Advice on buying a Volvo

  • Thread starter Thread starter GTIce
  • Start date Start date
you could be describing my 97 940 torslanda there
apart from fuel consumption
 
Stephen M. Henning said:
Not a Volvo 6. They were the least reliable Volvos ever made. Volvo
turbos are much more reliable and that is not saying much.
Click to expand...

The V6 was pretty bad, the newer inline 6 engines though are pretty solid,
they're essentially the same as the fairly well proven 5 cylinder. The old
B30 inline 6 was good as well, though it had notoriously awful fuel
consumption.
 
Rob Guenther said:
Wow this is basically why we got a 960 in 1993. No turbo to break down, lag,
or affect linearity. No front wheel drive to happer the tow-car ability
(this is the ONLY reason we didn't get the 1994 850 turbo wagon, as there
were a couple things the 850 did better then the 960), and to add to
possible complexity. And a big 6 cylinder engine to compensate for the 4/5
cylinder turbo's added power.
Click to expand...

The turbo isn't really much of an issue, yeah it takes a bit of extra
maintenance, but at 255k mine is still trouble free, and the Mitsubishi
turbo used on it has virtually no lag at all. I've formed the opinion
through experience that any engine is better with a turbo on it.
 
Stephen said:
Not a Volvo 6. They were the least reliable Volvos ever made. Volvo
turbos are much more reliable and that is not saying much.
Click to expand...

INLINE 6 - predecessor to the I-6 they make in their top end cars
today. Totally bulletproof.
 
James said:
The V6 was pretty bad, the newer inline 6 engines though are pretty solid,
they're essentially the same as the fairly well proven 5 cylinder. The old
B30 inline 6 was good as well, though it had notoriously awful fuel
consumption.
Click to expand...

I got 12mpg city on my 164E. Heh.
 
You know the turbo's are good now tho. We bought the 960 in 1993.... 80's
turbos were pretty bad on most cars of the time, and the Volvo turbo's had
yet to aquire huge mileage... The inline 6 looked like a MUCH better
alternative at the time, hasn't let us down save for 3-4 dead batteries
(that's what happens when you live in Canada and put on low amounts of city
Km's a year tho).
 
Rob Guenther said:
You know the turbo's are good now tho. We bought the 960 in 1993.... 80's
turbos were pretty bad on most cars of the time, and the Volvo turbo's had
yet to aquire huge mileage... The inline 6 looked like a MUCH better
alternative at the time, hasn't let us down save for 3-4 dead batteries
(that's what happens when you live in Canada and put on low amounts of city
Km's a year tho).
Click to expand...


No doubt the inline 6 is a great motor, but I've thought it'd be really cool
to build a turbo version of it and drop it into a nicely restored 780, can't
think of many cars I'd rather own. It's too bad they didn't make a 960
Bertone coupe.
 
James Sweet said:
The turbo isn't really much of an issue, yeah it takes a bit of extra
maintenance,
Click to expand...

What extra maintenance is required with the turbo?

Per Hauge
 
No doubt the inline 6 is a great motor, but I've thought it'd be really cool
to build a turbo version of it and drop it into a nicely restored 780, can't
think of many cars I'd rather own. It's too bad they didn't make a 960
Bertone coupe.
Click to expand...

Yes, Guys!
I still love my 780. The one I got 18 months ago.
I found my electrical problem. Rear audio amp circuit.

I have the audio consult assembly out, now.
I may replace the radio/casset player with the one I took out of my
765. I may put in a whole new system.
I am not driving it in the winter, only playing with from time to
time.

If I were to change the engine, in mine. I would put in a Mitsu Turbo,
instead of the Garrets one, that is has.
I like the mitsu in my 89-765's for it's performance, better.
It does work good in the 89-780,
but, I would not want it in the Wagon.
I wonder how they will last,
seeing how my Bricks were built one month, apart.
The 780 in Italy in April 89 and the 765 in March in Sweden?

Do like the B230FT for many reasons, finding parts, the size and ease
of working on it.

A bill @ Home in Wisconsin, USA
Maroon 1989 760 Turbo wagon! w/134k miles ;-}
Black! 1989 780 Turbo Coupe w/140k miles 8-}
Blue Mule 1987 245 non-Turbo w/205k miles :-)SOLD
 
For SURE that would have been a nice car. Imagine the bi-turbo T6 motor
(essentially a modernized version of the engine in my car) in a 960, boosted
to over 300hp... Or a "980" Bertone.... 5 Speed transmission, wider tires...
Oh my would that be a car and a half.

Hmmm maybe I should save up tons of money, buy a 960 sedan from 1995-8, take
her to a body shop to install only two doors on it (I'd have to relocate the
B pillar tho.... ahh well, it might be possible with some good welding),
redo the interior with even more luxurious seats, install some more
soundproofing... then drop a blow-inline 6 into that package...... God I
love dreaming.
 
Religious oil changes, synthetic oil highly recommended, and letting them
cool down after a hard drive.
 
James said:
No doubt the inline 6 is a great motor, but I've thought it'd be really cool
to build a turbo version of it and drop it into a nicely restored 780, can't
think of many cars I'd rather own. It's too bad they didn't make a 960
Bertone coupe.
Click to expand...

There was a turbo version available in europe, IIRC.
 
Rob Guenther said:
For SURE that would have been a nice car. Imagine the bi-turbo T6 motor
(essentially a modernized version of the engine in my car) in a 960,
Click to expand...

There is such a thing, it's used in the S80 T6, mounted transversely though,
I've heard of it being dropped into a 700 series but I would guess it's
quite a project with a lot of mixing and matching of parts.
 
Yes, I know the engine exists, that's why I suggested it. I think the
re-wiring would be a headache... that and the gearbox is meant for a FWD
car. I think just reducing the compression and adding a turbo to the older
960 engine meant for RWD would be easier.... I wish I had money, lots of
money...
 
Rob Guenther said:
Yes, I know the engine exists, that's why I suggested it. I think the
re-wiring would be a headache... that and the gearbox is meant for a FWD
car. I think just reducing the compression and adding a turbo to the older
960 engine meant for RWD would be easier.... I wish I had money, lots of
money...
Click to expand...


I bet the block is the same, the fuel system would need to be changed for a
turbo as well anyway so the wiring really isn't an issue, if I were to do it
I'd use the Megasquirt open source injection system, it's not a beginner
project but it could be done and is in the queue as something I'll attempt
some day.
 
Hmmm.... sounds like a neat project, for sure.

I'd have to top you and somehow install a quad turbo or some sort..... :-P
 
Rob Guenther said:
Hmmm.... sounds like a neat project, for sure.

I'd have to top you and somehow install a quad turbo or some sort..... :-P
Click to expand...


Ack, I think one turbo is enough for me, the bi turbo setup has some
advantages but I would not look forward to a $2k parts bill when they fail.
 
gary vetri said:
how about some advice on buying a 2000 S40, with 25,000 miles on it.
Click to expand...

The '00 has brake maintenance problems and some electrical gremlins.
The '00 S40/V40 is considered one of the worst Volvos. The '01 has
these weaknesses fixed and is one of the best Volvos. I would check
with a Volvo mechanic before buying an '00 S40.
 
What would an endless thread be without one more message?

I was new to Volvos 4 years ago when I bought my '83 240 Turbo and
have been in love since. The other day we were sitting around
contemplating the cost of ownership and were thinking that, as much as
we love her, it may be time to give Lilly up in favor of a newer car.
I remarked to my wife about this thread and the incredibly positive
response the 900 series was getting. I had driven an 850T wagon about
8 years ago as a rental and liked it for all the reasons mentioned
below.

We sat down and started adding up the costs (not including inevitable
costs like fuel, oil changes, etc.) and found that in 2002 we spent
$1530CAD on repairs and in 2003 $1503CAD (or about $1100USD). Is that
much? It's worthwhile mentioning that each of those totals is made up
of about 8 different items and no repeats. In the same period my
father (who drives a 1997 Mercedes) only visited the garage twice...to
the tune of $2400. And my boss (1997 Eagle Talon AWD) spent $2100 in 3
trips. So, with that in perspective, I don't feel I'm spending that
much. Their cars are about 15 years newer but are still costing them
more.

Would I spend much less if I dropped $5000CAD on a used 940 or 850? I
know there is no car that exists without the repair costs, but the
balljoint that cost me $110 in parts/labor/tax for my 240 would cost
what in a 940? I'm due for a water pump gasket replacement and an
inner tie rod replacement, about $350 is the estimate for all that.
Can you even get anyone to look at your 850 for that money?

If so then maybe the time has come for me to trade up.

blurp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top