Hi Brick enthusiasts!

We decided to sell our other car (a Toyota with a bow tie) and get another brick. Currently have had a '91 740 non turbo wagon for several years now, and love it.

We are going to get another, and there are a few for sale in the New England area, but are considering a turbo model. Before we do that though, I wanted to get some opinions on reliability, longevity, maintenance, etc.

Dave

PS Many thanks to everybody here, especially Pierce. You guys are awesome.

 

well, the turbo is more complex, with additional oil and coolant plumbing for the turbo itself, more air plumbing for the boosted air, and the boosted engine is somewhat more likely to blow its head gasket, that said they still go 200K+ miles with reasonable care. the turbo itself is about a $600 or 700 item to swap for a rebuilt one.

it certainly adds a lot of punch to what is otherwise a rather gutless car.

my preference would be a 94/95 940 turbo, there were some minor but significant engine enhancements in those, namely oil squirters to cool and lubricate the piston skirts. 2nd choice would be a 92+ 940T (or 1992 740T which is the same thing), these have electric cooling fans, bigger radiators, other minor improvements.

the 940 and later 740 are virtually identical.

many of the non-turbo cars are DOHC 16 valve engines, these have their own issues. decent power, almost as good as the turbo, albeit requiring much higher RPMs (they are geared accordingly), better gas mileage (turbo sucks, I get ~18mpg most of the time in mine), and very smooth due to twin balance shafts. if the timing belt on a DOHC snaps, you're looking at major engine work, all the others just need new belts.

a California or southwest car will have a LOT less rust and be in generally better shape.

 

Thanks Pierce!

That's a pretty big MPG hit with the turbo. I usually manage 23-24 with mine if I don't flog it (and keep it under 70 on the highway). Also didn't realize the turbos had a lot less life expectancy . I understand the SOHC 2.3L non-T can go 500k miles before a rebuild, then another 500k miles This one has 260k+ on it and uses hardly any oil. I like that in a motor. ; )

I guess I'll try and stick with the SOHC non turbo. Thinking about getting a mild high lift cam from IPD for for a bit more acceleration (although I don't know if that changes it from a non-interference engine to an interference engine).

If I ever get bored and want to go performance, this seems the way to go https://volvoforums.com/forum/volvo-...s-40947/page2/ and he's getting similar highway MPGs, lol! For now though, practicality rules the day...

 

For reliability, economy, and all around better personality I prefer a non turbo. Especially as they age the turbos are prone to many more leaks and dirty blowby all over the motor. The little extra power is not worth it unless one really needs it... Turbos fuel economy is much worse too--5 to 10 mpg depending on length of trips and manner of driving. The Red Block is great and we spend too much time discussing it--while the engine is the last thing to go in a Volvo as long as it's not overheated, better address transmissions, steering racks, electronics, heating/cooling systems, trim falling and cracking, etc. Transmissions last longer in non turbos too, less stress on them... I'd stay away from the 16 valves but they are rare only available til 1991, and getting rarer as they die sooner than the Red Blocks. 1993 and newer motors are supposed to be better but again, unless you plan to "tweak and race", who cares? The biggest benefit of the "squirter" motors is that they don't get "piston slap" when overheated... 1993-1994 940s are the best cars ever... 1995 are transitional and have some weird replacement needs and badly delaminating door panels.

 

I'm not sure I'd call 190 ft-lbs 'a little extra power'. compared with our 240, my 740T is a rocket sled.

 

Thanks Lev!

I have been toying with prophetically replacing the A/T in my current 740, as it has over 260k miles on it and has been shifting hard once warmed up (replaced fluid, added GUNK a/t additive, still shifts hard). They seem to be available for $400 with a 3 year warranty.

I'm getting pretty familiar with the issues with these cars. When we get the new brick, depending on the miles the first thing I'll do is either replace the airbox valve (or remove the airbox pre-heater hose, my current brick warms up pretty fast without it), replace the crank sensor, and maybe even replace the fuel pump and starter. Those were all issues with my 740 @ around 250k miles, why wait for the eventual inconvenience... I also finally broke down and bought the Chilton's manual.

 

I'm an old red block guy, or should I say... use to be. My old 740 had over 400,000 miles on it. As much as I appreciated the low cost to maintain, I do enjoy the newer and exciting 850 series. I have a T5 wagon and it shows no signs of slowing down with 240,000 on the clock.

If you don't mind turning wrenches, these cars being Volvo's first line of US delivered FWD cars, they require a lot more maintenance and repairs. The thing I do like is that the engineers continued with making the cars easy to service. The comfort, features, drive ability and decent mpg makes the car worth the maintenance.

If a new '94 940 and a new '95 850 were placed in front of me to choose from, all be it not an easy choice I'd take the 850 turbo. The car is amazing and parts are very easy to come by.

I have read and spoken to people with over 400,000 on their original motors that were still going strong. If properly maintained, I believe the I5 will do 500,000 with no problems. Transmissions are strong when serviced and they have random issues, no more than a 22 year old red block.

As I do consider the red blocks the lowest maintenance cars ever made, I don't consider it the best car ever made by Volvo. I'd have to give that vote to the late 960's and S90's. They have the soul of the old 700 series and the blend of fresh modern performance. I use to get 25 mpg around town and between 28 - 31 on the highway (under 68 mph). So, I wouldn't count it out. I had no issues with any of my 960's other than one of them saving my life on the freeway.

Just food for thought.

 

Sorry but White Blocks are junk all the way around and that is reflected in the prices and their overall condition one finds in the market. The most disappointing car I ever had was a '96 850R+. It looked great on paper, drove like an unreliable Toyota. Then I tried a V70R AWD with same results. Before getting into a FWD Volvo, get a Passat, or a Camry: much better car, less money, much less headaches, much better resale, etc! The White Blocks are throwaway motors as they are prohibitively expensive to repair once sick, same for their transmissions, odometers, interiors, etc. People will argue but just look at the prices they bring--a 940 sells for twice what an 850/S70 does, and is much older.
960 are plush overstuffed luxo boats, thirsty and super problematic all the way around, and unsellable. I have a nice '98 S90 with 135K miles for the last six months and I can't get $1,500 for it... A 940 in similar shape is easily worth three times that. I wish Volvo made newer decent cars, I really do, but...

The newest thing I have is a '05 V50 t5 with a stick. I do like it but I'd never compare it with a real Volvo, a RWD Red Block.

 

Lol, wow! My '95 850 brought me $5,900 personal sale in 2011. Just a couple of months before that my '97 960 brought $4,500 in about a week. Not sure what's going on where you are but we each have our own experiences. I had NO problems with any of my 960's.

 

our 1998 S90 tossed its timing belt on the freeway just cruising along, 10000 miles before it was due to be replaced, and was effectively totalled, with bent valves.

 

'95 850 for $5,900 in 2011? Did it have a gold brick in the trunk? Anecdotal evidence is, anecdotal evidence...

How about $1,500 for a nice 1998 S90 135k miles, all working fine? It's in So. Cal. I can't give it away. Even has that spoiler on the back for when it's going over 150mph down the freeway...

 

what color is that S90? nice interior, reasonable exterior ? my wife STILL misses her S90... we're in central cal (santa cruz).

 

Darkish blue, great body and paint, beigish interior is fine except some wear on driver's bolster. No mechanical issues, really quite a handsome car... PM me for more info if interested.

 

So boys, what do you think about the later model 240's? '85 and up, just the red blocks.

Looks to me like they are comparable to the 740 red blocks.

 

They have the same motor.

Man if I had 2 dimes to rub together I would be all over that S90. That is the only car I miss.

I found a 11 year old 960 with 54,000 miles on it. Changed the belt only at 59,000 due to age. Rollers started squealing around 85,000 about 14 months later, pulled the belt and the idler was so hard to turn I had to use 2 hands. Got to it just in time, I think it would have tossed the belt at any time. So I changed everything that time because the 13 year old water pump was leaking a little. I think age is a big factor on those timing belt parts.

Even though I drove that 960 like I stole it, that is a long motor and I don't think I would want to pull a head on one.

 

the whiteblocks are very difficult to do head gasket work on. the valve cover is the cam journals and uses an adhesive gasket

 

So anyway...

Going tomorrow to buy an '89 740GL sedan. Body looks solid. $525.00

...140k miles!

 

Don't be surprised if you need to do this and that-- $525 doesn't buy perfection.

 

indeed. when I bought my 1992 740 turbo wagon for $1200, I told my wife, this isn't a $1200 car, its a $3500 car, I'll be spending the rest later. now, 2 or so years later, I've done all what I wanted to do, and its about perfect (it got newer front seats, a trailer hitch, a head gasket job, new rims and tires and brakes, full set of suspension bushings and stuff and bilstein struts/shocks, new stereo and speakers)... heck, I probably went over budget. t'sok, I'm happy, and as far as I am concerned, it suits me to a T, better than any new car I would have bought, and its STILL way cheaper than that new car.

 

Needs blower motor repaired (might just be a fuse). Supposedly needs an O2 sensor. Might need a touch of exhaust work. Needs a battery. Needs cleaning. Needs a bit of paint touched up. Fuel pump is noisy.

Everything else works. Once I got it started (needed a double jump) thing ran strong right out of the driveway on old gas. Braked like it had just had them replaced. Hardly a spot of rust.

I figure for another $1000 I can get the rest of what needs done (hoses, belts, fluids, etc.) and have a car that should go another 100k miles w/o incident.

This car rocks! Talk about a bargain. I can't figure out why people pay a second mortgage to drive.