Volvo 740

Volvo 740: which version to choose

There is no second generation in the data, so nothing “changed” after 1992 inside this model line.

If the goal is the shortest 0–100 km/h time: take 2.0 MT 160 hp Turbo (9.4 s, 195 km/h). It is 0.3 s quicker and 3 km/h faster than 2.3 MT 156 hp Turbo (9.7 s, 192 km/h), on 26 kg less kerb weight (1293 vs 1319 kg).

If the goal is the lightest car with a 2.3 litre engine and Manual: several 2.3 MT rows sit at 1260 kg — 2.3 MT 113 hp, 2.3 MT 115 hp, 2.3 MT 117 hp — versus 1283 kg for 2.0 MT 112 hp. The 2.3 litre at 113–117 hp is 1.4 s quicker to 100 km/h than the 112 hp 2.0 MT (11.6 s vs 13 s) despite only +1 to +5 hp.

If the goal is Automatic: there is no Automatic 2.0 in this list. Automatic means 2.3 AT only: 115, 117, 136 or 151 hp, all Automatic 4, RWD. Versus the matching Manual, Automatic costs +1.0 s (115/117 hp: 12.6 vs 11.6; 136 hp: 12 vs 11) or +1.8 s (151 hp: 12 vs 10.2) and −9 to −22 km/h of top speed. The 136 hp 2.3 AT is also the heaviest car here at 1340 kg — 63 kg more than 2.3 MT 136 hp (1277 kg).

If the goal is disc brakes at both ends on a low-power 2.3: 2.3 MT 113 hp and 2.3 MT 117 hp use rear Drum; 2.3 MT 115 hp uses rear Disc at the same 1260 kg, 11.6 s and 181 km/h. That is a hardware split at +2 hp, not a speed split.

If the goal is Turbo: only two Turbo rows exist — 2.0 MT 160 hp and 2.3 MT 156 hp. Both Manual 5, RWD, Disc/Disc. The 2.0 Turbo is the higher-output, lighter, quicker car of the pair.

There is no second generation in the data, so nothing “changed” after 1992 inside this model line.

Volvo 740 generations (only one to pick)

1 generation, 1983-01-01 to 1992-12-31, body Sedan, 53 modifications in the catalogue of which 12 are listed here. Years, body and layout do not differ between these 12. You are not choosing a later body or a restyle as a separate generation.

Engines and specs

All 12: cylinders 4, layout Inline, position Front, longitudinal, fuel Gasoline 92, injection Distributed injection (multi-point), drive RWD. Valves per cylinder, compression and bore × stroke are measured only on the two 2.0 MT rows.

2.0 MT 112 hp: 2 valves per cylinder, compression 10, 88.9 × 80. 2.0 MT 160 hp: 2 valves per cylinder, compression 8.5, same 88.9 × 80. On every 2.3 row, valves per cylinder, compression and bore × stroke are not measured.

Arithmetic that decides the buy

Power per litre (hp ÷ litres from the listed cc): 2.0 MT 160 hp Turbo = 160 / 1.986 ≈ 80.6 hp/L (highest). 2.3 MT 156 hp Turbo ≈ 67.8 hp/L. 2.3 MT 151 hp ≈ 65.7. 2.3 MT 136 hp ≈ 59.1. 2.0 MT 112 hp ≈ 56.4. 2.3 MT 117 hp ≈ 50.9. 2.3 MT 115 hp ≈ 50.0. 2.3 MT 113 hp ≈ 49.1 (lowest). Turbo on 1986 cc adds +48 hp versus the other 2.0 MT and raises specific output by about 24 hp/L. Turbo on 2300 cc (2.3 MT 156 hp vs 2.3 MT 151 hp) adds only +5 hp and +2.1 hp/L, with the same 10.2→9.7 s step (−0.5 s) and the same 192 km/h top speed.

Weight per horsepower (kerb kg / hp): 2.0 MT 160 hp ≈ 8.08 kg/hp (best). 2.3 MT 156 hp ≈ 8.46. 2.3 MT / 2.3 AT 151 hp ≈ 8.74. 2.3 MT 136 hp ≈ 9.39. 2.3 AT 136 hp ≈ 9.85 (Automatic plus 63 kg). The 1260 kg cluster: 2.3 MT 117 hp ≈ 10.77, 2.3 MT 115 hp ≈ 10.96, 2.3 MT 113 hp ≈ 11.15. 2.0 MT 112 hp ≈ 11.46 kg/hp (worst): more mass than the light 2.3s and less power than all of them except a 1 hp gap versus 2.3 MT 113 hp.

Manual versus Automatic at the same hp:

• 2.3 MT 115 hp vs 2.3 AT 115 hp: same 1260 kg, same 115 hp; Automatic is +1.0 s to 100 km/h and −9 km/h (181→172). Rear brakes stay Disc.
• 2.3 MT 117 hp vs 2.3 AT 117 hp: same 1260 kg; same +1.0 s and −9 km/h. Both of these 117 hp cars use rear Drum.
• 2.3 MT 136 hp vs 2.3 AT 136 hp: Automatic is +63 kg, +1.0 s (11→12), −15 km/h (185→170). This Automatic is the only row at 1340 kg.
• 2.3 MT 151 hp vs 2.3 AT 151 hp: same 1319 kg; Automatic is +1.8 s (10.2→12) and −22 km/h (192→170). Same 170 km/h as the 136 hp Automatic — extra 15 hp on Automatic does not raise listed top speed versus 2.3 AT 136 hp, and both Automatics sit 2 km/h below the weaker 2.3 AT 115/117 hp (172 km/h).

What extra power buys on Manual 2.3 (No boost): 113→115 hp: 0 s and 0 km/h (11.6 / 181); the measured change is rear Drum→Disc on the 115 hp 2.3 MT. 115→117 hp: still 11.6 / 181, but rear brakes return to Drum on 2.3 MT 117 hp. 117→136 hp: −0.6 s, +4 km/h, +17 kg, rear Disc. 136→151 hp: −0.8 s, +7 km/h, +42 kg. 151→156 hp Turbo: −0.5 s, 0 km/h, 0 kg.

2.0 Turbo versus 2.3 Turbo: 2.0 MT 160 hp has the only listed torque figure among the fast cars (245 Nm @ 3500; the 156 hp 2.3 MT torque is not measured). It is +4 hp, −26 kg, −0.3 s, +3 km/h versus 2.3 MT 156 hp. Compression on the 160 hp 2.0 MT is 8.5 versus 10 on the 112 hp 2.0 MT — the Turbo 2.0 is the only version with a measured lower compression ratio.

2.0 NA versus 2.3 NA at similar power: 2.0 MT 112 hp vs 2.3 MT 113 hp: +23 kg, +1.4 s, −1 km/h, but the 2.0 has measured 158 Nm, 2 valves, compression 10, 88.9 × 80; the 2.3 has those fields not measured and rear Drum.

Performance and economy (mpg)

0–100 km/h ranking: 2.0 MT 160 hp 9.4 s → 2.3 MT 156 hp 9.7 → 2.3 MT 151 hp 10.2 → 2.3 MT 136 hp 11 → 2.3 MT 113/115/117 hp 11.6 → 2.3 AT 136/151 hp 12 → 2.3 AT 115/117 hp 12.6 → 2.0 MT 112 hp 13 s.

Top speed ranking: 2.0 MT 160 hp 195 → 2.3 MT 151 hp and 2.3 MT 156 hp 192 → 2.3 MT 136 hp 185 → 2.3 MT 113/115/117 hp 181 → 2.0 MT 112 hp 180 → 2.3 AT 115/117 hp 172 → 2.3 AT 136/151 hp 170.

City L/100 km: not measured on all 12. Highway: not measured. Mixed: not measured. CO2: not measured. Eco class: not measured. There is no mpg figure in this dataset to prefer one version on fuel use.

Dimensions and weight

Gross weight is 1800 kg on all 12; payload therefore ranges from 520 kg (1800−1283 on 2.0 MT 112 hp) wait - actually 1800-1340=460 on heaviest, 1800-1260=540 on lightest. Ground clearance 120 mm all. Tank 60 L all. Wheel size not measured on all 12. Front suspension Independent, spring; rear Dependent, spring — same on all.

Kerb ranking: 1260 kg — 2.3 MT 113 hp, 2.3 MT 115 hp, 2.3 AT 115 hp, 2.3 MT 117 hp, 2.3 AT 117 hp. Then 2.3 MT 136 hp 1277, 2.0 MT 112 hp 1283, 2.0 MT 160 hp 1293, 2.3 MT 151 / 2.3 AT 151 / 2.3 MT 156 hp 1319, 2.3 AT 136 hp 1340. Choosing Automatic at 136 hp is choosing the heaviest Volvo 740 in this list; choosing the 1260 kg 2.3 cluster is choosing the lightest.

Problems and reliability (what the numbers do and do not show)

This catalogue does not list failure rates, rust scores or service intervals. What it does list as hardware splits: rear Drum on 2.3 MT 113 hp, 2.3 MT 117 hp and 2.3 AT 117 hp versus rear Disc on the other nine. Turbo appears only on 2.0 MT 160 hp and 2.3 MT 156 hp. Automatic appears only as 4-speed on 2.3 litre rows. Those are the measurable differences a buyer can use; anything else about “typical problems” is not measured here.

Short buy map

• Fastest and highest specific output: 2.0 MT 160 hp Turbo (9.4 s, 195 km/h, ≈80.6 hp/L, ≈8.08 kg/hp).
• Turbo 2.3 alternative: 2.3 MT 156 hp (9.7 s, 192 km/h, same 1319 kg as 2.3 MT 151 hp).
• Strongest naturally aspirated Manual: 2.3 MT 151 hp (10.2 s, 192 km/h).
• Mid Manual without Turbo: 2.3 MT 136 hp (11 s, 185 km/h, 1277 kg).
• Lightest Manual with rear Disc: 2.3 MT 115 hp (1260 kg, 11.6 s, 181 km/h).
• Lightest Manual with rear Drum: 2.3 MT 113 hp or 2.3 MT 117 hp (same 11.6 s / 181 km/h / 1260 kg).
• Automatic if required: 2.3 AT 115 hp or 2.3 AT 117 hp stay at 1260 kg (12.6 s, 172 km/h); 2.3 AT 151 hp matches 1319 kg of the 151 hp Manual but 12 s / 170 km/h; 2.3 AT 136 hp is the 1340 kg outlier.
• Avoid 2.0 MT 112 hp if the criterion is kg/hp or 0–100: it is the slowest (13 s) and the poorest kg/hp (≈11.46) in the list, 23 kg heavier than the 1260 kg 2.3s.

Exact names to keep as anchors: 2.0 MT (112 hp and 160 hp), 2.3 MT (113, 115, 117, 136, 151, 156 hp), 2.3 AT (115, 117, 136, 151 hp).