Best Volvo for under $3000

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by Grey-hound, Nov 29, 2004.

  1. Grey-hound

    Grey-hound Guest

    Never been a Volvo owner but lookin for a Volvo as a spare vehicle. Sons 85
    300zx turbo breaks down too much. 2nd son is learning to drive. Dads 86
    300zx doesn't break. Looking for something heavy duty and pleasant to work
    on. What year models/type Volvo's should I be lookin for/which to avoid? In
    the Tampa FL region rust is not a factor. I do my own mechanical work but is
    there anything special I should be lookin for.
    Thanks
    Greyhound
     
    Grey-hound, Nov 29, 2004
    #1
  2. Grey-hound

    Bev A. Kupf Guest

    I would suggest a late model 240 ('89 - '93). Mechanically very similar to
    740s and 760s built at the same time, but fewer power gadgets.
     
    Bev A. Kupf, Nov 29, 2004
    #2
  3. I second Bev's recommendation. The Volvo 240 was the last car designed to
    last forever if well-cared-for, but with zero sex appeal. If you find a
    model with good service records and regular oil and time belt changes,
    around 140,000 - 160,000 miles, it will last for 200,000 easily with
    continued good care. And, an additional benefit for parents, the 240 is
    less likely to be raced by our precious children.

    Even an '88 240 is acceptable.

    Avoid 260's, 760's, 780's. These have different drive trains, with more
    problems, less reliable.

    The 960 is a luxury sedan with a sporty 6-cylinder engine; I would not
    recommend for teenager or 20-something. I could easily live with the 740
    and 940, which share the same 4-cylinder bullet-proof drive train as the
    240. As Bev mentioned, the 740 and the 940 have more gadgets for failure.

    G'luck.
     
    Pat Quadlander, Nov 29, 2004
    #3
  4. Grey-hound

    Rob Guenther Guest

    I agree with the no 960 rule - we've had one (a 93' - with the 201 hp
    motor!) since I was 10, and I wasn't allowed driving it alone unless it was
    for a specific purpose (picking up family, go to store ...etc... no cruising
    to the city with friends of course!- tho I got stuck with filling it up, and
    driving 40-50 mins to the dealer for servicing) it's quite a powerful car,
    and even though I proved as a whole, quite responsible, I very nearly had a
    few close ones with that car - having a 91 VW Golf as my main car was a
    great thing: limited power, safe handling, cool enough on the social ladder
    as far as cars go, and would protect me decently if I crashed it (tho, no
    Volvo). Go with a 240 or a 740, I would pass on a turbo - you want the
    cheapest car to run if it's for a teenager... trust me... gasoline alone is
    expensive enough, let alone insurance and aftermarket bolt-ons if so
    inclined... Word of advice tho, put in a good stereo system - heat unit, 4-8
    speakers (depending on space) driven by a quality amplifier... You don't
    want the headache of tape adaptors and poor quality sound when you are
    road-tripping with your friends.

    I'd personally want a wagon if it's a 740 tho, the wagons looked a lot
    better then the sedans IMO... and you can hold a lot more stuff in them. The
    240 sedan is the nicer looking of its pair. And even tho they don't hold
    much sex appeal, no one will laugh at you for having a Volvo, everyone knows
    it is a good solid car.
     
    Rob Guenther, Nov 29, 2004
    #4
  5. Grey-hound

    James Sweet Guest


    Depends, the 760 and 780 Turbos were the same mechanically as a 240/740 for
    the most part. A 740 is different than a 240, but they're both very well
    made cars with very similar mechanical bits. Both are quite easy to work on,
    though some jobs are easier on one, some are easier on the other.
     
    James Sweet, Nov 30, 2004
    #5
  6. Grey-hound

    mccaldwell Guest

    '89--'93 240. Easy to work on. Lots of used parts. Safe. Slow.
    Solid. Understeers (safety factor), but can be signifcantly improved
    w/ IPD sway bars. For a spare vehicle, get the wagon. Wagons are
    "in". More $, but holds value better (people are hoarding in many
    places). Large cargo capacity. Low insurance. Airbag not needed
    but in Florida w/ rain, ABS might be nice for kid (introduced '91 or
    '92, IIRC). Do a google search on issues/expenses on 240s. AC
    rebuild is $$ so might look for one where already done. '92 would
    satisfy all requirements, but will have to pay more for one taken care
    of (pay now or pay later!). Don't be afraid of one w/ 200K miles if
    well maintained, many parts replaced, and INSPECTED BY VOLVO 240
    SPECIALIST (the best $ you can spend).
     
    mccaldwell, Nov 30, 2004
    #6
  7. I am a college student driving a high mileage 740 and couldn't be happier.
    It has 300k and still starts great in the dead of winter. I would recomend
    a 240 or 740 to anyone looking for a dependable car, they are both easy to
    work on your self and parts are easily found. I have had mine for almost
    four years and have put little to no money into it to keep it running
    great.

    My parting advice is to be ware of the overdrive on both of these models.
    I have owned both a 240 and a 740 that had this feature and both have had
    issues. The overdrive tends to stick on, or kick on for no apparent reason
    at high speeds, usually easily fixed but will happen more than once in its
    lifetime... Enjoy your search, these volvos are strong reliable cars that
    are very safe and get reasonable gas milage.
     
    aeberniergolden, Nov 30, 2004
    #7
  8. Grey-hound

    mccaldwell Guest

    240 went to 5 spd trans in '88 (switched from 4sp w/ OD). Can
    probably get a better deal on a 740 than 240 (and 740 has advantages
    such as easy blower motor replacement, better visibility and IIRC,
    switched to newer AC compressor earlier,), but 240 holds value better
    and more parts available, cargo room, and less plastic. I believe 740
    wagon did as well or better on crash tests. Still, I prefer the 240.
     
    mccaldwell, Dec 1, 2004
    #8
  9. Grey-hound

    James Sweet Guest

    I think the 240 has better visibility but it's not a problem in either one.
    It's a tough choice, but it's essentially between luxury and simplicity,
    though the later 240's tended to have a lot more luxury accessories than the
    early ones making it less different.
     
    James Sweet, Dec 1, 2004
    #9
  10. i think that may be the "kickdown" cable...if you pop the hood, it is
    the metal cables on the round wheel...sometimes they just pop
    off...mine needed adjusting the other day...took, like 5 min for the
    mechanic to re adj...
     
    ~^ beancounter ~^, Dec 1, 2004
    #10
  11. Grey-hound

    BOEING377 Guest

    240 for sure. These days $3000 could buy you a really good 240. Safe, reliable,
    all vices are well known (blower motor, etc). Although I have owned up to 1992
    240s, my favorite is the 79-81 with B 21F engine. Simple cars, few problems.
    Noisy, poor fuel economy, but rock solid relaibility.
     
    BOEING377, Dec 3, 2004
    #11
  12. Also a bit underpowered for the weight, but that can be a good thing.
    An absolute tank. I saw one get rear-ended by a Dodge Ram. The Ram
    broke a radiator and had to be towed. The 240 drove away. I learned
    how to drive on one back in 1987, and it's still running.
     
    Cormac Foster, Dec 5, 2004
    #12
  13. Grey-hound

    Grey-hound Guest

    I changed the subject cause after lookin and with a lot of input I found a
    93 940 with A/T 4 door. Has 175,000 mi. on it, no rust, body perfect, recent
    rebuilt trans, new tires, new radiator and fan, new a/c system
    (compressor,hoses etc). Also has a sunroof, p/w and seats. Has a 2.3 na
    motor. Interior is leather and very clean with no rips or tears. Rides nice
    through the neighborhood. Any opinions on 940's.
    Thanks
    Greyhound
     
    Grey-hound, Dec 5, 2004
    #13
  14. Grey-hound

    Rob Guenther Guest

    They're supposedly the much more reliable varient of the 960... And we've
    never had a problem with our 1993 960 - tho it sounds as if you have the GLE
    model, which pretty much has the same amount of electrical toys to break in
    it... Maybe minus the Electronic Climate Control (ECC system)... Watch for
    the power seats getting "confused"... ours don't hold the memory very well
    any more... and you end up having to adjust them manually, they still work
    tho. No problems with power windows/mirrors/heated glass/sunroof/leaks in
    the sunroof/trim/lights/engine.... Had a leaky rad last year, a leaky brake
    caliper, leaking steering pump, and aged rack, new exhaust put in it, and a
    failed stereo.... basically all age related things - everything provided
    excellent service life, 8-10 years is pretty good for all those failed
    components... except the radio, but you can get a replacement for around
    30-50 dollars at a scrap yard... the 940,960, and 850's all have
    interchangeable Double-DIN radios... if yours breaks find one with a CD
    player in it.
     
    Rob Guenther, Dec 5, 2004
    #14
  15. i found a 93 940t w/190k miles (i think that was what i bought it at)
    on it that sounds sim to the one you are looking at. mine is a turbo,
    so more power and heat and stress on the system...but, the 940 is not
    a bad platform...esp for the $$...i went back to the mid/early 90's
    volvo after owning a 00 or 01 s80...the value is just on in the newer
    volvos...you will like the 940, parts, maint, and "things" last a long
    time. back in 92, i purchased a non turbo 940 and drove it almost 10
    years, 200k miles with no problems whatsoever...just normal maint...no
    turbo on that one either...and, i live in the boulder colorado area,
    so the air is thin, and performance was not so great...not so great,
    but manageable...anyway, i doubt you be sorry for picking up a
    940...what is the price? i would guess aprox $1.8 - $2.5..??
     
    ~^ beancounter ~^, Dec 5, 2004
    #15
  16. Grey-hound

    *misery Guest

    Sadly we lost a 940 from our volvo family recently due to a crash;
    totaled <sad> we had the car just 9 days. it was replaced last tuesday
    by a 960 with 100,000 LESS miles, aside from the larger engine the car
    is very much like the 940 which we adored! the new car has less issues
    than the 940 but like ALL used autos everyone has the potential for
    trouble. At 212K miles the 940 was as solid a car as i've ever driven,
    like them very much, it makes me afraid of driving anything newer for
    fear that i might like it more; if that's possible ;)
     
    *misery, Dec 6, 2004
    #16
  17. Grey-hound

    richbonilla Guest

     
    richbonilla, Dec 6, 2004
    #17
  18. Got 2 x 740 turbos 88 and 90 plus now a 240 sedan 1990 .Just did some work
    on the 240 easy to work on fun to drive goes well solid safe and respectable
    ..If you love your kids go Volvo that's why we brought our son one .
     
    John Robertson, Dec 21, 2004
    #18
  19. Grey-hound

    James Sweet Guest


    They're both excellent, I do a lot of work on 200 and 700 series cars of
    various years, people will sometimes claim one is easier than the other but
    in reality they're about the same. 700 has more room under the hood and
    things like the heater fan are far easier to replace. 200 has a bit less
    plastic on the interior and that stuff is easier to take apart. Engine and
    drivetrain is virtually identical, the rest you win some you lose some but
    they average out about the same.
     
    James Sweet, Dec 21, 2004
    #19
  20. Grey-hound

    BOEING377 Guest

    Go for the 240. It is a classic and is pretty easy to maintain. 700s are OK,
    but they don't have the classic looks and history of the 240.
     
    BOEING377, Dec 21, 2004
    #20
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.