make to the end! With the horrible USA coverage of that race, you'd never see anything interesting like that in it anyway! Which is weird to me... that race makes the Baja events look like Sunday picnics but we get to see next to nothing about it. As for the guy in Canada that had the 303's for sale, he was a piece of Sh** criminal that was trying to sell illegal (at the time, some 1977-79) trucks to some guys in the US. He also stole $4000 from me way back when I tried to get a '75 from him. His name is Adrian Simpson and lived/lives in Vancouver. Oh and if anyone ever runs into him, please forward his info to me... I still need to 'talk' to him. (The police have warrants on him now too) Peter, one can pick all the perfect lines one wants, if that's possible, but in the end you have to admit that some suspension flex can and does make all the difference when you need it. Though as you know, above all, the driver has more to do with capability than ANYTHING. I'll go up against a newbie in a 712 or 303 ANYDAY in my old Land Rover with it's 77hp diesel engine and 9.5" of clearance. :D VINCE To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com From: "Ingvar Karlsson" Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 18:07:32 -0000 Subject: [Volvo303] Re: C303 parts sources Reply-To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com Hi all, Some spare parts info! At "http://www.hotchallenge.se/tips.html" there are som info of obtaining brake parts for the C3-series from England (Land Rover parts) at a greately reduced price compared to Volvo. A Land Rover Series2 109 Station Wagon with a 2,6 litre gasoline=20 engine from 1971 has the same brake shoes and wheel cylinders as the C3-series. C3-series Land Rover # ---------- ------------ Brake shoe front RTC3424 Brake shoe rear STC2797 Wheel cylinder rear right 243296 Wheel cylinder rear left 243297=20 A site for C3-series spare parts is: "http://www.fbt.se/egetlager/bildelar.asp?action=3D74&do=3Ddelgrupp&bilgrupp=3DVOLVO&bkod=3D5000" Company info at: "http://www.fjaras.bildelsbasen.se/" Most spare parts to the C3-series can be obtained from a Volvo Truck dealer here in sweden. Lucky for us in Sweden :-) I don't know if it is possible to order spare parts from Volvo from overseas? /Ingvar To: From: "Lars Nordqvist" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:01:18 +0200 Subject: [Volvo303] Re: membran-1518799-0 Reply-To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com Hej! The brakebooster (servoaggregat in Swedish military lingo) is a 'Lockheed type 7'. Good luck in finding parts! Lars Nordqvist The D-90 Source > Classifieds > For Sale - Vehicles > Volvo C303 for sale View Full Version : Volvo C303 for sale VinceatReal4x4s My latest exotic for sale is this Volvo C303 currently being finished up after some light customizing. Imported from Sweden and fully titled here in the US. (In Va.) Comes with new ext. paint which was applied over a stripped, newer (replaced in 1995) zinc plated and rust free body, new 35" MT/R tires, portal axles with 16" of clearance at the lowest point, has diff. lockers front and rear, high and low range gears, on-the-fly 4x4 engagement, 4 speed with a top cruise speed of 65mph, engine is a Volvo 6cyl. 120hp unit (the famous B-30). Price is $26,500 as of now. And it's related to Rovers... Salisbury built the portal axles and they use the same brakes as the 109" 2.6's, the clutch is the same as a SIII's! Seen at www.real4x4.com Vince Sweeney 540-353-5309 To: From: "Greg David" Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:30:28 -0800 Subject: [Volvo303] Fuel Sender Gasket Reply-To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com Hi, This may be obvious to many of you, but the fuel sender on the 303 is a standard VDO design and uses a common five bolt round gasket. I bought one at a VW parts house. It is common to most air cooled VW's. My sender gasket was an old cork one that had split and fuel would overflow out around the sender when filling the tank. I was wondering also if anyone knew the logic of the springs used on the two forward tank mounting bolts? They allow the tank to flex a little downward on the forward side when under pressure, but I just can seem to figure out why they would need them. Greg To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com From: jb Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 17:01:07 -0700 Subject: [Volvo303] Brake parts revisited Reply-To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com Well I did some research and came up with the following Rover parts list that would be usable on a Volvo axle with some minor modifications. British Pacific Parts in Valencia CA. www.britishpacific.com Drums: Fr (6cyl Model 109 71+) 576974 $183.75 Rr (Model 109 71+ all) 576973 $63.00 Shoes: Fr (6cyl Model 109 71+) STC3945 $102.50 Rr (Model 109 71+ all) STC2797 $42.00 Wheel Cylinders: Fr Right (x2) (6cyl Model 109 71+) 600201 $68.25 Fr Left (x2) (6cyl Model 109 71+) 600200 $68.25 Rr Right (Model 109 71+ all) 243296P $35.25 Rr Left (Model 109 71+ all) 243297P $35.25 Springs: Rr Top (Model 109 71+ all) 548169 $4.50 Rr Bottom (Model 109 71+ all) 218983 $2.25 *Brake parts total (3/4/2005 pricelist) $995.00* -- -jb (all time #1 web wheeler / mall crawler) - "where's my 4Lo button." AND I dont know "Jack". To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com From: "G.R.Baker" Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 00:13:55 -0000 Subject: [Volvo303] Re: Brake parts revisited Reply-To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com --- In Volvo303@yahoogroups.com, jb wrote: > > Well I did some research and came up with the following Rover parts list > that would be usable on a Volvo axle with some minor modifications. > British Pacific Parts in Valencia CA. > www.britishpacific.com > Drums: > > Fr (6cyl Model 109 71+) 576974 $183.75 > Rr (Model 109 71+ all) 576973 $63.00 > > Shoes: > > Fr (6cyl Model 109 71+) STC3945 $102.50 > Rr (Model 109 71+ all) STC2797 $42.00 > > Wheel Cylinders: > > Fr Right (x2) (6cyl Model 109 71+) 600201 $68.25 > Fr Left (x2) (6cyl Model 109 71+) 600200 $68.25 > Rr Right (Model 109 71+ all) 243296P $35.25 > Rr Left (Model 109 71+ all) 243297P $35.25 > > Springs: > > Rr Top (Model 109 71+ all) 548169 $4.50 > Rr Bottom (Model 109 71+ all) 218983 $2.25 > > *Brake parts total (3/4/2005 pricelist) $995.00* > -- > -jb (all time #1 web wheeler / mall crawler) - "where's my 4Lo button." > > AND I dont know "Jack". > JB, don't fool with them or Rovers North, I have put brakes on two Volvos in the last 6 months (one this week) When ordering the brake shoes, wheel Cyls, and spring order the for a Series II LWB, 6 cyl. This fellow http://www.tntlr.com/ has much better prices and has it in stock. The front shoes on the Volvo use two extra springs (that you don't really need)if you use these extra springs you will have to drill two extra holes in the front shoes. I did this on my 6X6 but didn't on the FJ80. George To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com From: "oportaldog" Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 15:21:51 -0000 Subject: [Volvo303] Brake light switch Part # Reply-To: Volvo303@yahoogroups.com If anyone needs one or would like to add it to your list, the brake light switch (on pedal) is a Borg Warner S973. The local chain parts store had it in stock, I believe it fit a BMW as well as others. Oil-pressure sensor: http://www.c303.de/c303-forum/index.php?board=36;action=display;threadid=9322 xxxxxxxxx originalteil von volvo :1606877 kostete ca12 euro ohne mwst beim boschdienst : 1266085 kostete 5,93 euro mit mwst xxxxxxxxx