Most reliable 80's Volvo 240's

After 1988 when they improved the wiring.

Howard

Hi Howard,

What problems were there pre-1988 with the wiring?

Han.

One that has been fitted with a Chev V8. :-)

All 80's 240's had the same automatic transmission all the way up until the last ones in '93 so you won't find much difference there. Pre-'88 cars will probably need a new engine wiring harness if they haven't had one already, other than that the changes were minimal after the facelift in '86. Just small incremental stuff, power windows and seat heaters are more common, later ones have headrests in the rear, some of the very newest cars had ABS and driver's airbag but the basic car didn't change much at all. Shop by condition and maintenance, year and mileage is secondary but often related.

Post '87. Also, '88 used a different injection system, which was changed again in '89. Biggest enemy of Volvo transmission is heat so radiator maintenance important--especially in hot climates. Might want to avoid anything with original rad or low quality replacement.

han snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote:

That depends upon where in the world you are.

The wiring in the earlier-80s models (I don't know just when it started, but my '85 was sure affected) had terrible insulation. I've heard it was of French manufacture, and heard it was biodegradable, but all I really know is that the insulation crumbles away from the smaller wires at the slightest touch. It only appears to affect the exposed portions and I'm sure it didn't happen when the car was new. Internal wiring also does not seem to be affected, but under the hood and under the chassis re-insulating exposed wires is an ongoing job. I replaced the engine harness maybe 8 years ago, but I still have dozens of wires I've repaired and some I've just patched up.

Mike

Insulation breaks down on wires exposed to heat. Replacement of engine wiring harness expensive. Prob $3-400 parts and 6-8 hours labor.

May be hard to diagnose with lots of intermittant electrical/computer glitchs.

Howard

There's a few tricks, at one point I found a nearly brand new harness on a car in a junkyard for 8 bucks, I've also bought a good one from Dave Barton, a lot more than the junkyard price but much less than the $350 or so new cost. Installation time on the last one I did was about 2 hours with no special tools so if a shop quotes you 6-8 hours they're ripping you off in a big way.

Are the 740's from that era any less reliable than the 240's?

Have seen one caught fire from....so bit dangerous....

have fun....sno

Howard Nels>

Generally no, the engine, transmission and much of the electronics are virtually identical, they tend to have a bit more bells & whistles to break but otherwise they're just as solid. One catch though is that some of the non-turbo models have the less robust ZF automatic gearbox.

The 740s are pretty decent, but the 760s - especially before the '88 model year, have some troublesome accessories. (Ours is an '85, so I guess I am an authority!) The A/C will drive you cRaZY on the pre-88s.

Mike

Get an 81 240 with the B 21F engine with Bosch K Jet injection system. This fuel injection system is very basic, no real FI computer (just a closed loop system using voltage from the O2 sensor to modulate fuel/air ratio).. but it is ultra reliable. A three row radiator is a good idea for improving reliability and keeping things cool. If the alternator has an external regulator retrofit the internal regulator brush assembly (really easy). Put in new bushings on the power steering pump mounts. Put in new injector seals (easy). Put in the later model flame trap that doesnt clog. I know the wiring harnesses are often big trouble in this vintage, but I have had no serious problems with mine. The 81

240 is the best Volvo I have owned and I have had six, ranging from a 68 144 to a 92 240. The IPD sway bars are a good upgrade if you want less body roll in turns. The 90s 240s are nice, and they are cheap now, but they are more complex, a bit harder to fix and have the air mass meters that always seem to fail at the wrong time. Power windows and mirrors are nice, but they break. I love 240s and for me the 81 is a great vintage.

My advice gained by personal experience is opposite of that, I deal with a number of K-jet 240's on a regular basis (including two '81 B21F 240's) and while a couple of them run pretty well, I've spent more time screwing around with some others than I care to admit. As simple as it may be, when it's not working right it can be very difficult to diagnose without some specialized tools. The warmup regulators fail often and are as expensive as air mass meters when you can find new ones. An '81 is a 25 year old car so unless very well maintained it will likely need all new hoses, some wiring, and possibly some other stuff. Also in a couple instances when I've been too busy to take on a project, the owners have found just how hard it can be to find a mechanic with K-Jet experience, most of them seem to look under the hood and go "huh?" The cars always seem to run, so in that sense yes it's "reliable" however they rarely run "well."

On the other hand I've had nothing but great experience with the more modern LH-Jet injection. I've had two air mass meters fail out of about a dozen cars I've worked on and both were very easy to determine the problem and inexpensive to find a good used AMM. The LH injected engines run smoother and get better fuel economy, as well as there's less funky vacuum stuff and no "black box" hydraulics. Just simple, solid computerized electronics. Only problems I've ever experienced with them other than the AMM is rotted wiring (a problem with the K-Jet cars share), and an injector that had the plastic cap over the pintel crack and fall off into the stream. Most problems can be diagnosed with a basic multimeter and a quick visual inspection, no need for any special pressure guages, fittings, or any other special tools.

What is the *more robust* slushbox, and how can I identify which one is on a vehicle? I like this thread so much I am looking for a 240 or 740!

What kind of MPG's can one expect, real world? I get about 24-26 on the non turbo 850--my wife drives it day to day, and she gets about 17-18 but she is of the push the gas down let it up, push it down, let it up school of driving.

The alternative is the AW-71 transmission. The types can be identified by the shifter; AWs have an overdrive button on the side and three speeds on the shifter, while ZFs have 4 speeds on the shifter and no separate overdrive button.

My understanding is that the ZF is fine except for one dreadful catch - if the engine is revved in neutral (or park?) above 2000 rpm (IIRC) for more than 30 seconds (IIRC again) the transmission will be seriously damaged. Others can supply the exact details, I'm sure, but a number of transmissions have gone into emission testing working fine and had to be towed out. I understand there are alternative emission test procedures that are okay with the ZF.

My '85 760 turbo wagon gets right at 20 mpg all the time - short trips or long, hot or cold weather.

Mike

The ZF gear selector will have 1-2-3-D while the stronger AW-70/71 has 1-2-D and a button on the side to lockout overdrive (4th gear). When my mom's 240 was automatic it got about 26 mpg. Later converted it to manual and it's been doing 29-31 mpg but then at 235k miles or so it's probably loosened up a bit.

240's and 740's have different personalities, drive both and see what you like. One thing about the 740 though, beware the headliner, they tend to fail and sag with age, and it's a HUGE pain to redo it in a sedan. Not so bad in a wagon but it's no picnic either. It's the price to pay for a bit more luxury I suppose.

transmissions

I think there might be more to it, I know revving in park will damage it, but they seem to not last as long even with normal use. Some people have had great luck with them, but many more have not. The AW-70 and 71 boxes are just so bulletproof and they're about the same to drive, enough reason for me to avoid the ZF.