It seems we have a theme this week on the Digestible Collectible/Crapwagon Outtake beat. IT’S SWEDEN WEEK! Throw back some akvavit, heat up some meatballs, plug in an ABBA 8-track, and let’s look at another sweet Scandinavian hotrod of the ’80s.
No, I really didn’t plan this. I don’t think I can come up with another Swedish car for Friday anyhow, unless someone can find me a barn-find Koenigsegg, or perhaps a couple BILLY bookcases powered by a Husqvarna chainsaw engine. I have been looking for a clean Volvo wagon to feature for some time, as I have occasional fond memories of the 745 I briefly owned before my wife attempted to set a Great Lakes record in the conrod toss.
If you’re keeping score at home, that’s two of my cars my dearest has obliterated via external combustion.
To be fair, my Volvo was a $300 Craigslist find. This 1983 Volvo 240 GLT Turbo, on the other hand, looks to have been well cared for. The paintwork looks perfect, the panels are straight, and without a hint of rot. The interior looks pristine, though the plastics have all faded to different shades of beige and/or yellow, while the white leather looks new. I suppose that’s to be expected after thirty-plus years. Oh, and those seats. Volvo makes some of the best seats in the automotive world. I’d considered pulling the driver seat out for a desk chair when I got rid of my heap.
The big attraction, of course, is the turbo four cylinder paired with the four-speed (plus overdrive) gearbox. While certainly not fast, the extra power made the wagon a bit more fun in the twisties. A price of $8500 might be a bit steep, but as the car’s offered by a new-car dealer in San Francisco, I’d imagine there is a good bit of room for negotiation.
See if they’ll throw in some ABBA 8-tracks for the installed factory deck.
Those wheels are simply too sporting for old box Volvo! Even if they are factory. While I can’t find anything wrong with it save for the rippling on the sun visors (imagine if it were dark green though, mmm) the price still seems too high. $6000 seems more reasonable, and I know they wouldn’t go that low.
Looking at it overall, I think I’d go for a later model with a bit better equipment and more modern switch gear. I get that it’s vintage, but why not buy a newer and improved version which basically looks the same? And you can go all the way up to what, 1993?
PS. Those white seats with cream piping and button tufts are terrible. Volvo was trying to Chrysler on the seats, and Ikea it everywhere else.
Genuinely asked (since the internet cannot distinguish between snark)
What is the appeal of these things?
Back in the day this Volvo was a TURBO family CAR! When most turbos were Mustang SVOs and other sports cars. The only other TURBO family cars were K-cars.
Plus the Volvo was European when that was still considered a plus.
I’d take a clean K-Car instead of these in a heartbeat!
I guess a lot of this comes to nostalgia. I did my road test in a K-car. I think they were alright.
Oh I saw a very clean fully Broughamy New Yorker on Ebay today. More tidy than I’ve seen in a while. Still wouldn’t want it, but I would probably have it over this because luxury and wood.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/121812159604?forcerRptr=true&item=121812159604&viewitem=
Looks very comfy. Also it’s cheap.
pfffft, so high class Corey!
I’m talking Aries or Reliant.
I’m with Dave. Give me a Dodge Aires/Plymouth Reliant wagon instead!
Lol SUCH CLASS. I wonder how they were treated at country clubs and the like. And what sort of person purchased such a small luxury palace.
My 80 year old next door neighbor growing up (she passed about 5 years ago now, well in her 90’s) had an Aries K in light blue. I saw that thing every day on my way to school. Always just noticed how boring and plain it was. Much less desirable and interesting than the Renault Alliance convertible across the street! She replaced it in the late 90’s with… a New Beetle, which was yellow.
Good for Doris, I say.
Also, her grandson went on The Price Is Right or something in about 1994, and won a Sunbird convertible. Red with white top. MAN was that cool looking when I saw it at age 8.
I figured you would laugh at that Corey.
Still though, the New Yorker just looks awkward. The Aries/Reliant had much better proportions, even if they were a bit bland.
Mhm, I agree. The car was too small to get stretched that way and landau’d.
Mind you, not as bad as the Executive. But that’s more of a specialty deal.
I knew a British gal who got stuck using university-owned Reliant wagon. She cheerily called it the “Blue Sh*tmobile”. University fleet vehicles are never the best example though.
My first car was a 1990 Olds Cutlass Ciera. Other than the torquey V6, that car pretty much put me off American iron of that era. A near-compact car that wallows and rolls like a barge two sizes up just isn’t my cup of tea.
Yeah there was a lot of half assed stuff of the time, but it wasn’t all bad.
” The only other TURBO family cars were K-cars. ”
Except those Mercedes Diesels that out sold Volvos by a healthy margin and are many more still out there running along just fine….
-Nate
There would have also been some VW TDI models at that time. The Quantum, Fox, Rabbit, and whatever else.
European cars are still quite desirable other than by the Panther-loving troglodytes around here.
Comparing K-Kars to Volvos? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Panther was found to be the answer in a thread on the Junkyard Find.
The only comparable aspect would be their VDO sourced odometer gears.
Its a simple fix on a 240, K-cars require pricey kits due to their awful cluster designs.
I’m with you, I never understood the appeal of these.
“What is the appeal of these things?”
It’s impossible to convey today to someone who wasn’t an adult in the ’70s when Volvo’s brief niche opened up in the US.
Japanese cars were still too new and too small to be much of a factor for middle-class American families but the 140 series offered a just-my-size alternative to wallowing American iron which Volvo’s period ads brilliantly capitalized upon.
Of course the vaunted safety innovations and sober Lutheran ethos of its boxy solidity were a perfect fit for educated and reasonably affluent folks who simply wanted the safest and best built road appliance available.
The 240s only enlarged and continued to prosper in the space opened by the 140s.
The people who wanted and could afford the best built and safest cars back then bought Mercedes. Mere mortals bought Volvos. They cost half as much.
“Mere mortals bought Volvos.”
Quite right. I wasn’t yet even a mere mortal back then and would dive into a ditch to hide whenever Mercedes hove into view.
One did not seek attention from Gauleiters.
As a beater they’re easy to work on, tough suspensions, and later years were good at fighting rust.
As an $8k car you can do better, I’d personally use that money on a K-Car wagon and a later Volvo 900 turbo.
(I assume you mean Saab 900 Turbo?)
But … man, having learned to drive on a Reliant K wagon, I’d rather have the Volvo any day of the week.
The K was solid enough, but so cheaply made, useless on any snow at all, idled at about 25mph…
No thanks.
I meant the Volvo 940 Turbo, a cheap Saab is like a cheap Benz to me.
K-Cars are fairly reliable and arguably helped spawn the Toyota Camry (the Camry was better made but much more vulnerable to rust), but they’re not something I’d invest much into.
“K-Cars are fairly reliable and arguably helped spawn the Toyota Camry”
I’m confused.
At 28D:
Compare the stying of a gen-1 Camry and an early Aries, consider the dull but spacious interiors.
Later K-Cars with fuel injected 2.2s arent that bad as around town beaters, they’re kinda Chryslers GM A=body.
Well, I wouldn’t want a 30 year old one, but … clean lines, nice seats, plenty of space inside, more than adequate power for the day.
(Of course, I might be biased, since my DD is an almost-new XC70.
Though its power is more than adequate.)
“Looking at it overall, I think I’d go for a later model with a bit better equipment and more modern switch gear.”
Go for a turbo Volvo 7-900 series, you’ll be able save a good $5000 at the least, get a sturdier turbo engine, and better performance.
Quit changing your avatar!
But how else am I going to attract a new, younger audience?!
Next months Avatar I shall be….I dunno yet.
Corey is the People’s Commissar on Avatar Enforcement, you’d better do as he says ;)
Me also! Ryoku75, fall in line!
DATS RITE!
Maybe I’ll use an updated version of my old avatar!
@Ryoku75
A 740/940 is a MUCH better car if you are looking for an actual car, but the 240 is a lot more charming if you are looking for a toy. And anything this old and well preserved is a toy.
An odd factoid about these is that they share the 5×108 wheel spacing with the proud thoroughbreds from Maranello.
And some Ford and Jag products. Get some S-Type wheels on that Volvo!
The last year for the 240 turbo was ’85.
You can’t make an average one this nice for the price. Though the white seats are odd and unfortunate.
Too bad it is an ’83 and not an ’84, no intercooler so not as much power, unless it got the factory retrofit kit. The stickshift is a HUGE bonus, thought the 4spd slushbox isn’t terrible for the day.
Those seats are not factory. You had two choices in a 240 Turbo, beige or black. The seat color should match the headrests, more or less. And being a GLT it would have had leather. Someone with no taste had them reupholstered.
I don’t believe for a second this car only has 100K on it, there is not a 240 on the planet that does not have or has had in the past a broken odometer by now. Crappy VDO plastic gears split on every single one of them. Though the fact that it is a likely rust-free Turbo stickshift wagon makes it a fairly desirable car. Problem is that it is on the wrong coast. That car is solid gold in New England.
I was victim to VDO gears failure on my 1993 90S. How I managed to make that not hurt my resale price is beyond me.
Yeppa better to dodge that PRV6.
I didn’t realize it was a PRV. That makes it nearly a 100% avoid.
Four-cylinder turbo here, not the PRV.
*phew* Still.
Sorry I mean’t better this over a 260 with PRV. Our 74 164E was not updated. Such fanfare back then in the mid-70’s at PRV debut. There were early dealership rumours we caught end of 164 lease.
This was my first car. Mine was silver but had the turbo 4 speed with pushbutton overdrive on top of the stick. So tempted to call this dealer.
It was not terribly fast, but you could do burnouts and it surprised a lot of people with how quick it actually was. I got mine with 90k miles on the clock in 1991. It leaked oil pretty bad, several attempts to have it fixed did not seem to work. Rusted around rear fenders.
It ended its life only a year after I bought it. I came to a stop on a 4 lane road as the turnaround in the median was backed up. An Oldsmobile 98 pulled into my lane from behind a semi that was blocking the view of stopped cars in my lane. Roughly 40 mph impact pushing me into the pickup truck in front of me. They had to get a wrecker to pull the cars apart. The Oldsmobile would never start or drive again based on the damage I saw. I drove my 240 home, put new taillights on it and continued to drive it for several months. What a tank.
THAT is the appeal of these cars. (Other than the comfort and solidity of a practical, fairly economical ride!)
Just in time to add salt to my old wounds of recollecting my lost, and loved, ’88 Volvo 244 GL. That car wasn’t better than my modern DD in any one way, but it oozed charm and definitely had that intangible aspect newer cars lack. If nothing else, it was the apple of my eye, a delight to look at while approaching to drive or walking from to my destination.
It’s more like Overpriced Swedish Car Week. Buy it for $8,500, put $4,000 in deferred maintenance into it, and sell it for $4,900 on ebay next spring after you get sick of its Versa-like acceleration. Granted I’ve seen worse ROIs but this one would be down there in the gutter with the worst.
Dropped to $7500! It’s in San Francisco, perhaps that explains it.
That’s A LOT of money for that car. I’d rather have the brown 4 door on the local CL, asking $3500
https://cincinnati.craigslist.org/cto/5264610487.html
I have seen the brown one driving around near the University of Cincinnati and it’s a nice, clean old car, at least from 20 feet.
Man that ad put me off big time. He’s a UC hipster, otherwise he wouldn’t know how to say all that crap.
Barf.
No thanks, $1500 (or less) has gotten me some good 200-series Volvos, all later models so they dont rust like these older ones, theres little reason to buy a 200-series sedan.
Oh and the owner quite clearily hasnt owned the car very long, hes just flipping it for some cash to pay for his writing classes.
He may also be a DAAP student, which is the art school at UC.
Interesting Carfax history. From NY to SF? Sold in July and now for sale again? Hmmmm….
I smell some flippin’ antics.
You must be the most understanding Car Enthusiast on the planet, two cars she blew up? Ay, yi, yi…
You reminded me of Tim Allen’s routine about when the engine in his Regal blew up and his wife was driving. (Due to low oil.)
Tim: “Didn’t the oil light come on?”
Wife: “I’m not going to stop for some little light!”
Anyone recall the R&T comparo between this and the Citation X-11?
I like vintage Volvos as much as anyone, but that white leather is anything but. There is no leather that will look pristine after 32 years, even if that car was never sat in and only stored in climate controlled garage. This is nothing but pure and unadulterated vinyl/leatherette/pleather/MBTex/Softex/insert_your_synonym_for_crappy_vinyl_here. That alone would preclude me from buying any car with it inside. But yes, it’s also a bad deal, unless you’re a really die hard Volvo fan. This thing will likely outlast anything of that era on the road, but would you really want to drive it every day?
Who trades in a clean ’80s Volvo wagon for a Q40?
I would, in less time than it would take me to say “Why the hell do I have a 30 year old Volvo!?!?!”
I have much want for a G37x. And very much indifference for Volvo.
I was about to say, who *wouldn’t* trade it in for a Q40?
Like the SAAB a few days ago, though, I find the Volvo quirky and endearing. I’d keep the Volvo as a sunday driver and occasional crap hauler, and daily drive the Q40. The trade-in value wasn’t great on this deal and I have the extra parking space.
Who? Idiots who get things for free and who don’t realize the dealer isn’t giving you s*it for an oddball Volvo they don’t want when it would make more sense to just keep (or sell for cash) and add the extra 2K off onto your payment. This 200 will be on the road long after that Q40 is a Chinese refrigerator. F*** the PRK.
Fair comment 28, one would do much better selling it privately. Which is what I would do in a heartbeat as soon as I was…given one I guess.
I’d want grandma to sell the 1983 Volvo wagon before I inherit it. Maybe the Medicare Administrators can just take the Volvo so I wouldn’t have to sell it.
@bball
I’m hearing blasphemy there. Just like the dealer, you give the criminals at fedgov NOTHING. Make sure all of Gram’s property is legally transferred/gifted to your parents or you before Gram goes on to the next world.
Commonwealth of PA stole my mother’s neighbors house after she had a minor stroke and was declared unfit to live alone (which she had done proudly for twenty years). She died four weeks after they put her in Kane and her 20 something grandson had to come up with 40K to buy the house their family would have inherited (which needed major work but still).
Me personally on the Volvo, its motor gets refurbished and it lies in wait somewhere until it may be needed as a backup or bug out vehicle. Although another route is to take to my guy and allow him to to sick things with it… such as Windsor 5.0 and T-5.
My grandmother doesn’t have a Volvo. She has a 1990 Camry.
Ok so dealer will give you something but they will advise you up front it won’t be much. So instead of taking it, you just say “nah” and put it on the interwebs. RWD Volvo people are everywhere and this thing would have been gone rather quickly in the condition its in. Instead typical PRK resident takes nothing and gives the dealer an oddball I don’t think they want but one they can sit on forever bc they have nothing in it and rip off some Volvo collector.
Giving the dealer a good late (or very late in this case) model car to resell is akin to letting the terrorists win. You trade them junk for the no money they give you and sell the rest.
Reminds me of a story, years back a former colleague bought a CPO MY06 3 series/6spd and offered an MY97 VW Jetta Wolfsburg/5spd on trade. The offer was I think a grand which he said FU you to and just kept it another year. I explained margin is different on CPO etc and then applauded him by saying a running inspected car is always worth at least a grad but these days more. So after about a year he mentioned to me he gave it to a high school friend whose wife’s 80 Civic was too rotted underneath to pass inspection. This is how you do it… although the last I heard of this 97 in 2011 was the fuel tank fell off…
“but as the car’s offered by a new-car dealer in San Francisco”
Looks like an Infiniti dealer no less. I’d have to really “see it” but this period 200 wasn’t particularly valuable. Maybe uber clean and no miles it pulls 5-7, which is what people in these parts put on later 200s. Avg miles and Cali condition? 3-4, tops.
Those Infiniti plates they slapped on it are blasphemy. Swedes weep, and the Sect of VQ is not pleased. Nobody wins.
I’ll happily take the agriculture clunks of an old Redblock, than the attrocious farts of a VQ.
Wait you changed the avatar Ryoku? I’m not sure we can allow this…
I’m kind of confounded by the disapproval of this Volvo.
“But…but but it has a PRV!!”
Pretty sure the PRV in this is a different variation of the anchor found under the bonnet of your Mom’s old Eagle Premier. Just sayin’.
It’s an honest to goodness, clean, rear-wheel drive turbo wagon with a stick. Utilitarian, basic, and rock solid. You ask what’s to love… I ask what’s NOT to love.
I’ll take this exact wagon with S60 wheels please. And thank you.
ADDENDUM: Think I’ll hold off for a brown one. ;)
This 240 GLT doesn’t use a PRV, only the 260 did.
Good deal.
260s and 780s are pretty much gone because of said PRV as I have never seen one. If they do exist its probably because someone did a redblock swap.
Relatively few 780s had the PRV6, most were turbo 4s. And it was an almost completely different motor than the one that was used in the 260, and had very few problems. The 260 version was 2.7L, the later 760/780 version was 2.8L.
The biggest issues for the 780 are that they are WAY more susceptible to rust than other 700-series Volvos, and those Italian body panels are largely unobtanium at this point, along with 90% of the interior. And they simple never sold more than a handful, as they cost a fortune.
I had a neighbor in La Jolla that had a 780 project car and two 780 parts cars a dozen years ago. Other than that, I haven’t seen any since they were new. I think they would have been pretty nice had Volvo kept them around another year and equipped them with the B6304 I6, but I have no idea if those engines were as durable as some of Volvo’s fours.
The Eagle Premier had a far superior version of the PRV than anything built in 1983, although this car didn’t have one.
The Eagle had the late 3.0L Renault version of the PRV. While the engine was jointly developed, the three companies (Peugeot, Renault, Volvo, hence PRV) really went their own ways with them. For example, the Peugeot version had balance shafts in the heads and was extremely reliable. And it was largely the heads that were the big problem with the 2.7l Volvo version. They had oiling and cam wear issues. And because of the way they fit in the engine bay, they were none too friendly to work on in a 260. Ultimately it was a complex, expensive, all-aluminum wet-liner engine and did not suffer neglect well at all.
The 260 was long gone by ’83 anyway, pretty sure that the last year in the US was ’80 or ’81. The Turbo effectively replaced it, along with the introduction of the 760 in ’82. Which had the much improved 2.8L PRV6
The inline six was not a bad engine, it’s the same modular family as the aluminum four and five. The Achilles heal of the early 960s was that the timing belt had a 30K change interval. Super easy to change (literally a 30 minute job), but neglect it and your valves got an intimate introduction to the pistons. As they age the slightly unusual construction of the head tends to cause oil leaks that are very expensive to fix. The “valve cover” has no gasket, but uses sealant and very precise machining to keep the oil in. That sealant eventually doesn’t. Not unreliable by any means, but definitely in a wholly different realm than a redblock. A redblock is roughly as complicated and reliable as an anvil, suffers neglect about as well as an anvil, and in n/a 8v form has the power to weight ratio of one as well. Though the turbos like the car here were pretty darned rapid for the early 80s, especially once they got intercoolers and 160hp.
My very worst car ever was an ’82 245 GLT – sadly, an automatic. Though not Volvos fault, the car was just plain used up by the time I foolishly bought it. It was completely reliable – it would start every single time no matter how long it sat, and then something would go wrong or fall off every time I drove it somewhere. It caught fire on Rt 128 around Boston, and like an idiot I put it out and had it towed home. Should have let that sucker burn to the ground. Luckily I had it at the same time as one of the best cars I ever owned, an ’87 744GLE.
I dated a girl that had a 244 GLT about eight years ago. She also had a ’66 1800S the same color as Irv’s and an S60. Her family is in the Volvo business. The GLT was nice, but doomed. It was getting slow. It turns out the catalytic converter had melted into a brick. When that was fixed and the car was about as fast as intended, it developed a taste for deer. They fixed it after the first one, but as soon as it was back on the road it met another. It was a shame, because it was a very nice, original, 25 year old car at the time.
Superb!
I owned one briefly in 2004, a 1988 245 non-turbo stick. Drove it 12k miles to Alaska and back. Resold in Canada, made a very nice profit. Wonderful car! I called it my “maxi-Miata”… Handling in the rain could be “interesting” if you are really on it.
“Handling in the rain could be “interesting” if you are really on it”
Thats odd, I swear that both of my 240s actually handled BETTER in the rain!
That and they felt quicker, but then again perhaps that was more from the slow traffic.
Reduced to $7500
This looks like a very nice example of one of my favorite cars from the 1980’s. The price has been reduced to $7500 but it still needs to come down a ways to tempt me.
Best reserve $5k for repairs.
I can’t imagine what you could spend $5K repairing on a rust-free 240. I guess if you drained all the oil out and took it for a long drive.
Volvo 200s are great $2k or less cars, a “mint” one would be a genuine pita to keep up due to their GM-grade interior plastics, let alone bio-degradable wiring and what not.
Even though I personally enjoyed my 200s series Volvos I’d only buy one to fix n flip, 7-900 Volvos have spoiled me.
“7-900 Volvos have spoiled me.”
I don’t even know who you are,,,
I should be more specific, late 740-940 redblocks have spoiled me, I’m sure the more complex/less sturdy 6-series would’ve made me miss my 240.
I do certainly miss the headliner in my 240, it was some kinda “old timey European car” stuff, whatevers in my 740 seems like it was made from recycled napkins.
I had a ’84 Intercooled 4-door 244 “Turbo+” sedan that averaged about 25,000 miles to the set of turbocharger bearings. Among other quirks was the overdrive button atop the shifter knob — it kept coming unplugged and I would have to fish the wires out with needle-nose pliers to reconnect it. Also, the A/C airflow was vacuum-operated and generally would slam all its doors shut when climbing a hill if the turbo boost was on for more than a few seconds. Thank goodness Volvo started using much better turbos in the 850 and later, plus making the HVAC baffles electrically-operated.
Makes me a bit nostalgic– my family had one of these (albeit a base, vinyl upholstered, DL model). But I remember seeing a fair amount of these GLT models running around in my town growing up– mostly bought by bankers for their wives. Good memories and I kind of like the looks, but they were never very pleasant to drive. And, yes, the interior plastics ad fit/finish were even worse than anything cooked up by GM.
So many questions on this car:
1. Why would an Infiniti dealer want anything to do with this?
2. It looks very well maintained. Why would someone who cared so much just trade it in instead of selling it to a volvo enthusiast?
3. What’s the story behind the white leather? That certainly wasn’t standard (and you can tell from the non-matching door panels).
I can’t think of who the target buyer would be either. In theory, it’s someone like who is nostalgic for his youth. But there are so many other 80s icons i’d buy first. I’d much prefer a Mercedes 300TD if I were going for the retro euro wagon thing.
The Volvo 240 market seems to consist mostly of hipsters driving ratty examples and guys who stuff V8s in them. This car would not appeal to either segment.
I had, briefly, a 1982 sedan (or maybe it was a 1983 or 1981 or 1980…that was a long time ago) with a 4 speed manual (I don’t recall that it had an overdrive button…but it might have had one). I definitely recall that is was painted orange and that it had a tan/brown interior. It did not have a turbo charged engine. I do recall, out of necessity (not because I am particularly inclined) performing some repairs, myself, to the vehicle. It made a lasting impression on me because, over the years, I have bought (new) several (or maybe I could/should say many) Volvos. The appeal of these (and, perhaps this also applies to modern Volvos) to someone like myself, is difficult to explain. My 1982 sedan was not, as I recall, super reliable, nor did it have a long lasting interior, nor did many of the dashboard switches properly work, and I don’t recall that the engine always started on the first try. It was, however, safer than most (or all) other cars being manufactured at that time. And, it looked good (to my tastes, anyway). Just for fun, I occasionally look for good examples (to possibly purchase) of 1974 through 1993 Volvos and maybe someday I will find a good “collectable” example. In the meantime, I have my modern Volvos to enjoy.
Thank you so much for this post.