I have had most every model of Volvo from the 122 to the XC70.

It is much safer to have an accident in a newer Volvo but that means the
Volvo will sustain more damage.  That is the nature of the animal.

Each model had it's problems.  I had a 240 that had a soft cam.  I had
another 240 that had transmission problems after 120K miles.  I also had
an 850 that had transmission problems after 120K miles.  I would never
want to give up my 850 or V70 to go back to one of the 240s.  The FWD
models are much better built and have low emissions by design, not by
bandaid.

The handling of the FWD Volvos is much more precise than the RWD Volvos.  
The RWD Volvos were fun to drive, but the body lean was out of control.

I was lucky and never got one of the buggy Volvos.  I also haven't heard
of those problems showing up on the FWD models.

I have driven many other makes of vehicle and haven't found anything I
would want.  My idea of a perfect car is one with geartronic and no
leather and no sunroof.  My 1800E was the most fun to drive, but the 850
comes close and is a much better vehicle.  The 1800E had severe rust
problems and was always having fuel leaks.  

I do have a pet peeve:

I wish the cruise in my '95 850 was as good as the cruise in the '93 850
or '01 XC70.

I'd like them to bring back the 240.  Especially the wagon.  We had two
wagons and thought they were almost the perfect car.  Rugged, simple, light,
decent fuel economy, easy to repair.  They hold 5 passengers and a big stack
of stuff.  We traveled as a family of 6, two car seats and luggage with the
third seat option.  Our oldest child, stuffed in the optional third seat in
the rear, probably wasn't as comfortable as he would have liked. :-).  It
had an astonishing turning radius (unbelievably easy to park) and great
capability on snow (thank you, limited-slip differential).

They were lacking in reliability.  Although the tranny and engine seemed
bulletproof, the electrical parts should have been studied and improved over
time but I think Volvo coasted a bit.  Luckily, they were easy to repair
(simple and plenty of room under the hood). Putting extra electrical bits in
them as options (like electric windows) was not a plus.

Volvo should bring back the 240 wagon.  180 -190 inches long, and keep it
narrow and a little tall, just like the old one. The weight was perfect at
3100lbs.  Put in a well-designed, rugged, 4-banger (you'll probably have to
go to VVT, do it right, buy the engines and transmissions from Toyota, if
you have to) and 5-speed (manual or auto) and keep the features to a
minimum. Build the perfect basic car.  Improving the fuel economy a bit
would be nice; aim for 30+ mpg on the highway.  Rake the windshield just a
bit more, make the front and sides a bit more slippery, curve those formerly
flat side windows and make them more flush.  Skip the rain gutters, too, I
guess, but add a decent roof-rack system, perhaps a hideaway mounting system
like on the '96 to '00 Toyota Rav4s would be good, no drag when the roof
rack is taken off.  Pay some attention to the under-car aerodynamics.  One
muffler would be enough, thanks.  Add some tie-downs and cargo-net/cage
things in the wayback.  Volvo could bring back the crazy third-seat option,
too.  One ton tow capability.

The list of things it should NOT have is long.  No low-profile tires!  No
8-way speaker system!  No CD changer under the seat; the stereo is limited
to whatever fits in a slot in the dash!  No in-window antenna!  No
integrated nav system! No electric windows!  No automatic or electronic
climate controls!  No fade-in/fade-out lighting! No power seat (but keep the
manual lumbar adjustment)!  No power mirrors (although the interior handles
that wiggled the outside mirrors were great, bring those back)!  OK, OK, the
heated seats were nice... but they're expendable, too!  Nothing automatic,
everything that can be turned on or off or adjusted up or down should be
directly adjustable.  Keep the computers to a minimum.

15 inch wheels (vs the old 14s) would probably be an improvement.  Make sure
that the defroster vents will push HOT air onto the windshield near the
base, to help keep ice clear in bad conditions.  Cruise control is probably
a necessity.  Fog/driving lamps would be helpful.  Do bring back the rear
"fog lamps" feature.  There probably shouldn't be any options at all.  Build
it just one way and get it right.  The customer can choose the color.
That's it.

I don't know whether or not it should have a turbo option for those that do
need more power but many of us could live without it.  Come to think of it,
the current Toyota 2.4L I-4 VVTi engine would probably be powerful enough,
with its 156 or so hp.  I think the old turbo 240s, which were fast enough,
only had 168hp, anyway.  156hp is certainly more than I'm used to (the
non-turbos we had provided just 114hp).  A new 5-speed auto would also be
one more gear than we're used to.  If it saves money, Volvo could skip the
provision for a manual transmission.  Actually, if Volvo used a new Toyota
engine, which I'd expect to be more efficient than the old B230F, went to a
5-speed with a fairly tall fifth gear (1800rpm at 55, maybe lower), did
refine the body aerodynamics a bit and kept the weight to 3100lbs, I would
think 30+mpg should be achievable and I don't think 34mpg on the highwway
would be too much of a stretch.  We used to routinely get 28mpg on the
highway at a pretty good clip and ours had a pretty draggy roof rack.  A
diesel might be a possibility, too.

Target price of $20K.  I'd buy it in a heartbeat.  I'd probably be willing
to pay more.

Not apparent is what you expect to get from this thread - please
explain.  Comments inserted.

I don't know how much knowlege about f.cking there is on the Volvo
forum, but I'm glad the very thought of it got you to thinking about
something.

Not much of a base of knowlege.  I've owned Volvo's before and after
that and currently own two of them.  There is not a car around that
will not break down or need repairs at some point.  That's why all car
dealers have repair departments.

Please tell us why you would likle to bash Volvo all day long since
your only experience is with a 20 year old car.  BTW, I also owned a
1987 GLE and loved it.  Fine reliable car.

Also, please tell us just exactly is a "can do attitude" and who
exactly is supposed to have this presumably desirable attribute.  (In
my experience it is a phrase that first the military then an army of
consultants wore out long ago)

What makes you think that Volvo doesn't pay attention to "valid"
customer complaints.  Without a doubt the V70 wagon is a better produce
than it's 240 counterpart of 25 years ago.  So in my experience Volvo
does listen.

Without a doubt the newer cars are better.

200,000 miles is a very low threshold for almost any car made today.
All that is required is that the owner perform all maintenance as
scheduled, change fluids ahead of schedule and fix problems as they
occur.

One avoids accidents by driving in a safe manner and watching out for
the idiots around you.

Systems designed to provide driver and passenger safety don't allow one
to avoid accidents - they minimize the damage of accidents in process.
Vehicle control systems like ABS, STC, DSTC, etc., reduce the chances
of a driver getting in trouble when driving beyond what common sense
would dictate in a given condition.  They all work for the most part.

No.  Quite reliable in my experience.  What would make you think they
are.

I would probably substitute Toyota pricing.