A guy in my neighborhood is selling a 1994 940 wagon turbo with 125k miles for $200.... but it has the following issues, as he describes them:

1. exhaust is free from the motor mount (assuming he means not mounted correctly)
2. head gasket might be blown; was leaking coolant from head gasket and used a radiator stop-leak that stopped the leak.
3. front end is 'too boogered up to drive straight'
4. rear brakes are eating up rotors; unsure if calipers are seized up or what problem is

what would you guys think of this car? run for the hills due to the problems and neglect? or do you think it's possible to get into good running condition and get more use out of it? I knocked around a bit on IPDs website and it seems like replacement parts could be gotten fairly cheap; so if I did the work myself and got the car running, at $200 plus ~500-700 in parts...that wouldn't look so bad?

But I am not familiar with the 940s as much as the 240s, hence this post. The other thought I had was that it could be a good parts car if there is enough overlap with my '85 240. I know some of the 940s have the same B230F engines.

The interior and body seems to be in good shape; rust-free.

 

My opinion on these cars is if the body is good and straight and the interior is in decent shape it is worth fixing. In your case the price is reasonable. However, once you get into it you'll probably end up spending more than $1000 to get it to be a good running, reliable daily driver. Probably closer to $2000 as you don't know what other problems may be lurking or will crop up once you start using the car.

There is a limited parts set that can be swapped to your 240 - mainly engine and transmission. However, these are items that rarely need replacing on these cars unless really neglected. When my son totalled our first 240, I kept the engine and transmission as spare parts when I bought a second and third 240. They sat in my garage for 12 years and were never needed.

 

Thanks for the reply. The biggest issue I am worried about here it that head gasket. If the gasket is blown, that's a pretty intensive repair, no? That's the one item on the list I have less confidence in. Not that I am necessarily unwilling to learn....

 

an 85 240 is LH2.2, while the 94 940 is LH2.4, and is a turbo so there's actually quite a LOT of differences in the engine... turbo engines have lower compression, and then its a completely different harness, ignition system, ECU, etc. the 940 will have a much bigger radiator, etc etc.

 

ps. get tthat 940 sorted, and you might find its a much nicer car to drive and ride in. my 92 740 T wagon was far smoother and nicer than our 87 240. downside, turbo == crappy gas mileage.

 

Well my '85 240 gets only ~16mpg in town, which is most of my driving miles. (Gas is luckily cheap down here in Luzianne) It's my daily driver (only 136k miles), but I keep wanting to get another vehicle as a backup and all. This 940 is a cheap option that also gives me the opportunity to learn how to do more repairs myself, plus it's swedish metal. If it was a standard, there'd be no quibbling over it.

 

my 87 240 got 27-29 MPG on the freeway if I cruised smoothly at 65 for long distances, and the tank average was usually around 20-23. 16-18 MPG was my typical mileage on road trips in the turbo, and around town leadfooting would do 12-13.

 

holy cow why is my gas mileage so poor comparatively??

 

well, in the 240, my average tanks were about 50-50 suburban and highway driving. frankly, its been over 10 years since that was my daily driver, so I don't remember what the worse case tanks were.

also, an 85 might be LH II rather than 2.2, I don't quite remember when they crossed over. its possible your O2 sensor is shot, that tends to impact your mileage, or your AMM/MAF is worn, that too tends to make it run rich. and mileage is *heavily* dependent on that right foot.

 

If you do the work then it may be worth it. If you to shops, forget it! Also the cosmetics are much more important than the mechanicals. By the sound of this, sadly this car sounds like a POS, but then the 1994 is the best 940 year. The headgasket is easy as long as the head is not destroyed.

 

i found a cracked head on one 940 i went to do a head gasket on, and some nice gentleman on this forum popped up and volunteered tha the had an excellent head he'd prepped for a performance build, but then went a different direction and decided it was time to get it off his garage shelf.... so I got an excellent ready-to-go head for a couple $100, probably less than the local guys charge to machine one.

 

For $200, I'm considering getting it and if the head is warped, I'll pull the transmission and part the car out or scrap it.

 

If you are handy with tools and fix your car yourself then it is worth it. A head gasket job is not too difficult on these cars. If it is warped you can get it machined for a reasonable price.

If you are not a do-it-yourself auto repair person it is probably best just to pass on it as paying someone to repair the car would cost even more than I was stating.

 

Volvo wasn't too concerned about gas mileage in the '90's. The non turbos had a lock up torque converter which acted as an overdrive and lowered highway rpms. The turbos did not have that and had a 3:73 rear end ratio so the turbo could keep spinning and stay in it's power range. Hence the poor gas mileage. Most modern cars have rear end ratios closer to 3:00.

 

well, the rear end ratio by itself means nothing without knowing the transmission ratios.

I think my F250 has a 3.73 rear too, and its a 7.3L turbodiesel that turns at a ridiculously slow RPM and gets quite good mileage considering its a 4.5 ton GVWR.

 

are there any common problems with the 940s to be aware of? and in general, what might cause a head gasket failure? could that failure indicate abuse or neglect?

 

commonest cause of head gasket failure is overheating.

but, age, mileage, and they can start to fail. The turbos will usually go well over 250000 miles before any issues. my last turbo was up around 270,000 miles of leadfooting, and would suffer from a bit of excess 'blowby' causing things like the dip stick to push out of the tube, while east bound on I80 climbing the Sierras with a heavy load on a hot day at 70+ MPH. this would spurt oil out.

the AW71 trannies are usually good for at least 250K miles of hard driving, if their ATF is changed occasionally.

otherwise, its just regular wear and tear. the turbos have upgraded brakes. cheap rotors and pads can tend to 'throb' under hard braking, I found using akebono rotors, this didn't happen nearly as often or much. I had to replace my heater valve at one point, but thats easy and cheap. I had to replace the transmission throttle pressure cable, ditto, cheap and fairly easy.

IMHO, a 1994 940 turbo wagon with a clean body, and a clean interior is worth repairing the motor and sorting it out. its a /really/ solid car, very comfortable, and a great cargo hauler, with a decent ride and pretty good handling if you have decent shocks and tires on it.

 

Let me rephrase that, other gasoline cars from that era - BMW, Audi, Mercedes - with 4 spd automatics and similar hp and torque ratings and comparative gross weights, had rear end ratios closer to 3:00. Even the 960, which wasn't boosted, and had approximately the same transmission ratios and overall weight, had a 3:31 to 1 rear end ratio.

 

I was finally able to meet up in person with owner and view the car. The problems are actually as follows:

1. The exhaust pipe is missing bolts which attach it to the exhaust manifold. This failure is located in the engine bay. The fitting is missing 2-4 bolts.
2. The head gasket leak actually appeared to be a coolant leak above the water pump, at the connection between the top of the water pump and the engine. He said that the head gasket leak crept forward and leaked onto the water pump but I am not sure if that's right.
3. The rear rotors likely need replaced and possibly the calipers as well.

It has two flats in the front and has been sitting two weeks. I am unable to really test drive it (unless I buy two tires for it), and the battery on it is weak, but with a jump is started right up and seemed to idle with no obvious stumbles or anything. Also, it has a cool hidden third row seat in it!

The owner did admit he drove it hard and said he 'ran it hot'. That likely explains the coolant leak. He is asking $225.

Final thoughts? I am unsure about the head gasket leak or if its blown. The owner said he put a sealer in it that worked, but I would figure a head gasket leak would leak more on the engine block rather than the water pump. Regardless, the other problems he initially described over the phone appear much less serious than I feared.

 

this is a non-turbo? I'm only remembering two or maybe 3 bolts that attach the downpipe to the exhaust header. pretty trivial to replace.

the coolant leak sounds like its the top ring gasket that connects the head to the pump, always use genuine volvo for that gasket, and it should last a long time.

brakes are a standard consumable item. so are tires.