Last great Volvo?

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by Jeff Townsend, Feb 20, 2007.

  1. This should be interesting.

    My '86 745 was great. Got it at 160K, 300K plus before it went to a
    friend who needed a car, and is still running.

    Got an '89 245 a few years ago, and it too rocked.180K/320K now.

    Time for a replacement ride, I'm leaning toward a 900 series wagon, is
    it worth going to the 6 cyl?

    The 850's, are they as good as the RWD models of the past? Tell me about
    the 5 cyl. engine. Fit/finish/repair costs anywhere near as good as
    earlier models?

    What is the general consensus of the last GREAT Volvo?

    Thanx, Jeff
     
    Jeff Townsend, Feb 20, 2007
    #1
  2. Jeff Townsend

    z Guest

    240!!!
    If you don't drive in the snow.
     
    z, Feb 20, 2007
    #2
  3. Jeff Townsend

    Opie Guest

    1994-95 940 Turbo: solid, fast, not too bad looking.
     
    Opie, Feb 20, 2007
    #3
  4. Jeff Townsend

    mdrawson Guest

    Early 90's 940 turbo, nice looking, roomy, rear-wheel drive (goes well in
    snow if you put a snow tire on each corner)!! Plenty of power for a
    4-cylinder.

    Avoid 6-cylinder Volvos at all costs! We've had several 5-cylinder V's, and
    they've been great --- lots of punch with the turbo --- if you like front
    wheel drive.
     
    mdrawson, Feb 20, 2007
    #4
  5. Jeff Townsend

    Ola V Guest

    But hey! Why do you say that? I live in Norway, and I drive my 240
    Wagon in the snow and on the ice all winter (4-5 months on and off
    with snow and ice). Only thing is that they are a bit sensible on what
    sort of tires you use, and they get a lot better with a 50 - 80 Kg's
    extra in the empty spare tire room. But then you beat any RWD car
    any day!
     
    Ola V, Feb 21, 2007
    #5
  6. Jeff Townsend

    Ola V Guest

    Here you can see how some "use" their Volvos in Scandinavia,
    this clip is from Finland:

     
    Ola V, Feb 21, 2007
    #6
  7. Jeff Townsend

    James Sweet Guest


    The last really bulletproof classic Volvo was the 940, that's not to say
    the 960 or FWD cars are not good, but nothing else quite compares to the
    old redblock 4 cylinder motors.
     
    James Sweet, Feb 21, 2007
    #7
  8. Jeff Townsend

    James Sweet Guest

    I would say avoid the *V6* Volvos, but not all the 6 cylinders. The
    inline 6 used in the 960 is based on the same design as the inline 5,
    they're solidly made smooth running engines and hold up well so long as
    you keep up on timing belt and oil changes.
     
    James Sweet, Feb 21, 2007
    #8
  9. Yes Jeff,

    I agree. I have a 940 injection (no turbo) 1992 and it drives still
    fine. Even after towing 9 years a motorboat across and above the alps
    in Europe! My car still runs at a topspeed of 200km/hour (tested in
    Germany). 230.000 km and going.

    Greetings from Belgium
    Chris
     
    Blackbird-EBOS, Feb 21, 2007
    #9
  10. Jeff Townsend

    Roadie Guest

    I've owned Volvo cars since 1984, and to be perfectly honest each one
    represented a significant improvement in terms of safety, performance,
    handling and drivability. I have fond memories of driving a 240, but
    in comparison to a modern car it was underpowered, had barely
    acceptable handling and was dreadful in the snow. So to answer your
    question, the last GREAT Volvo has to be the most recent one I'm
    driving, which is a 2004 V70 2.5T.

    I've owned:
    1984 240
    1987 240
    1988 740
    1996 960
    2000 S80
    2004 V70
     
    Roadie, Feb 21, 2007
    #10
  11. Jeff Townsend

    Roadie Guest

    5 cylinder V's...???? Now that would present a balancing challenge!
     
    Roadie, Feb 21, 2007
    #11
  12. Jeff Townsend

    mdrawson Guest

    As they used to say about Volvos: "Drive 'em like you hate 'em. They're
    practically indestructible." That certainly seemed to be true of the
    earlier models. Today's Volvos have so much on-board computer electronics
    (as does every other car) that they're now a mite touchier adn not quite so
    indestructible.
     
    mdrawson, Feb 21, 2007
    #12
  13. Jeff Townsend

    c.fiedler Guest

    Well, Jeff, I've owned *most* Volvo models since the 1960 544 (which I
    loved and wish I had again today for it's oddity). I never owned a 700
    or a 900 or anything later than the 850.

    I have usually bought used models with 50-150K miles on them and
    driven them for another 50K or so before moving on, not for failure to
    serve but just the desire to update.

    While there is considerable nostalgia wrapped in the older models, the
    later models with ABS and airbags are considerably safer (IMNSHO)
    although there is arguably more to go wrong and require damned
    expensive replacement parts.

    Right now I have a '93 240 and a '97 850. The 850 is clearly a more
    refined vehicle and has given excellent service to date (87K miles as
    of this writing). The 5cyl engine is smooth and trouble free. The
    sideways arrangement of the engine gives my mechanic some challenges
    with the periodic snake belt replacement but that's infrequent. Oh
    yeah, I *could* do this work myself but at 63, I've lost my interest
    in DIY car work.

    That ain't a concensus but it's one man's view of a brand to which I
    give the appearance of loyalty.

    Chuck Fiedler
    Nothing but Volvo since 1974
     
    c.fiedler, Feb 21, 2007
    #13
  14. Jeff Townsend

    c.fiedler Guest

    I fail to appreciate the NEED for a turbo. It's something that gives
    more pickup but it's ultimately time-limited before it's replaced and
    damned pricey when it is. I once said I would consider a turbo when I
    saw *lots* of cars with 100K+ miles on them with turbos still running
    well. Agruably, that's been proven but I just don't need that extra
    boost (of course, I'm not in my 20s anymore). The non-turbos, properly
    maintained, have always satisfied my needs.

    Chuck Fiedler
    Nothing but Volvo since 1974
     
    c.fiedler, Feb 21, 2007
    #14
  15. Jeff Townsend

    James Sweet Guest

    As many have said though, these issues can all be fixed without too much
    trouble or cost. Swaybars, decent shocks, and good tires completely
    transform a 240. I'd agree about the power, except I've gone with the
    turbos which are definitely not underpowered.
     
    James Sweet, Feb 21, 2007
    #15
  16. Jeff Townsend

    James Sweet Guest


    I think he meant V's as in Volvos.
     
    James Sweet, Feb 21, 2007
    #16
  17. Jeff Townsend

    James Sweet Guest


    Have you looked on ebay lately? You can pick up a brand new turbo for
    under 200 bucks with some luck, or your existing one can be rebuilt for
    about $300. Given the huge improvement in drivability (depends on the
    terrain and what you do with it) I can't imagine not having the turbo. I
    can tow a boat over the pass, merge into traffic on our hilly highways,
    and yet still get good fuel economy around town. The myth that turbos
    are unreliable went away when they became water cooled. 285K on mine,
    shaft is a bit sloppy but no rubbing yet and no smoke.
     
    James Sweet, Feb 21, 2007
    #17
  18. Jeff Townsend

    c.fiedler Guest

    James, I grant your point as in the prior note. *I*, however, have
    been perfectly satisfied with the non-turbo versions. Granted I don't
    have a boat and, as for hilly terrain, have you ever been to Dallas?
    <G>

    Chuck Fiedler
    Nothing but Volvo since 1974
     
    c.fiedler, Feb 21, 2007
    #18
  19. Jeff Townsend

    Roadie Guest

    With enough parts one can radically transform the performance any
    middling car. But the original poster was asking what the last great
    Volvo was and NOT how to correct a design that is seriously outdated
    by current standards.

    Certainly some handling issues of the 240 can be improved, but it will
    still drive like an underpowered, tall, boxy sedan that lacks many
    modern safety features.
     
    Roadie, Feb 21, 2007
    #19
  20. I have had 10 volvos since 1967 and I agree. Each one is better than
    the previous. I have been able to avoid sun roofs, leather and turbos
    and have avoided problems. The XC70 does have a low pressure turbo and
    that seems OK.
     
    Stephen Henning, Feb 21, 2007
    #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.