I really couldn't say it much better than the way it's been expressed in these posts. If we ever get around to making a 200 FAQ, these should be right in the "Buying a 240" section.

In my opinion, the 240 series is one of the best all-around automobiles ever built. It combines simplicity, sound engineering, safety, high construction quality, modern safety and conveniences, and is, long-term, a highly reliable and cost-effective means of transportation.

We hear of the common problems on this forum, on this board, and in other enthusiast groups like this, but these problems for the most part, are common to many of the cars because they are able to survive to an old age, old for any vehicle really.

Volvo steadily improved the longevity of the cars through this series. I have copies of old ads and road test reports: at the introduction of the 140 series, Volvos were expected to last an average of 11 years. By 1983, that expectancy was up to 18+ years. Thats a huge improvement in quality, achieved at a time when the rest of the auto industry, US and abroad, was struggling mightily to comply with new rules.

The car has these things going for it:
1) Modern design. Particularly mechanical design- the basic concept of an iron block, aluminum head, overhead cam, 2-valve per cylinder 4cylinder engine, is virtually bulletproof. Other similar engines (Toyota and Nissan trucks come to mind) have achieved similar levels of longevity. Likewise, Volvo's transmission choices endure as well as any modern transmission. Witness the junkyards' pricing of these components: $150 for a used engine or transmission means "come and get it out of our yard." This is due to low demand for the parts due to low failure rates. Not that they can't fail- simply that they survive better than hundreds of other car models.

2) Ease of service, and low parts prices. Cars inevitably break, leak, wear out, and simply require regular maintenance. These cars, for a modern design, are very easy to replace parts in, and generally won't break the bank. Most "economy" cars do not have cheaper parts than the Volvos. The whole point of this board is to help people maintain the vehicle themselves, saving $100's of dollars, and face it, making it worthwhile to own an older car. But ask any mechanic who's been around a while, would you rather work on a 240, or a newer Volvo? The new ones are fine cars, but some of that work is very tight access, tricky, requires special tools or jigs, or is far more involved than equivalent work in the 240. Even the "easy" R&R work in the newer models usually involves some expensive computer module (ABS controllers, anyone?) which can cost as much a complete, running 240 these days!

3) Safety. The car was the government crash-test standard, the car by which all others were judged for crashworthiness when introduced. Volvo has always done their seatbelts right, including 3-pt rears LONG before anyone else did. A newer 240 has airbag protection for the driver and the last ones have ABS brakes, giving active safety measures that are hard to beat. No, they dont have 36 air bags in the ceiling but a good foundation is there to improve your chance of walking away when the worst happens. I've seen dozens of these cars crunched up every which way. The passenger compartments stay intact in any situation that would be considered a "survivable" accident. Peace of mind? Absolutely. We used to sell so many of these cars, as 3-10 yr old used cars, to people buying one for the young drivers in their family. They're still a good option, as long as they're properly serviced.

4) Performance. ok we can all agree that the 240 is not generally a quick car. The Turbos were quite adequate but most of you enjoy driving a normally aspirated brick. But each person expects something a little different from a car, and has different ideas about what driving means to them. For some, the 240's comfortable ride is the exact kind of performance they wanted. Subjectively, the cars never scored well on skidpad tests or 0-60 numbers. However, the car is predictable when pushed hard, and reliably can be driven briskly around town or 80 mph on the highway all day. The emergency handling of a stock 240 defaults to "safe"- it understeers, it stops VERY well, and doesn't really have any negatives or quirky behaviors. You have to understand, when it was introduced, you're looking at comparable cars from 1975, and it handled VERY well indeed. TEchnology has caught up a lot in 30 years, and the car seems mundane or middle of the road now. As a comparison point, Popular Science used to give any car that could beat 15.0 seconds 0-60 their highest rating for acceleration. Now, your everyday grocery-getter can beat that by quite a bit. So what we find is a car that doesn't post incredible numbers but does in fact meet it's owners needs for vehicle performance, every day, for 100, 200, 250, 300 thousand miles. Not bad at all.

There's much much more, but for now I'll leave you with a little historical reference on my site: the 1975 introductory road tests for the 2 series.
http://www.bareiss.net/volvo/volvo.html

Happy bricking!
--
Rob Bareiss, New London CT ::: 87 244DL- 249K, 88 245DL- 181K, 84 242DL, 89 244DL parts, SOLD: 86 244, 88 244GL, 87 244, 91 244, 82 245T, 88 744GLE, 86 244