1989 Volvo 340 Reviews

1989 Volvo 340 1.4 petrol from Romania

Model year1989
Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2011
Most recent year of ownership2011
Engine and transmission 1.4 petrol Manual
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.5 / 10
Distance when acquired140000 kilometres
Most recent distance149000 kilometres
Previous carVolvo 440

Summary:

Very nice car!

Faults:

Bad headlights.

Weak shaft.

General Comments:

Very comfortable.

Very good for winter drifting.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 16th October, 2011

1989 Volvo 340 GL 1.7 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1989
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.7 Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.3 / 10
Distance when acquired100250 miles
Most recent distance101200 miles
Previous carVolvo 340

Summary:

Very cheap car with adequate performance

Faults:

Nothing yet, as I have just bought the car. But I think the starter motor is new, as is the battery.

I did find a loose pipe coming from the Carburetor, which I was told was supposed to be connected to the ignition/coil box. It was a vacuum pipe which advanced the timing of the ignition when the engine was under load. I was quoted about £60 for a new ignition housing, which the connector had snapped off, so I just super glued it on instead! (Which did work!)

So far, nothing else has gone wrong.

General Comments:

I had a 340 on a friend's farm for 3 years, during which I learned to drive, had lots of fun and completely thrashed the poor MOT failure. After around 1200 miles over-revving, the car packed up and had to be scrapped. However, I liked the car so much, and now that I'm 18, I thought I'd get one for the road. So I looked in the paper and found one. I knocked it down to £225 with 8 months tax and MOT! Having cleaned it and fitted the much needed spoiler from my old one, it was looking quite reasonable, I thought.

It had a full service history at the same address, and has been in the same family until now. I also know it hasn't been thrashed because the accelerator cable was set up so that only half throttle could ever be achieved. So, I fixed the cable and tested it. At first I was quite shocked with its acceleration. Although it is no sports car, it certainly shifts when you floor it, and I managed to beat a Peugeot 406 HDi (1.9) which I was quite impressed by. I got just under 110 mph out of it on the Orwell Bridge! Not bad for an old 1.7?

Unlike my old one, this has a rev counter, which has shown me that it is perfectly safe to do 50 mph in 2nd gear!! Again not bad.

The only problem with this car is the fuel consumption. Although some people told me it was quite good, I think 27 mpg it pretty terrible. And the image, I don't mind the old box image, and if anyone does, are they really going to mess with the big rubber bumpers and iron girder in the chassis?

Although it's not a 'cool' car, my friends seem to respect it, and were surprised with its performance and comfort. Highly recommended for learner drivers.

(Oh, and yes I have already once lost the back end on a wet roundabout - which was a little scary, but quite good fun!)

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 15th June, 2004

8th Feb 2005, 15:47

Just to add, I fitted an after-market unrestricted air filter and tuned the carburetor very slightly (bodge job) but have now managed 112mph!!! It is also more efficient - at 60mph from Bristol to Ipswich I got just over 40mpg, (slip-streaming a coach most of the way) but I was still very impressed. Unfortunately, I have thrashed it over the past year, and now its MOT is due this month, have found out how much needs replacing - brakes, wheels bearings, etc. So until I can afford to put it through another MOT, as I think it's worth it, I will have to go for a 440, either 1.7 GLTi or Turbo for now. The insurance is not that much more than the 340!! But I have to say, I still prefer my interior and seats to the 440.

Regards.

18th May 2006, 06:00

Good luck with the MOT the first car I ever drove was a 360 and I've just got a 1985 340 1.4 as my first car and I agree with what you say about the comforts etc their great cars.

3rd May 2008, 20:31

As an update, I did take the car for an MOT and all it needed was replacement brake drum pads for one of the rear brakes, and that was it!!! There I was, worried about how everything was going to need replacing after I'd run it to the limit nearly everyday, and in the end it turned out just fine. It's definitely been the most robust car I've owned to date.

I did sell it in the end though, and replaced it with a 460 turbo, which was then replaced by a 3.0 S90. All have been excellent, although the 460 became a little unreliable when I started racking on the miles. The S90 was also excellent, and so I still remain happy to recommend any 80s - mid 90s Volvos to anyone. They're cheap to buy, insure, have generally good performance and are very reliable and robust.

Average review marks: 7.2 / 10, based on 15 reviews