1982 Volvo 264 GLE 2.8 petrol


Powerful, if you can afford the fuel, but don't fancy yourself doing any work under the bonnet


Wouldn't start (water damaged).

Two of the electric windows don't work (red dust gets in the electrics).

Electric aeriel/radio didn't work.

General Comments:

Good power (spins the wheels easily).

Comfortable interior.

Ridiculous setup under the bonnet (couldn't even get to the spark plugs without dismantling half the engine)

Lots of gages so you can keep an eye on everything (outside temperature gage, tachometre, battery gage).

Power windows handy.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 11th September, 2004

5th Dec 2008, 09:07

Forgot to mention that engine access is a nightmare for maintenance. Obviously designed by "boffins" Wasn't really meant to last 29 years without a major rebuild. All alloy block with wet steel liners not suited to "hard" water.

17th May 2009, 02:10

This is a nice solid car with only a few bad points. The main one is the BW55 transmission is smooth, but not that strong.

Accessing spark plugs is not too difficult if you have the right socket and extensions. If you fit platinum plugs, you will have a 4 year gap in plug changes. Older cars will need the injectors replaced, as the poor injector spray pattern will give poor fuel economy, as will a badly adjusted fuel distributor co idle setting.

Having electronic distributor means a service is generally an oil and filter change.

One feature I like is the Girling 4 pot calipers on the front, and 2 pot ATE calipers at the rear. If driven sensibly, brake pads last for a very long time.

Volvo 200 series bodies are incredibly long lived due to great rustproofing. Whether a six or a four cylinder, these cars are great cheap motoring if you like a comfortable car that has very predictable handling.

1981 Volvo 264 GLE 2.8 petrol


A moving swedish electrical fault ridden bathtub


Had problems starting from six months after ownership. Volvo mechanic said that an electrical malfunction caused the fuel pump relay and ECU to short out. After a $500 repair job... engine just didn't start. Assumed fuel pump failure.

Gauges worked intermittently.

General Comments:

Brakes are generally good for a non-ABS.

Never pushed the car since it was not made for it.

Apparently Volvo make terrible 6 cylinder engines. 264's are the worst in the series for reliability. One's best buys would be the 240 or 244 series.

Tri-speed automatic transmission was also uneconomical at high-speed travel.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 14th May, 2002

31st Jul 2002, 07:34

Er..! Wrong again, mate! The V6 engine of the Volvo 264 is a joint-venture mischief by Volvo, Peugeot and Renault.

Originally it was planned as a V8-engine, but lack of space in the already made bodies (!) from the 3 manufacturers dictated the need for shortening the engine. This was achieved by sawing off two of the cylinders and leaving the engine with a strange angle (90 degrees) between the 2 rows of cylinders.

9th Sep 2003, 08:54

Also not entirely true.

The oil crisis of 1973 made them decide to delete 2 cylinders...

The 90 degree angle was made to give space to the injection system. A bit strange, but it worked quite nicely...

23rd Feb 2008, 14:44

The b28 V6 is a bad motor.. the b280 V6 in 87-90 760/780 are very, very, reliable powerplants.. swapping a b280 in a 264 can be done with deep pockets..