|
I've found the non-turbo 940's to be pretty quick in general, since most seem to have the 4.10 rear axle that gets them moving.
All the turbos are going to have the hose problems sooner or later, just a question of time. As for getting a standard transmission, there ARE NO 940's with standard transmissions, so that's not an option in a US model.
The 93 240 ( the last year of production) did still have a manual trans available. Finding one is another story. 93's are somewhat uncommon anyway but finding one with this setup would be very tough. Somewhat less than 10% of production sold in US has the stick.
In terms of longevity, life expectancy, I'd guess a 93 240 and a 93-4-5 940 to last basically the same amount of time. Sooner or later rust will kill the 240. the 940s seemed to be impervious, but now I'm reading about frame cracks apparently brought on by rust. Scary. The aluminum hatches and the 745/945 are always prone to paint failure, though they'll never rust out like an early 245 hatch.
Interior space for cargo is a wash. The 240 is taller, the 940 wider. Diagonal space about the same. 940 seats do the split folding thing so they win I guess. And the front seat area is larger in the 740/940.
A 93 240 has a lot of the things that a 940 came with, ABS brakes, R134 air-cond., 100K timing belt. No passenger air bag in any 240s - that's a plus for some people. Both cars are outstanding for safety track record. Both have an engine that's good for 3-400K miles and a transmission almost as good.
Comes down to preference I think, and maybe whether you want a sunroof in your wagon....
Rob Bareiss, New London,CT
--
Rob Bareiss, New London, CT 86 244, 87 244, 88 744
|
