Volvo 240 or Saab 900?

[Thekilt]

Looking at getting another car soon, and we were looking at something small and eco, however I fancy something older. Quite fancy the 900, but also quite like the 240. So, anyone got any experience with the 900, and which do they think is the better choice? I would prefer the 900 Turbo but prices are on the increase for a decent one. My initial pros and cons below:

240
pro:
It’s a volvo
Rear wheel drive
Inline six available but rather rare
Con:
Can be seen a bit boxy
Seem to have quite a few ‘boy racer’ conversions

900
Pro:
Alternative inline 4
Double wishbone front end
Distinguished looks too it
Cons:
Front wheel drive

[Forg]

The 240 had a V6 rather than an inline 6, and while those in the know & with the right tools are able to pull them apart & mod them to last forever, for the normals among us who don't fancy spending all that time on what's still a lacklustre & thirsty engine in a car that's not worth all that much ... yeah, just Avoid. If you must, the 2.8L (B28) is the one to get, but I think that was only the last couple of year's worth of production.

240 is easier & simpler for noobs to work on.

Saab is more refined & quieter, should be more fuel efficient as well (although not by that much). You also need to be seen in public wearing brown or grey socks with sandals AT ALL TIMES when driving a Saab, so if you'd be embarrassed in that attire then maybe avoid the Saab ...

[360beast]

No experience of a 240 but I know they are renowned for being bullet proof, easy to maintain and I personally really like the boxy styling of older Volvos.

My dad had several non turbo 900s while I was growing up, he now has a 1996 Saab 9000 turbo (the last proper saab not this GM junk) and he absolutely loves it. He says it is easy to work on and parts are relatively easy to get a hold of for an older car.

[VroomVroomClonk]

It was decades ago now, but we have owned both.
We went from a W reg Saab 900 8V Turbo to a Y reg Volvo 240 GLT 2.3 estate. We did have them both at the same time for a while, and whilst they are very different cars, in terms of driving pleasure the Saab absolutely trounced the Volvo. We kept the Volvo for several years until the children outgrew the extra seats in the boot, but my wife hated the car and refused to ever have another Volvo after it. She does now occasionally drive my V70 T5 has has conceded that Volvo have improved a lot since the 240 days.
It's interesting that you mention front wheel drive as a negative for the 900, because I was very anti front wheel drive in the 1970's and 1980's and I'd always had rear wheel drive cars. My mum had a front wheel drive Fiesta which scrabbled madly for grip whenever pulling away and my dad had a front wheel drive Honda Accord which was much better but still not as good as rear wheel for grip. And then my very trusting future father-in-law allowed me to use his 900 Turbo, ... and I was stunned. It was the first front wheel drive car I'd ever driven that just gripped and gripped and gripped. And it wasn't just the grip, it was beautifully balanced and fun to drive.
So personally the only reason I'd consider another 240 would be if I needed another big estate, and if I needed another big estate then I'd buy a V70 not a 240.
As for Saabs, well several years after the 900 8V Turbo, I did later have the holy grail of Saabs, a Black, 3-door, 900 Turbo 16 S Aero manual with tan leather interior and fully loaded with all the extras, and it was superb. You'll need deep pockets for one of those today though.

[Thekilt]

Thanks for the feedback. I was looking at the saloon 240 initially but if a decent condition estate came up I may be interested.
I have always had front wheel drive cars up til now with the Jag, and to be honest I love the feeling of the rear wheel drive. Both the V70 and V50 I had torque steered and slipped around a fair bit. May be different on the Saab with the double wishbone front end.

[john.wigley]

Good morning, 'Thekilt'. I was going to ask the same question as '360beast' - were you thinking of the 'Classic' 900 or the later (GM) cars? I wouldn't go so far as to say the latter were 'junk', (we've got a 9-3 convertible, which is not a bad car), but the earlier cars were definitely better built, in my view.

Linda has a V6 9000 as well, so you can see that we are fans of Saab as much as we are of Volvo. As you are aware, they are quite different cars, so your choice rather depends upon personal preference. If you'll permit an equine analogy, I've always regarded our Volvos as Shire Horses, in contrast with the thoroughbred race-horses from Saab. Solid dependability compared with highly-strung, temperamental excitement.

Why not have one of each and enjoy the best of both worlds?

Regards, John.

[Wagon Sailor]

The Saab is better in the twisty bits - both in terms of ability and fun. I wouldn't expect there to be much difference in reliability or running costs.

[Forg]

Originally Posted by VroomVroomClonk

So personally the only reason I'd consider another 240 would be if I needed another big estate.

Actually, on that score, Saab hatchbacks have cavernous load-spaces. Unless you're putting dogs or other things in the back that need that "headroom", Saab hatches are very nearly as load-carrying-capable as a 240 wagon, and in my opinion more-so than a 240 sedan.

[Thekilt]

Originally Posted by john.wigley

Good morning, 'Thekilt'. I was going to ask the same question as '360beast' - were you thinking of the 'Classic' 900 or the later (GM) cars? I wouldn't go so far as to say the latter were 'junk', (we've got a 9-3 convertible, which is not a bad car), but the earlier cars were definitely better built, in my view.

Regards, John.

Yes it will be the pre ‘93 version. Looking at 90-91 range. I remember seeing a convertible turbo locally, overtook us on a windy road and seemed to handle extremely well. And he was blaring out some pink floyd too!

[Thekilt]

Oh and we have a big estate as the main car so don’t really need an estate