the situation: my fiance drives a honda civic tin can, and i really feel it's unsafe. i've had four 240's, and just getting to the point that i can do a lot of work myself, but they are too boxy for her. i've been thinking along the lines of an 850 - 94 -97, but don't know much about the car.

question 1: is it a very reliable automobile?

q2: is it a lot more difficult to work on than a 240?

q3: having repairs done at a shop, how much should one realistically budget to maintain one per year?

q4: can one realistically drive one into the 200K range like a 240 without paying drastically?

q5: would a turbo model be more prone to problems than one without?

your wisdom is crucial to my decision.

godspeed,

raymond

As far as the miles are concerned there is a turbo listed at the local Volvo dealership with 277k on it. And there are only asking 3k.
--
90 744ti, Airbox, K/N, Cold air, G-Valve, Dual boost control, VDO, Modified exhaust. 88 745 gle, 99 Camry

This is based on my 97 850, which currently has 207K miles.

Q1: yes, mine has been.
Q2: yes, more complex and engine compartment is much more tightly packed. That is, there's always more disassembly to get access to what you need to do. You would probably want a OBD reader.
Q3: don't know
Q4: yes, in my experience.
Q5: don't know, but my guess would be no, not simply because of the turbo. Would a turbo car be likely to have been driven more aggressively though?

From what I've read it's worthwhile to find one closer to 97 than to earlier years.

--
244, 855, 765t

I'm a 240 guy myself, and surveyed many posts on this.

Look in the 900 section.
Many recommend 940s, or 960s if you will change the timing belt religeously (960 has an interference engine).
940 has the 2.3L, same as 240, with a very similar auto tranny.
900s are RWD, basically an update of the 700s.
This is a path I'm considering, you might have a look at it.

The last year for 940 was '95, the last 960 '97.
The 90 series is a continuation of the 960, but I know precious little about that one.

question 1: is it a very reliable automobile? They can be if maintained properly.

q2: is it a lot more difficult to work on than a 240? Some aspects are, like timing belts but things like struts and blower motors are much easier.

q3: having repairs done at a shop, how much should one realistically budget to maintain one per year? Ballpark $1500.00 depending upon the age of it and how many miles you rack up in a year.

q4: can one realistically drive one into the 200K range like a 240 without paying drastically? Yes, it can be done but it is going to cost you. I am not entirely sure what your idea of drastic is. I just totaled a bill up on one for $1600.00 for radiator, t/stat, cap, rotor, wires, mass air flow sensor, and a major service.

q5: would a turbo model be more prone to problems than one without? Yes it will. Just the simple fact that it runs hotter under the hood due to the gigantic heat sink that the turbo is. This will make for a shorter life span for the underhood rubber stuff like engine seals and heater hoses. They tend to be harder on brakes and bushings too but this really depends on if you drive like a bat out of hell or not.

To sum it up I would have to say that the 240 is a better car if you want something to drive for 300,000 miles. The down side is that the 240 is more expensive to service than the 850. The upside is that the 240 is cheaper to maintain when it comes to repairs like water pumps brakes and things like this. The 850's are nice but because they incorporate a higher level of technology they tend to cost you more on the repairs. Examples would be ABS control units, CV joints and boots, gear position sensors. Then you couple the fact that they are tougher to work on with the technology aspect and throw in the pattern failure stuff like spring seats, fuel pumps, mass air flow meters, and a/c evaporators, you find that they are more expensive to maintain and the older they get the more they cost.

I own my own independent Volvo repair shop and with the exception of the '92 960 that I drive, my wife and three kids all drive red engine cars.

Mark

mark,

thank you. your reply was incredibly helpful. i'm sure you run a wonderful shop.

by the way, what are red engine cars? is that japanese - referring to high engine revolutions?

if i could, your thought on one more thing pertaining to my 88 240 - when i take off from a stop there is a popping sound from the rear axle area just as the car begins to move. i can't distinguish left or right. any ideas what this might be?

with a lot of gratitude,

raymond

Raymond,

A red engine car is basically any of the 4 cylinder overhead cam engines that Volvo used i.e. B230, B23, B21. You find them in ALMOST all of the 240's and all of the 700's and 900's so long as they are 4 cylinder, with the exception of the B234 16 valve engine. I guess technically it is a red engine but it is more of a red headed step child than anything else. The models all have the red cast iron bottom end.

When you hear someone refer to a "white" engine they are talking about the late model engines like the 960,850,S70,S40,60, or 80. These engines have no paint on the block so they are left in the white. In the manufacturing realm any metal that is left unfinished is said to be left in the white.

So with that info, my wife has an '89 740 and the kids have all got 240 wagons. The middle child has a 240 diesel so technically she is not a card carrying member of the red engine society, but she sure wishes she was!

Popping noise from the rear when taking off from a stop huh? My first suspicion would be either the rear trailing arm bushings (most likely) or the locating arm bushings. Those are the top two noise makers back there. You'd be suprised how much you can quiet things down just by rolling under it and putting a wrench on everything and tightening it all up.

Mark