1989 Volvo 240 Reviews - Page 5 of 7

1989 Volvo 240 DL from North America

Model year1989
Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission Manual
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.3 / 10
Distance when acquired209000 miles
Most recent distance214000 miles

Summary:

What a wonderfully reliable car

Faults:

Burned out bulb in rear turn signal, clock and radio not working.

General Comments:

I bought this car my short commute to work, for $900. It has had a long life, but still starts first attempt every morning, even here in the Philadelphia winter. Seats are comfortable (seat heaters still toasty!). At over 200K this Volvo still has lots of life left.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 17th January, 2006

1989 Volvo 240 GL Estate B230F from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission B230F Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.3 / 10
Distance when acquired210000 kilometres
Previous carVolvo 240

Summary:

Not only very stylish, a well maintained 240 is a very reliable and comfortable car

Faults:

Front sway bar came loose.

Air conditioner compressor noisy.

General Comments:

The Volvo 240 is the second Volvo I have owned (1st was a 740). I am very satisfied with this car. Despite having travelled 215000kms it still performs perfectly. It is not the most modern car, but the simple and individual styling ensure that it will never look dated (unlike most Japanese and Korean cars).

Maintenance costs can be expensive if more than regular servicing is required, but this is to be expected of a car that is made of quality components. If maintained correctly the 240 is an extremely reliable car.

The interior is really spacious and the estate will swallow almost anything. Again, interior styling is of a high quality and very efficient layout.

For the amount it cost me ($5000) I don't think I could have bought much better - I really like this car. When buying, make sure that the car has been maintained well - mechanicals and body. Treated well the 240 is one of the best. Treated poorly it can drain your bank account fast!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 2nd October, 2005

28th Nov 2005, 00:14

Good Review, but the car is not what you would call stylish by anyone's book. It looked dated when it was launched in the 70's, but that is what adds to the overall charm. Good luck with your mini-tank.

30th Nov 2005, 03:31

I must say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. In my opinion there are plenty of brand new American and Australian cars that bear more of a resemblance to tank than the 240 Volvo.

Anyway, since attractiveness is subjective, I will try not to argue with another person's opinion. I will say that I really like with my 240- regardless of others' judgements of its appearance.

21st Apr 2006, 17:50

The Volvo 240 looks nice to me. Like the blonde ABBA chick. She had no wardrobe style at all. No, it's true. But, you knew there was a high endurance Scandinavian beast under the facade. I bet she is still hot - and the V 240 is still a blonde!!

22nd Apr 2006, 05:07

Yes, a Scandinavian beauty she was (and still is!). But I don't know about the no wardrobe style bit??? And I bet that once you get her going you will discover her extra charms, just like the 240!

19th Oct 2006, 14:01

The Volvo 240 is an extreemely good looking car (my faviorite being the estate) compared to new Kia's etc.

It may not be fast, but handles far better than the new 4x4 Volvo's.

17th May 2011, 16:26

I'm looking to buy a 240 because I can't find any late model cars I care to look at... and they almost all look the same.

It seems most of the cars in New York City are Hondas and Toyotas.

1989 Volvo 240 DL from North America

Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired130000 miles
Most recent distance200000 miles
Previous carSubaru Wagon

Summary:

Loved it so much I'm buying another one!

Faults:

Replaced: exhaust system, rear hatch lock, new timing belt, alternator, fuel pump, radiator, and rear bumper.

The car was slightly rusty when I bought it, but that quickly turned to major rust over the last 4 years. I live in the Northeast where winters are severe, so I suspect salted roads have contributed heavily to this problem.

Suspension is about to collapse, it seems, but this is likely due to the very poor condition of the driveway where I live (I rent, so I can't easily remedy this!).

These cars are not cheap to fix. Replacement lenses for the lights are astronomically priced. Fortunately, I have the world's best, most honest and decent mechanics who service only Volvos and Saabs, and they've gone out of their way (many, many times) to help me find the cheapest solution (used parts!).

General Comments:

I love this car and am sad to see her go, but she's become too expensive to maintain. I've always felt very safe and comfortable driving this car, and haven't cared a whit that it accelerates about as quickly as an orange. Rear wheel drive has given some difficulty in certain winter scenes, but with good snows it's manageable (whereas my ex's hoity-toity BMW 3 series couldn't spin it's way out of an ice patch if its life depended on it!).

In the immortal words of folksinger Greg Brown: His old Volvo didn't die, it just completely rusted away...

Of course... I AM about to buy a 1993 240. What better endorsement is there?

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 7th June, 2005

Average review marks: 7.3 / 10, based on 21 reviews