1986 Volvo 240 Reviews - Page 3 of 7

1986 Volvo 240 GL 2.4 petrol from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 2.4 petrol Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired198000 kilometres
Most recent distance250000 kilometres

Summary:

Best car ever

Faults:

Fuel Pump failed, but the second one cut in it went bad, but still drivable got replacement.

Worn drivers seat.

Eats rear tires.

The exhaust rusted so I cut it off (Sounds awsome)

General Comments:

Faster than people think especially with manual tranny and my custom exhaust cut it off from the engine back. (Seriously Loud) and a cold air intake.

Serious fun comes when you have a empty paddock or car park on a rainy day thanks to the rear wheel drive HELL YEAH!! Comes home covered in mud.

The clutch stands up to a lot of torture (dumping it at 7500 RPM).

It has a lot of body roll around corners therefore it is hard to swing the rear end out on tar.

It is a cheap to buy cheap to run fun car.

I would suggest to anyone to buy one.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 29th April, 2007

1986 Volvo 240 DL from North America

Model year1986
Year of manufacture1985
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 2 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.2 / 10
Distance when acquired165000 miles
Most recent distance220000 miles
Previous carToyota Van

Summary:

This Volvo makes other cars seem like toys

Faults:

I replaced the alternator.

A wire broke and I had it replaced.

I replaced the water pump.

One tail light cover broke so every time it rains I have to replace the bulb.

General Comments:

This car drives like a tank. I ran into a light pole and the light pole fell down.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 3rd September, 2005

4th Sep 2005, 23:14

Yes the light pole got back up and started doing the polka with a telephone pole.

1986 Volvo 240 DL Sedan 2.3 gasoline from North America

Model year1986
Year of manufacture1986
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 2.3 gasoline Automatic
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.5 / 10
Distance when acquired133000 miles
Most recent distance188000 miles

Summary:

Maintenance costs are definitely not zero, but the benefits of ownership far exceed the costs

Faults:

This car has had mostly typical problems for older high-mileage cars. Alternator replaced in early 2000 with rebuilt model, and replaced again in 2005. New master cylinder. All brake lines replaced and two brake jobs. Rotors ground down, all new brake calipers. New struts (one new strut housing dew too bad pothole), spark plugs, muffler, exhaust piping, and catalytic converter. New taillights (due to cracked lenses) and front turn signal. New rims. Motor mounts replaced due to engine shaking. New radiator. New overdrive relay and solenoid. Numerous fuses and wire repairs. Most major repair was having the original automatic transmission rebuilt (overhaul) and reinstalled.

General Comments:

The transmission was rebuilt in 2002 for a bargain price of $1200. However, I must take personal responsibility for the damage necessitating the repair. The car was stuck in a snow drift, and I foolishly stripped the gears while trying to rock the car free (i'll never make that mistake again) The transmission now performs absolutely flawlessly as it did before the damage I caused. The car was one owner when I bought it and not everything was maintained perfectly, but the engine was. The engine is still cleaner and more pristine then most cars less than 5 years old. And the engine has never had any internal trouble and performs like new, never stalling and still getting 26 mpg highway. The body is heavy and rock solid. Aside from annoying wiring problems and the short life of the rebuilt alternators, this car is a real gem and aside from the routine maintenance required to keep the car running perfectly and safely, the car is extremely cost effective. Even including maintenance and the more major items like the tranny and radiator, this car is undoubtedly much cheaper then leasing a new car, and is much heavier and safer as well.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 6th August, 2005

22nd Aug 2005, 05:09

Yea I had a 85 dl and I loved it unfortunately rust got to it and I had to sell it. I am having selers remorse.

20th Apr 2009, 01:49

I am surprised at all the people saying this car is underpowered, I pass at least one Lexus or BMW going up a hill or around corners on my way to work every day, but then again when I borrow my friend's Subaru I DEFINITELY notice I have developed a serious "Volvo foot" (sorry for the whiplash folks). This is the best car ever, I am searching for a new automatic transmission for mine (oops)!

And as an aside, considering the appearance of the car, while it may not be a "chick magnet", it seems to be invisible to police unless they have the radar gun on, and that's a magnet to this chick!!

Average review marks: 7.4 / 10, based on 23 reviews