1991 Volvo 240 Reviews - Page 4 of 5

1991 Volvo 240 DL Sedan 2.0 from North America

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 2.0 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired113000 miles
Most recent distance126356 miles

Summary:

Great first car because it's safe, reliable and will last forever

Faults:

Belt needs to be replaced. It squeals when high speeds are obtained and it rests. Good twenty dollar fix.

Many fuses had to be replaced. This too was pretty cheap.

Muffler rusted off the catalytic converter which was easily fixed by a friend.

Seats have holes in the back, but that is cosmetics and don't bother me.

Radio doesn't work when I want it to, something wrong with the wires.

Replaced speakers when I bought it.

Brake lights needed to be replaced as well as the socket on the passenger side. Six dollars at a dealership.

General Comments:

The car is a dream. For being my first car and reasonably priced, I couldn't ask for anything else. Although I'm looking forward to a truck I will definitely give this car to my brother because he'd be very safe in it and the gas mileage is awesome. About twenty eight miles to the gallon with highway traveling. Good handling if I had to say so. The only thing that bums me out is the winter time. The car is rear-wheel drive and doesn't move when you hit the gas. Took a little getting used to, but is now overlooked.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 11th April, 2004

29th Mar 2008, 22:29

Rear wheel drive is a big turnoff to a lot of winter drivers. I find on both my wagon and sedan (both 240's) that putting about 200 Lbs. in the trunk or rear compartment and tires with good tread tend to give me all of the traction I need in the winter.

1991 Volvo 240 2.3L SOHC I-4 from North America

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 2.3L SOHC I-4 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired140000 miles
Most recent distance142850 miles
Previous carToyota Tercel

Summary:

In Sweden, Volvos last 19 years, ja?

Faults:

Upon purchase the wiper motor needed replacing, as did (according to my Volvo dealer) the speed and throttle sensors as well as one of the headlights.

According to previous owner, absolutely nothing has gone wrong aside from normal wear and tear.

Valve tappets collapsed recently, I think. The engine suddenly became 10dB louder.

General Comments:

What a fantastic car! The quality of construction and driving feel are impeccable, and you feel like you're driving something truly substantial. Especially if coming from a 1900lb Tercel that felt like a tin can.

I sometimes wish that I had the turbocharged 240 like Volvo used to sell in the 80s. Acceleration is generally adequate, but on hills you start wishing for 30 more horsepower.

I'm also only getting 23MPG, which I understand is par for 240s, but pretty disappointing when your previous car would get 38MPG easily.

The rumors you may have heard about Volvo repair costs are true, by the way: they get VERY expensive, almost in BMW and MBZ territory. I spent $753 on those nitpicks listed above! On the other hand, a lot of the cost is from the dealer end. One could easily get by with a Chilton's repair manual and some elbow grease, because 240s are relatively simple to work on and parts can be found cheap. That's one advantage of a design dating back to 1975, I guess. But then again, my experience with Volvo dealers has been quite favorable, almost worth the exorbitant prices they charge.

And did I mention the fan-base this car has on the web? 240 owners are a loving bunch, myself included. I easily see myself keeping this car beyond the 200k mark, both because the car will easily go that far and because I WANT to keep it running. It's been a great ownership experience for the brief amount of time I've owned it and the car comes highly recommended to those wanting something along the lines of a used Camry, but with more panache.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 6th March, 2004

3rd Sep 2012, 00:18

What I find funny about this comment, is I too am going from a Tercel to a Volvo; it's well worth the switch.

But as for dealers, avoid them and get nifty with DIY if you plan on owning any older car.

Average review marks: 7.6 / 10, based on 13 reviews