Volvo Owners Forum banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I drive a 1982 240 wagon with 250k miles and love it. My wife's mini-van died with only 84K miles due to coolant leak onto camshaft and into oil (do not buy a 3.4L V-6 GM minivan!). I have convinced her a 240 is so safe and practical. I'd like to get her a 2.3L non-turbo and have heard rumors that the later models may not be as reliable as the earlier models. Any truth or do you think any well maintained 240 is a worthy of consideration? Also, I have only had manual transmission 240's; are the automatics durable? Thank you so much for your opinions; we are really in a bind here.
 

·
Volvo Guru !
Joined
·
5,908 Posts
Personaly I think you should go with a later model 240.Try to find one with electronic fuel injection.The mechanical injection ran good but when something happened it was expensive to repair.I would say go with and 88,89, or 90 that would be your best bet.
 

·
Volvo Guru !
Joined
·
5,908 Posts
The only Electrical problem that were with the 240's were the engine wiring harness.That was somewhat common with all the 4 cylinder engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
QUOTE(cjh3 @ Dec 21 2004, 11:54 AM)I drive a 1982 240 wagon with 250k miles and love it. My wife's mini-van died with only 84K miles due to coolant leak onto camshaft and into oil (do not buy a 3.4L V-6 GM minivan!). I have convinced her a 240 is so safe and practical. I'd like to get her a 2.3L non-turbo and have heard rumors that the later models may not be as reliable as the earlier models. Any truth or do you think any well maintained 240 is a worthy of consideration? Also, I have only had manual transmission 240's; are the automatics durable? Thank you so much for your opinions; we are really in a bind here.

[snapback]1807[/snapback]​


go with the latest models you can find/ afford. the later 240's have anti-lock brakes, air bags, some had r-134 conversions already, 91-93 had the newer front windshields (90, too?), and improved a/c systems.

the best for the earlier models is probably the 89 model with improved main harness wiring. 85-88 years had a bio-degradable wiring and costs $320+ for a replacement at the dealer. it literally fell apart in your hands. check to see if it has been replaced if you find these years 240.

regards,
byron golden
86 245
92 245
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
QUOTE(bcg @ Feb 25 2005, 11:28 PM)go with the latest models you can find/ afford. the later 240's have anti-lock brakes, air bags, some had r-134 conversions already, 91-93 had the newer front windshields (90, too?), and improved a/c systems.

the best for the earlier models is probably the 89 model with improved main harness wiring. 85-88 years had a bio-degradable wiring and costs $320+ for a replacement at the dealer. it literally fell apart in your hands. check to see if it has been replaced if you find these years 240.

regards,
byron golden
86 245
92 245
[snapback]4039[/snapback]​

ABS became standard equipment for the 240 for the 92 model year. 91 SE wagons had it as well. 91-93 240s have the late a/c system, which is much improved. Only 93s came with r134a from the factory, but the factory comversion kit for the 91 and 92 models is available cheap. The Aisin-Warner automatics used in late 240s are very reliable, almost as much as the red-block 4 cylinder engines. 90-93s have a driver's airbag as standard equipment.

Actually, 89 is considered a bad year by a lot of 240 aficionados. 88s actually have the improved wiring harness, and they're the best of the LH 2.2 injected cars. 89 was the first year of LH 2.4, and there were some teething problems. A lot of the 89 (and later) LH 2.4 cars have the pink sticker 561 ECU, which will leave you stranded if it fails.

My advice would be to buy a 92 or 93. ABS is a big plus, IMO, and the a/c system, improved windshield seal and bigger rear window, etc, all make the car more civilized. The airbag may or may not be a selling point based on your own preferences. I drive a nice 91, but I'm looking hard for a 92.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top