Which older volvo do you recommend? [merged]

[scot850]

Avoid the V70XC (not XC70) as AWD. Parts for rear end many are NLA
875? Not sure what that is? S80? Avoid
S70 = V70 in terms of most mechanical and panels to rear for rear doors.
872? S80 Avoid except possibly S80 AWD with 2.5T engine 2004-6?

Neil.

[msloan]

ok let me try again:

prior to 2004
rwd if possible
NO awd. period
best choices:
240
740
960
850 1993 - 1997

acceptable, pending parts availability:
S70 1998 - 2000
v70 1998 - 2000
XC70 1998 - 2000
c70 1998 - 2002

How does that sit?

[BlackBart]

ok let me try again:

prior to 2004
rwd if possible
NO awd. period
best choices:
240
740
960
850 1993 - 1997

acceptable, pending parts availability:
S70 1998 - 2000
v70 1998 - 2000
XC70 1998 - 2000
c70 1998 - 2002

How does that sit?

Isn't the late 90s XC AWD a problematic car as far as parts and AWD system? Maybe ask abscate about this model.

One thought on your situation - I think in this case it's worth spending the money to get an exceptional early car (whether that's a 240 or 740), one that is either very low mileage and pampered (with documentation), or a completely restored example. By that I don't mean a paint job and some seat covers. Be wary of that guy in Portland who has highly polished, high dollar 240s for sale all the time.

These cars are few and far between, but they're out there. You do your homework, research the target model and variations, scour the classifieds and forums, wait until one pops up, and grab it. Is that a $10,000 240? Maybe.

[msloan]

well, as I said, NO AWD cars. And your advice is good. THanks

[volvolugnut]

My thoughts on spending $8-10,000 on a 30 year old car in great condition:

Initial cost $10,000. Assume 100,000 miles and great condition.
Assume annual maintenance $1000. Just a guess on this amount.
Annual miles 10,000
Useful lifetime for new owner 15 years. Total miles will then be about 250,000.
Total cost (less fuel, taxes, and insurance) $25,000
Cost per mile (less fuel, taxes, and insurance) $0.166

Compare to a new car of your choice. I think the old car may be cheaper and have better smiles per mile.

volvolugnut

[msloan]

EXACTLY!!!!! And In my case, you have overestimated the miles. Now all I have to do is find one.....

[BlackBart]

I will add some positive thoughts on the FWD 850 wagon. I searched and searched for a low miles, black or red, 1-owner, turbo T-5, with a manual. Well, manuals were nowhere to be found (in the early 2000s), so I nabbed this sharp red one with tan seats and maybe 60,000 miles. I asked the pre-purchase inspection tech if he checked the compression and he said, It only has 60,000 miles, it's a Volvo.

We've had it ever since. Many trips to Seattle and Denver in all kinds of weather. Both my kids drove it to soccer practice and the coach was amazed we "still had that car." 170,000 miles. Fantastic in the snow with good tires.

It was the first year of the high pressure turbo and the wagon, as a marketing move by Volvo I believe, to produce a good-looking, modern, fast road car. And it is. Low and smooth and really a nice drive. A leap in technology and safety from the 200/700 series - it's a very modern car, with big torque and good handling. I never drove my 245T all day at 80 mph - it would be exhausting. It's been very reliable, with the normal wear items, and PCV maintenance, and a rear main seal early on, and the A/C quit.

So you buy a "nice" one of those for $1500? $2500? You put $5000 or $7000 into deferred maintenance, replace some parts, put a new A/C compressor in, refinish the seats...and you've got a fun modern car for 10k to 15k-ish, with the assumption you'll have to keep a good eye on maintenance - age is age.

[Clemens]

+1 on the FWD 850ies. Or rather +2, because I have 2 850 Turbos and love them to pieces

[Sveedy]

+2. Obviously. Such a Goldilocks of a car. Comfort, ride, safety, performance, and reasonable economy....
And taking the turbo out on a nice road, is some kind good therapy.

[BlackBart]

They also had really good seats.