 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Volvo Cars / December 2004Best Volvo for under $3000
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 > 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. 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.  SignatureMany a smale maketh a grate -- Geoffrey Chaucer 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. > > 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 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 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. 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. >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 [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > to >> 740s and 760s built at the same time, but fewer power gadgets. > 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 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Avoid 260's, 760's, 780's. These have different drive trains, with more > problems, less reliable. 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. 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 . >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 [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > to >> 740s and 760s built at the same time, but fewer power gadgets. > 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 . 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. 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. "Go for the 240" i would say that is good advice...i would either go for the 240 90's or newer...classic volvo, a bit small and not so confortable on a 8 hour drive, but great for running around town, and 90% of typical driving...or the 940 series...a bit more "modern", a bit roomier inside ( i think)...a bit more "whiz bang" technology (to utilize a techinal term)....and "next generation" body / crumple design....(well, years a go it was "next generation")...either model will serve you well, if maintained and in good shape when you buy.. let us all know what you end up with !! & haow much $$...what is on eBay today for, say $1500 - $3000 under volvo?? I'd say a 240 wagon. Second place would go to a 940 sedan. '89--'93 240. Easy to work on. Lots of used parts. Safe. Slow. Solid. Understeers (safety factor), but can be signifcantly improved w/ IPD sway bars. For a spare vehicle, get the wagon. Wagons are "in". More $, but holds value better (people are hoarding in many places). Large cargo capacity. Low insurance. Airbag not needed but in Florida w/ rain, ABS might be nice for kid (introduced '91 or '92, IIRC). Do a google search on issues/expenses on 240s. AC rebuild is $$ 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). > 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 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Thanks > Greyhound 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. 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. > 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 [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > lifetime... Enjoy your search, these volvos are strong reliable cars that > are very safe and get reasonable gas milage. > 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. 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. 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... > 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. 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. 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. > 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. 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 > 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 [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> problems. >> Noisy, poor fuel economy, but rock solid relaibility. 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. >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, [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >>> problems. >>> Noisy, poor fuel economy, but rock solid relaibility. 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..?? > 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 [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > >>> problems. > >>> Noisy, poor fuel economy, but rock solid relaibility. >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 [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >>> problems. >>> Noisy, poor fuel economy, but rock solid relaibility. 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 ;) > >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 [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > like them very much, it makes me afraid of driving anything newer for > fear that i might like it more; if that's possible ;) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.