25th Aug 2001, 18:58
In case you didn't read my review before commenting, my car had both the gasoline engine as well as a manual transmission, making it as 'fast' if not 'faster' than your car. Your impassioned commentary on diesels, though appreciated, has no bearing on my complaints of my car being horribly underpowered. In response to your theory that it's the engine's fault and not the manufacturer, I'd like to point out that Volvo who DECIDED to put diesels in some of their early 240 series models. It's not like the engine just jumped into the engine bay and took them by surprise. As evidence of their poor design, the diesels are amongst the least reliable engines that Volvo ever made. Their production ceased in the early eighties as a result of it.
2nd Jul 2002, 00:23
It wasn't a bad diesel design. It was the aluminum in all the six cylinder engines, including gas, which warped that did most of them in. but I recently had 270k on my '84 diesel, with 30+ mpg every tank before it was totaled by a city cab.
9th Nov 2002, 13:42
Hey! About the Volvo 240 models...we've owned a couple of them, including 2 1984 diesels, and YES, they (the diesels especially) are pretty slow to accelerate. However, I have found that certain companies make after-market products for Volvos that boost performance, handling, appearance, etc. I hope it doesn't seem like I'm trying to promote a particular company here, but I receive catalogues from a company called IPD for my current 1984 diesel and 850 turbo. Things can be expensive, but I think it's worth a look if you want to help with the pokey old Volvos - some products out there can add some surprising power to these cars.
14th Nov 2003, 12:37
I wrote this review quite a while back, and since have made drastic changes regarding the car's performance. I'm at the 3 year mark of owning the car now, and it still has yet to have a major failure.
Modifications which I've since added to the car: A turbo system salvaged from turbo model 240 and 740 cars, which I bolted on and plumbed for oil for less than $200. After setting the boost to 12psi and adding extra injectors to supply fuel, the car is now significantly faster than stock. When I bought the car, it ran 18.5@73mph in the quarter mile when I took it to the track completely stock. Now with the turbo system, it has run 15.1@91mph at 11psi of boost. I've also since added 15" wheels, 205mm tires, and turbo sedan sway bars to improve handling.
It's now a totally different car, and I love it.
28th Aug 2004, 22:12
I'm currently in a 740T Wagon - love it - after having three Volvos previous. And I remember spending all day installing a new blower motor (it was over 400 bucks, if I recall) in a 240 sedan years ago. Man, was that a job - hands all scraped up. Does anybody know when Volvo changed to a blower motor configuration that avoided the change-out nightmare?
22nd Jun 2006, 18:35
I have a 1982 GLT sedan, non turbo. They were bored out to 127 horses and mine was equipped with the 4 speed manual with electronic overdrive. Never found it slow, what needs to be done is an adjustment in the way you drive. If you go to europe cars are far more underpowered and nobody is complaining there. Look for manuals, so you can drive them at their best performance mark at all times. They're great cars!
25th Jul 2001, 06:03
Slow? You won't find a faster used Yank Tank at the same price. Whats the pont of whacking great 5, 6 or 7 litre V8's that only wheeze out 150 or so emmisions strangled horses. Put in context, the puny 2.1 or 2.3 litre Volvo lumps ain't that bad.