240 General: Running only old volvos

[DW42]

I'm considering going all old volvo for our family fleet, which is presently a 2006 Toyota Avensis Verso and a 1990 Volvo 240GL saloon. The 240 was neglected by the previous owner, but I've done a fair amount of work and preventive maintenance on it, and it gets me to work and back with no dramas. I'm considering replacing the Toyota with a 240, 740 or 940 estate. The Toyota does 10-12000 miles annually. My question is, am I nuts to do this? Will an early to mid 1990s volvo be anything like as reliable as the Toyota in say the next 5 to 7 years driving? Any pearls of wisdom would be much appreciated.

[Steve and his 244]

I think you've partly answered your own question, your Toyota may be reliable now, but inevitably components will fail over time (as you say, the next 5 to 7 years, by which time it'll be 14 year old car) and, although and 'old volvo' will be even older, they are built like tanks with simple olod fashioned engineering that is easy to repair and maintain.

The other major contributing factor is that you clearly enjoy maintaining the volvo - do not underestimate how much extra effort will be required to maintain a car you dont enjoy working on. Ive been there and I would not go back. I run a 24 year old 240 GLT as my 22k/year daily driver for precisely that reason.

Perfect example: The core plug on the back of the head that covers where the distributor would be on a 7xx/9xx popped off once, and I drove to the workshop, found a spare and had it fixed in half an hour, and then drove away grinning from ear to ear about how easy and enjoyable a 240 is to own

Go for it!

Steve

[wooble]

Quite doable in my experience, I've daily driven a 240 with no back-up car for nearly 5 years now and only been let down once (crank sensor, luckily at home and I had a spare handy). As long as you're prepared to do the work, and accept that occasionally minor niggles will happen. For example, at the moment my high beams have stopped working, the rear TABs really need doing, the paint's flaking on 2 of my alloys and my door pockets have both been broken AGAIN. nothing affecting the drivability of the car, but driving a 20 year old car every day, these things occur.

[Paul240480]

I wouldn't hesitate. I run a 24yr old 240 too. It is used most days but only about 5k a year. General maintenance done by myself. It has let me down once in 10 years. But a quick 'lift' to a garage and new voltage regulator we were off on a 120 mile return journey .

T'other and 'main including towing a jammer' (caravan) is a slightly younger (18yrs) 850 (eek mentioning a FWD on this page...... Washes mouth out with soap) . Had that one since 09 . Has done 53,000 miles in that time . Failed once when fuel pump died, that was late in 09. Quick trip to the yard sourced a pump and it's been fine since.
208,000 on 240
191,000 on 850

They're good solid reliable motors, especially the RWD 'gang' . Go for it

[heckflosse]

Originally Posted by DW42

I'm considering going all old volvo for our family fleet, which is presently a 2006 Toyota Avensis Verso and a 1990 Volvo 240GL saloon. The 240 was neglected by the previous owner, but I've done a fair amount of work and preventive maintenance on it, and it gets me to work and back with no dramas. I'm considering replacing the Toyota with a 240, 740 or 940 estate. The Toyota does 10-12000 miles annually. My question is, am I nuts to do this? Will an early to mid 1990s volvo be anything like as reliable as the Toyota in say the next 5 to 7 years driving? Any pearls of wisdom would be much appreciated.

ANYTHING from the pre ECU era is a definite thumbs up in the longevity stakes.We are regularly scrapping older v70 s etc because of major computer problems at work these days, stick with your old Volvos(if they have a prop, they ain't plop ,as the saying goes!)
We ran an amazon everyday , now being welded, and have replaced it with an 81 240. Toyota lovers are probably scrambling for the keyboards as I write!

[volvo always]

I would go for it! I have a 1989 240 GLT auto estate and it has been excellent and very reliable in the 42 months I've had it. It's my only car and do about 10,000 miles a year. Hasn't let me stranded but the only major expense was a new alternator (£197).
It now has 196,700 miles on the clock.
I think the mechanicals will last a long time but look after the body.
I need to sort a rust hole below the passenger rear light and boot opening frame. The passenger side rear wheel arch is a bit crusty on the lip/trap!! Will grind it off and repair and when it gets too bad buy a repair panel. Everywhere else it's rock solid.
The problem is I have no access to electricity unless I had a 100ft extension lead where I live to use power tools!!

James

[stephend]

Not nuts at all. I would have no qualms about doing it, as long as you go into it with your eyes open - and the 240 is evidently a known quantity to you.

The other key question: do you enjoy driving your 240? If you're as happy driving your 240 as your Toyota, then I think the way forward is clear...

[Stephen Edwin]

That's a good point about how you feel driving the different cars. If it feels right, then that is a very good start. And yes, make the decision with your eyes open. Fuel cost and road tax and sometimes infuriatingly obscure faults .... and the 240s are excellent cars.

[Cardiff240]

An interesting thread and a question I have considered myself. I have an '89 240 GLT (148k) and a '07 Toyota Auris 1.4 diesel (100k). I drive 30k a year between Cardiff and Bristol and while reliability as been excellent on both cars fuel costs are the only major factor. The 240 runs on super unleaded and gets low 20's to the gallon while the Auris gets mid 50's with a heavy right foot. 240 is more fun to drive though and certainly gets more looks. I haven't been brave enough to take the plunge and commit solely to the Volvo! Keep us informed of your decision though!

[Stephen Edwin]

Originally Posted by Cardiff240

An interesting thread and a question I have considered myself. I have an '89 240 GLT (148k) and a '07 Toyota Auris 1.4 diesel (100k). I drive 30k a year between Cardiff and Bristol and while reliability as been excellent on both cars fuel costs are the only major factor. The 240 runs on super unleaded and gets low 20's to the gallon while the Auris gets mid 50's with a heavy right foot. 240 is more fun to drive though and certainly gets more looks. I haven't been brave enough to take the plunge and commit solely to the Volvo! Keep us informed of your decision though!

It is as Stephen D says, an eyes wide open decision.

A modern classic Volvo has very low depreciation left, and modest maintenance costs. How is depreciapion and other costs for the Toyota? If and when mileage makes fuel consumption outweigh other costs .... then which car do you want to drive and can you afford it?

To save costs now, I'd like to afford a car old enough to avoid road tax and even MOT. e.g. a Farina as mentioned elsewhere. But even then I'd not save on fuel.

If I had a job again, I wish, and if I needed a daily drive, I'd have a very hard decision to make. The "right" new car has low or nil road tax, excellent fuel economy .... might not feel like driving a car, and probably needs a dealer for ordinary servicing ...

There's no right answer. I, ahem, recently advised my support worker to get a smaller and automatic car ... it suits him and he is pleased. ......

*****

Take no notice of me. most of miles are by bicycle. And I get paid bicycle mileage as a volunteer worker


.