Purchasing of a 440 or 460

[Woolybully]

Iam thinking of buying a 440 or 460 auto to replace my low mileage 940 auto estate

can anyone advise what to look out for and offer some comments on how good or bad these cars are not having had any experience of this model

cheers Wooly

[pooley29978]

look out for rust on bodywork mainly back arches and bottom of doors and look for water ingress into the boot well were spare is if u a buying turbo look 4 blue smoke on cold starting and it must be COLD and not smell of oil when started if any advice needed leave a thread

[sarumboy]

Agreed about the water in the boot and the rear wheel arches. As with any auto box I'd want to check that the shift is smooth going both up and down. I expect you'd do that anyway having got an auto alteady. Also go for the B20F engine. I can still turn in 38mpg on a long run on my 100K 2.0 GLT.

[captainslow]

Price will all be about condition (rusty arches particularly) and mileage.

Ecconomy will be significantly better than with the 940 (up to 45mpg i got from a '94 1.8 manual), but be aware that interior quality will not be near your 940.

[Volvo Dave]

I run a 92 (J) 460 turbo with an auto box and can give you a few pointers. First fuel econony is poor compared with the manual as the auto is only 4 speed. The best we can get is 32 mpg and more like 24 mpg round the town. Many years ago I had a 480 turbo with a manual box and that would do 40 mpg if driven lightly! The other thing is the change up speeds. Mine will go 1st-2nd at about 15mph, 2nd to 3rd at 25mph and 3rd to 4th at 40 mph. So if you are following someone round the town and they are traveling at 25-30 the auto box just goes up and down !! Also the auto box takes away a lot of the enjoyment of the turbo as it has a habbit of changing up just as the turbo kicks in. You can get round it by putting the peddle to the floor but ideal if you are trying to save fuel. We have owned several 400 series over the years. The 1.6 si was good on juce but the 2.0 si we had after was a much drive untill the timing belt snapped. The 2.0L engine would proberly be the best to go for with an auto box. The 460 has a decent boot and the back seets fold down but the 440 hatchback is much better if you intend lugging large items about. As others have said watch for rusty rear arches. Also look out for badly rusted front subframes, front wishbone rubbers, and I once had a snapped rear panhard rod on my 480. The electrics on the later cars are better than the earler ones. Most 400 series leak oil from the near side drive shaft rubber seal. Another thing to watch for if going for a manual box version is play in the gear linkage when in 5th gear. My 480 had this and not long after the gearbox went, the garage told me that the 5th gear had worked loose and jammed up the gear selector. Apart from the above the 400 series are not a bad little car and not to bad to work on either ie. the front suspension struts seperate in the middle making shock absorber replacement easy for example. The handbrake on the 400 series can cause problems at MOT time as the handbrake opperates on the rear discs although they can be 'nipped up' provided you can get the covers off the self adjustment mech !

[Woolybully]

Thanks to all for the info and special thanks to Volvo Dave
for the comprehensive detail.

cheers Wooly