240 General: New (to me) 1980 Volvo 244

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

We're back to the perennial question, what defines a classic car? For many, it has to be a certain age, a rarity, no longer in production, have a following (however small) and/or have some special engineering or other outstanding features.

Go back a few years to when i owned, in addition to my 827 Sterling, an 827 Coupe and i bought an 827 SLi saloon.
Imagine my surprise when i got a quote for the SLi and it came out about 5 times what i was paying for the other two combined. Why i demanded?

Turned out that although the Sterling (94/L) and the Coupe (95/N) were considered classics in their own right for various reasons, exact model and body styles and the rarity of the trim levels being the main ones cited. The 827 SLi was almost identical to the Sterling except for not having cruise control. The official spec was leather upholstery and cruise control were the two main things that set the Sterling and SLi apart when new. However, this particular SLi had leather from the factory (build sheet to prove and alloy wheels too) so apart from cruise, was identical to a Sterling.
However, because it left the factory as an SLi, it wasn't eligible for classic insurance as they didn't consider it a classic. In terms of age it's a 94/M reg so more or less in between the Sterling and Coupe i owned.

Onto the 214SEi that you query whether it's a classic or not. Consider a 1993 Ford Escort 1.4 Ghia. Is that a classic? I'd say not, it's just another 27 year old Escort but many Ford fans would instantly argue that it is a classic. The 214 was the direct competitor to the Escort so in that respect, should also be a classic.
Now consider its 20 year older predecessor, the Allegro. They are now regarded as classics and have a following.

The 214 SEi was a fairly rare model when new so perhaps qualifies on that score, the overall condition/mileage of the one in question adds to that. They were very capable cars when new and still are. I've never been a fan of the K series engine, not one of Rovers finer moments but the 1.4 16v is one of the better ones to have.

However, if you really want an R8 200 series as a classic, go for the 216 Coupe with the Honda D16 engine, reliable as the day is long and a rare body style. Alternatively, go for the 220 or 220 Turbo (aka Tomcat) which although is a Rover engine, it's the T series, based on reworking the B- series initially for diesel operation (so the block was strengthened and a few other things and the all important crossflow OHC cylinder head) preferably in Coupe form (the only way to have a Tomcat - 220 Turbo Coupe) but the 3- door (for preference) or 5 door hatch models are still good and more of a sleeper.

Overall, i wouldn't say the 214 SEi is a classic in its own right as yet but is likely to become a classic in the near future.

As for the cost new, i don't know about the 214SEi but i know my Sterling was just over £30k and my Coupe was a bit over £33k, that may give an idea.

That was an interesting lesson in middle-aged Rovers Dave, you clearly know much more about them than do I.

I agree with the insurance bit: I had a Saab 900 convertible once (a 1996 model I think, terrible car) that did qualify for the classic car insurance (good for me), but I found out by chance that the hard top version would not have. I suppose the insurers took the view that no one would be commuting in a convertible Saab 900.

I have nothing against Rovers (and I had not realised you were an aficionado), it was just an ad I happened to see and thought: why would anyone consider that a classic car. Nostalgia seems to be such a driving force in our lives these days - even for things that were not much good in their day. I take more notice of motorbike prices and have seen 1970s FS1Es being adversited for £5-6,000. Even my 1976 Suzuki B120 (a ride to work 2 stroke that I maintain so it looks like someone's dad just stepped off it after commuting to work at the shoe factory in 1986) is worth £1500. I think both those examples are crazy, but it is what it is: nostalgia gone mad.

I didn't mean any offence about the Rover example, I could have picked a Vauxhall or a Mazda instead.

Now this one really is madness:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/LADA-2101...53.m1438.l2649

I recall taking a look at a brand new Lada (poor copy of a Fiat 124 - in itself a bad car) in about 1982, it could still be bought new for about a grand, and deciding that even at that price it was a terrible car. It will be interesting to see how much that one goes for, my guess is £3-4,000. I'm trying to envisage what sort of person would want to drive a 1979 Lada, even if it is in nice condition.

Sometimes I just feel too old to understand :-)

Alan

PS. Here is a photo of the Bloop (which is of no relevance whatsoever):

[john.wigley]

Originally Posted by Othen

It is no secret that I enjoy driving what I consider to be a nice classic car around - the Royal Barge was cheap and cheerful - and 40 years old (which the government and I think make it a classic car).

I was just leafing through the eBay classic cars section (as many of us do) and I notice people are advertising almost any car over 20 years old as being classic, this Rover is only 27 years old:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/An-Outsta....c100010.m2109

... the 214 wasn't a particularly good car when it was new, has no special engineering or design features and the asking price (£3.5k) is probably more than when it was new (that is a guess on my part, I have not checked).

These are just the idle ramblings of a confused old man (I'm 59), but are people mad - these are just old cars that should be selling for £999 on a street corner sales lot, not classic cars (this one may not even be much of a classic car in 13 years time).

Ho hum, time to take Bob for a walk.

Oi! That ain't old! I'm 71, and that ain't old either, so we'll have less of that kind of talk, if you don't mind!

Seriously, I do agree with you and 'L.S.' regarding what constitutes a 'classic' car. Veteran and vintage are clearly defined, and I also like the term 'post-vintage thoroughbred'. But even that is a grey area; while my 1950s Riley RM series cars might reasonably have been included, my first car, a 1951 'sit-up-and-beg' Ford, would probably not qualify. My only new car, a Mini 1000 which cost me a little over £2000 in 1978, a car inferior in so many ways to a Volvo 240, would today be worth a five-figure sum if preserved in excellent condition. My 1971 Fiat 500,a lesser car when new even than the Mini, could now make up to £20K if in a similar condition.

I think one factor is the potential of cars for survival. Those that were cheap and cheerful when new were often also seen as disposable - hence few have survived - while 'prestige' cars such as Jaguars, Bentleys, Alvis', Rover 3 litre and 3.5 and the like, are more likely to have been preserved. The survival rate - hence availability today - is reflected in the prices that they command. Have you looked at what 'bubble' cars - one step up from a motor-cycle combination - go for these days?

No. I think what makes a car a 'classic' is it's 'Je ne sais quoi', and that may well differ even between enthusiasts. One thing is for sure, Alan' the R.B. has it in spades, and isn't that all that really matters?

Regards, John.

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by Othen

That was an interesting lesson in middle-aged Rovers Dave, you clearly know much more about them than do I.

I agree with the insurance bit: I had a Saab 900 convertible once (a 1996 model I think, terrible car) that did qualify for the classic car insurance (good for me), but I found out by chance that the hard top version would not have. I suppose the insurers took the view that no one would be commuting in a convertible Saab 900.

I have nothing against Rovers (and I had not realised you were an aficionado), it was just an ad I happened to see and thought: why would anyone consider that a classic car. Nostalgia seems to be such a driving force in our lives these days - even for things that were not much good in their day. I take more notice of motorbike prices and have seen 1970s FS1Es being adversited for £5-6,000. Even my 1976 Suzuki B120 (a ride to work 2 stroke that I maintain so it looks like someone's dad just stepped off it after commuting to work at the shoe factory in 1986) is worth £1500. I think both those examples are crazy, but it is what it is: nostalgia gone mad.

I didn't mean any offence about the Rover example, I could have picked a Vauxhall or a Mazda instead.

Now this one really is madness:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/LADA-2101...53.m1438.l2649

I recall taking a look at a brand new Lada (poor copy of a Fiat 124 - in itself a bad car) in about 1982, it could still be bought new for about a grand, and deciding that even at that price it was a terrible car. It will be interesting to see how much that one goes for, my guess is £3-4,000. I'm trying to envisage what sort of person would want to drive a 1979 Lada, even if it is in nice condition.

Sometimes I just feel too old to understand :-)

Alan

PS. Here is a photo of the Bloop (which is of no relevance whatsoever):

No offence taken about the Rover Alan, it was in fact a very good example to pick from a plethora of similar cars such as a 1993 Astra, Mazda 323, Escort - the list goes on. They were all much of a muchness, all small family cars designed to do a job, no more, no less.

The silly thing about that VAZ (Russian home market Lada) is they have more of a following than old Ladas from the UK of their time. As you rightly point out, they were an Eastern Bloc copy of the Fiat 124 and not a good one at that! A bad copy of a bad car but enthusiasts have sorted the niggles and presented a good condition car with no frills that holds a certain something for certain people.

That something is nostalgia and what makes Fords so popular i think. Almost every family had a Ford at one time or another so people grew up with them and had fond memories of their dads Sierra and their grandads Mk3 Cortina and so on.
They want to relive those days nostalgically so fight each other for the right to own a good example of whatever triggers their memories, whether it's a Cortina, Ecort, Capri etc.

I suspect you're right about that VAZ, £3-4k, maybe a little more. Surprised you haven't noticed my signature and the fact i own an 827 so it's likely i have more than a passing interest in Rovers in general. Out of all the cars i've owned, the two makes (without counting them all up) i'm fairly sure i've owned most of have been Volvo and Rover as they've been the best cars for me.

Now i'm a bit older i don't change my cars anywhere near as often as i used to. In the past i've had most of the FWD/Honda-derived Rovers and/or the honda equivalent plus a number of SD1 V8s and a P6 2000 plus a 145, 144 auto, 360GLT, 3 740GLE and now the 760 GLE which for me is the ultimate 7xx Volvo.

A little known fact is when Rover launched the Mk2 (which is what mine is) 800 series, they were planning on rebranding it as the 700 series - if they had i would now own a 760 and a 727!

[Othen]

Originally Posted by john.wigley

Oi! That ain't old! I'm 71, and that ain't old either, so we'll have less of that kind of talk, if you don't mind!

Seriously, I do agree with you and 'L.S.' regarding what constitutes a 'classic' car. Veteran and vintage are clearly defined, and I also like the term 'post-vintage thoroughbred'. But even that is a grey area; while my 1950s Riley RM series cars might reasonably have been included, my first car, a 1951 'sit-up-and-beg' Ford, would probably not qualify. My only new car, a Mini 1000 which cost me a little over £2000 in 1978, a car inferior in so many ways to a Volvo 240, would today be worth a five-figure sum if preserved in excellent condition. My 1971 Fiat 500,a lesser car when new even than the Mini, could now make up to £20K if in a similar condition.

I think one factor is the potential of cars for survival. Those that were cheap and cheerful when new were often also seen as disposable - hence few have survived - while 'prestige' cars such as Jaguars, Bentleys, Alvis', Rover 3 litre and 3.5 and the like, are more likely to have been preserved. The survival rate - hence availability today - is reflected in the prices that they command. Have you looked at what 'bubble' cars - one step up from a motor-cycle combination - go for these days?

No. I think what makes a car a 'classic' is it's 'Je ne sais quoi', and that may well differ even between enthusiasts. One thing is for sure, Alan' the R.B. has it in spades, and isn't that all that really matters?

Regards, John.

No offence meant John!

I like maintaining older things for what they are - we throw away far too much in our society - but I struggle with nostalgia for the sake of it.

Thank you for your kind works about the RB, it was a nostalgic purchase of course, but also it only cost 2 grand and could (at a pinch, if one could live with 25 MPG) be used as a daily driver.

Alan

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

No offence taken about the Rover Alan, it was in fact a very good example to pick from a plethora of similar cars such as a 1993 Astra, Mazda 323, Escort - the list goes on. They were all much of a muchness, all small family cars designed to do a job, no more, no less.

The silly thing about that VAZ (Russian home market Lada) is they have more of a following than old Ladas from the UK of their time. As you rightly point out, they were an Eastern Bloc copy of the Fiat 124 and not a good one at that! A bad copy of a bad car but enthusiasts have sorted the niggles and presented a good condition car with no frills that holds a certain something for certain people.

That something is nostalgia and what makes Fords so popular i think. Almost every family had a Ford at one time or another so people grew up with them and had fond memories of their dads Sierra and their grandads Mk3 Cortina and so on.
They want to relive those days nostalgically so fight each other for the right to own a good example of whatever triggers their memories, whether it's a Cortina, Ecort, Capri etc.

I suspect you're right about that VAZ, £3-4k, maybe a little more. Surprised you haven't noticed my signature and the fact i own an 827 so it's likely i have more than a passing interest in Rovers in general. Out of all the cars i've owned, the two makes (without counting them all up) i'm fairly sure i've owned most of have been Volvo and Rover as they've been the best cars for me.

Now i'm a bit older i don't change my cars anywhere near as often as i used to. In the past i've had most of the FWD/Honda-derived Rovers and/or the honda equivalent plus a number of SD1 V8s and a P6 2000 plus a 145, 144 auto, 360GLT, 3 740GLE and now the 760 GLE which for me is the ultimate 7xx Volvo.

A little known fact is when Rover launched the Mk2 (which is what mine is) 800 series, they were planning on rebranding it as the 700 series - if they had i would now own a 760 and a 727!

This has developed into an interesting discussion - occupying a few of us on a blustery day during the national lock down.

It is interesting that some cars and bikes make it as classics, and others that are just as worthy from the same era just don't. Ford is a good example, many older escorts from the 70s and 80s will command 5 figure prices, whereas similar Vauxhalls, Mazdas and so on will sell for a few grand. Motorcycles are the same. Honda 4s (regardless of the model) sell for small fortunes, whereas 4 stroke Yamahas and Suzukis from the same era just don't. It is a little inexplicable, but it is what it is.

A mate of mine bought a 1983 Ford Capri at about the same time I got the RB. I do some maintenance on it for him. He paid about 10 grand for it, and I suppose it is about the same condition as the RB, which cost a couple of grand - but Shaun's car is a Capri V6 (full stop). If I'd paid 10 grand for the Royal Barge I probably wouldn't use it the same way, I'd perhaps be more like Shaun: garage it and use it on Sundays when the sun shines. I like using the RB as an everyday run around, for me that was the point of it.

Alan

[john.wigley]

I think that your approach to using the R.B. is the right one, Alan.

I have a friend who has a Jaguar 'E' type - admittedly a lovely car - which he keeps in an air-conditioned 'tent' in his garage. He very rarely drives it, and when he does, he is constantly concerned about security and the possibility of damage. That also does a car designed to be driven (and enjoyed) few favours. He might just as well have a piece of art hanging on his wall. In the present circumstances, that might also have been a better investment than the Jag will turn out to be.

I hope things quickly get back to normal when you can once again enjoy the R.B. as was your intention - as a practical, competent and interesting alternative daily driver.

Regards, John.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by john.wigley

I think that your approach to using the R.B. is the right one, Alan.

I have a friend who has a Jaguar 'E' type - admittedly a lovely car - which he keeps in an air-conditioned 'tent' in his garage. He very rarely drives it, and when he does, he is constantly concerned about security and the possibility of damage. That also does a car designed to be driven (and enjoyed) few favours. He might just as well have a piece of art hanging on his wall. In the present circumstances, that might also have been a better investment than the Jag will turn out to be.

I hope things quickly get back to normal when you can once again enjoy the R.B. as was your intention - as a practical, competent and interesting alternative daily driver.

Regards, John.

I have been pleased to find on this forum that many Volvo owners seem to agree with the ethos of the Royal Barge. Compared with the Ford Capri owners that is really refreshing.

I don't imagine there are many Volvo 240s living inside air-conditioned tents in someone's garage :-)

Alan

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by Othen

This has developed into an interesting discussion - occupying a few of us on a blustery day during the national lock down.

It is interesting that some cars and bikes make it as classics, and others that are just as worthy from the same era just don't. Ford is a good example, many older escorts from the 70s and 80s will command 5 figure prices, whereas similar Vauxhalls, Mazdas and so on will sell for a few grand. Motorcycles are the same. Honda 4s (regardless of the model) sell for small fortunes, whereas 4 stroke Yamahas and Suzukis from the same era just don't. It is a little inexplicable, but it is what it is.

A mate of mine bought a 1983 Ford Capri at about the same time I got the RB. I do some maintenance on it for him. He paid about 10 grand for it, and I suppose it is about the same condition as the RB, which cost a couple of grand - but Shaun's car is a Capri V6 (full stop). If I'd paid 10 grand for the Royal Barge I probably wouldn't use it the same way, I'd perhaps be more like Shaun: garage it and use it on Sundays when the sun shines. I like using the RB as an everyday run around, for me that was the point of it.

Alan

That would be a Capri 2.8 injection then Alan? Too late to be a 3.0 but might be a 280 or "Brooklands".

It's strange how some cars you'd never think of as becoming classics do so. I've recently had the May edition of Practical Classics drop through the letterbox and it's their 40th anniversary issue, one of the editorial bits says in another 40 years time, no doubt it will have pictures of 50 year old Nissan Leaf, Renault Zoe and similar cars. Not sure on that one as the car has to have some sort of character, not be a milk float in disguise. Can you tell i don't like electric cars?

Originally Posted by john.wigley

I think that your approach to using the R.B. is the right one, Alan.

I have a friend who has a Jaguar 'E' type - admittedly a lovely car - which he keeps in an air-conditioned 'tent' in his garage. He very rarely drives it, and when he does, he is constantly concerned about security and the possibility of damage. That also does a car designed to be driven (and enjoyed) few favours. He might just as well have a piece of art hanging on his wall. In the present circumstances, that might also have been a better investment than the Jag will turn out to be.

I hope things quickly get back to normal when you can once again enjoy the R.B. as was your intention - as a practical, competent and interesting alternative daily driver.

Regards, John.

Totally agree John - it's nice to keep your car in nice condition but making it a garage/trailer queen does it no favours and only serves to stress the owner out as you've desribed because it might get a ding or wet or whatever.
If he's not going to actually use it, get a model of it and donate the real one to a museum on the proviso he can come and drive it every so often. WOuld save him a fortune in ownership costs and also air conditioning bills!

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

That would be a Capri 2.8 injection then Alan? Too late to be a 3.0 but might be a 280 or "Brooklands".

It's strange how some cars you'd never think of as becoming classics do so. I've recently had the May edition of Practical Classics drop through the letterbox and it's their 40th anniversary issue, one of the editorial bits says in another 40 years time, no doubt it will have pictures of 50 year old Nissan Leaf, Renault Zoe and similar cars. Not sure on that one as the car has to have some sort of character, not be a milk float in disguise. Can you tell i don't like electric cars?





Totally agree John - it's nice to keep your car in nice condition but making it a garage/trailer queen does it no favours and only serves to stress the owner out as you've desribed because it might get a ding or wet or whatever.
If he's not going to actually use it, get a model of it and donate the real one to a museum on the proviso he can come and drive it every so often. WOuld save him a fortune in ownership costs and also air conditioning bills!

Yes, Capri 2.8i - Cologne engine I think. It is a nice car - very Bodie and Doyle. The Capri is probably a good investment, I can see it being worth £20k in another 10 years time.

I’ve often wondered whether people will be keeping 40 year old cars on the road in 2 or 3 decades time in the same way that I run the RB. I have a feeling that most post 1990 cars will be difficult to maintain when the computer that controls their windscreen wipers fails at 15 years old and will cost £2,000 to replace - the car being worth £800 by then. I wonder whether a MY 2000 Renault Megane or a MB A class that one could buy today for under a grand will be cherished by the fifth or sixth owner in 2040?

[loki_the_glt]

Much sniping at FIAT's 124 that isn't really justified - it handled better than its British contemporaries such as the Mark 1 Cortina with leaf springs, FC Victor with leaf springs, thanks to a Panhard rod and 4-link axle (just like certain Volvos...). True, they rusted badly, but so did the British cars of that era. And the twin-cam versions were sleepers.

But "classic" is in the eye of the beholder. I hanker after an FE VX4/90 with the overdrive box but can't afford the few that show up on the market so make do with the Exxon Valdez. It's also the case that the "grey porridge" cars have gone and the upmarket/performance versions are the ones everyone wants nowadays (like my wish for a VX4/90) or are "converting". There are allegedly more HS2300 Chevettes extant than ever left the factory, to give just one example.

And yes, it's nice to see an original, or nearly so, car being used. The Royal Barge has been modified, but sensitively and for sound practical reasons, from stock. I know of a Mark 2 Granada that serves as daily transport during summer, its owner having previously run an unrestored Mark 1 Granada as his summer car, while there are several Drivers' Club members who use their cars on almost a daily basis.