340 advice needed

[Angie]

We're thinking of buying a 340 1.7l and wondered what to look out for when we go to see it. In the pictures it looks quite tidy and has 11 months MoT with, apparently, no advisories. We just wanted a smaller car than the 240 for short trips, country lanes etc.

[Joe Harding]

We had one. Our second volvo. Don't let this be your only opinion, ask around, but I wouldn't touch the 1.7 again.

We had a 340 1.4 first off, and it was lovely. Never mind the underpowered rubbish, it did well.

Then we got a 5 door 1.7 and it played up no end. Electrics, (HT) and long-term probs with the carb base warping. (Underengineered).

Then things began to snowball. By the time we traded it in it had:

head gasket gone. (At 120,000) front shocks on the way out, intermittent rough idle and rust spots.

That's my pen'orth. Make of it what you will.

[volvorocks]

Originally Posted by Angie

We're thinking of buying a 340 1.7l and wondered what to look out for when we go to see it. In the pictures it looks quite tidy and has 11 months MoT with, apparently, no advisories. We just wanted a smaller car than the 240 for short trips, country lanes etc.

Agree with Joe , Angie

1.7 engine had flat spots, carb issues, poor fuel consumption, dodgy dropping doors,kept cutting out etc etc

I do believe this is a Renault engine - which in Renaults were actually quite good (had a few)

In my view the 1.4 is a better engine (had one of these too) - more economical and whilst no sports car - pretty quick if you put your foot down.

The 2.0 litre 3 series Volvo eats fuel by the way (had one of these too)

Avoid the automatic at all cost - nasty whining single gear thingy!!

[Angie]

Thank you both, advice taken!

[Chris_C]

I'm going to counter both the above...

If the 1.7 is looked after correctly, it's the best engine of the bunch. With the 340 being lighter than the 360, there is no noticeable difference between the carbed 360 and the 1.7 340 and with much much better fuel consumption.

However, it's more likely to have suffered if the previous owners havn't paid attention to the signs of wear. The 360 or 1.4 will just keep going even if they have the same faults the 1.7 fails on.

Get a good one and look after it.

[classicswede]

I'll agree with Chris on this. The 1.7 is probably the best of the bunch. The carbs do give some trouble but is not to bad to sort out. Other than the engine the 1.4 and 1.7 are the same so moaning about door hindges or boot struts is nothing to do with 1.4 1.7 or even 360 as they are exactly the same.

These are old car and you will want to go through and check everything.

Things like door hindes are a common fault and not easy to repair as you need a special tool, but with the tool it is not a long job and quite cheap to do.

Engine mounts do go soggy with age and this can lead to prop failure so new mounts are a good idea.

You can check for air leaks with a flamable spray like carb cleaner or lynx. If the revs raise when spraying a joint then it is leaking air. Air leaks are common on all 300's

Rust is the main issue. Front wings are a common area and if the outer wing is rusty then the inner often also needs repair. Sill another common area. Doors both in the bottom corners and at the top of the skin by the door glass. Always check the rear jacking point and the inner sill in that area as it is a very common rust spot. If teh car squeeks when going over bumps this is usualy due to a bent jacking point rubbing on the spring. Check the rear spring hangers - very dificult repair and very few welders will take on the job.

As with any car rust can be a big problem so check as best as you can especialy the lower part of the car and from teh underside.

[TheJoyOfSix]

I concur, the 1.7 is reliable if maintained, although as mentioned above can be prone to warped carb bases and faulty carbs. However, the 1.4 is prone to these too!

The 1.7 is nearly as quick as the 2.0 Volvo engines, but far more economical, probably even more than the 1.4.

Everything else is common across the 300 range, the only difference being the actual engine/propshaft. The 360's do tend to come a bit higher specced, but it's very easy to 'up-spec' a car these days, the only really difficult job is to fit front foglights in the front valance of a non-360. There's quite a big 300 following out there, from young kids wanting a cheap, easily modified fun car to those who inherited one and found it so good they've never changed it.

www.volvo300mania.com/forum-uk is probably the best English speaking site devoted to the Volvo 300, although many of its members are here also.

[misa]

I have 340 1.4 which i bought 3 years ago.It's very reliable car,comfort,and it have very low fuel consumption...about 7litres/100km.

This car is indestructible and it is built to last.I love it!

[volvorocks]

Hi everyone

Regards the 1.4 and 1.7

Yes you guys have valid points in so far as these cars are very old now so either 1.4 or 1.7 may have lots of faults and its also true about rust and door hinges regardless of engine size!!

I had numerous models of 340/ 360 hatch and saloon with 1.7l 2.0l and 1.4l and quite honestly I found the 340 GL 1.4 absolutely the best.All the others had probs with fuel pumps alternators eleccy gremlins starter issues fuses eleccy window probs etc etc (nothing really really major though)

All vehicles when I had them were over 5 years old and bought second hand and the only problem I had on the 340 GL 1.4 was the propshaft (I had 4 in 30000 miles (1 every 3 months!) - bought them second hand for 20 quid from the scrappies so were probably also worn as well!!) It seemed a common problem was with the rubbers on them.

Please do also bear in mind that I owned my 340 GL 1.4 for 2 years and it already had 90000 on the clock with no service history and I added another 70000 in two years , never serviced it or really looked after it and it was well used yet nothing else ever failed.Sailed through the MOT as well. I would imagine that a lightly used lower mileage 340 would not have eaten propshafts!!

regards

[Joe Harding]

Nice to hear your endorsement. But please tell me, what are the symptoms of propshaft failure (or impending failure?)

Cheers