Last great Volvo?

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

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.

Agreed.

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!

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

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.

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.

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

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:

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

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

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.

I think he meant V's as in Volvos.

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, 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?

Chuck Fiedler Nothing but Volvo since 1974

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.

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.