I don't remember the movie but it was about this girl who was all hot for some guy. When they finally got a date set, she said "I'll pick you up in my vulva. I mean Volvo."

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

You are right--I saw a V70 this morning and I had driven a v 40.

My wife drives a 2000 S70, the last year of that model run.

Great car. Extremely reliable. Currently has about 80,000 miles, and not one repair. Recently replaced the battery and front rotors.

You might consider a turbo model, like the S70 (or V70) GLT. The non-Turbo 2.5 liter inline 5-cylinder engine is slow. It keeps up with traffic fine, and cruises effortlessly at 80 mph, but I personally wouldn't be happy with it if it were my personal car.

What works in your favor is that while the S70 body style ended in 2000, and became the S60 (current body style) in 2001, the V70 wagon in 2001 is virtually the same, which to me is a good thing.

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

NA just get a real Brick

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y206/mrbrickdriver/latestfiles073.jpg

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y206/mrbrickdriver/latestfiles087.jpg

ok, heres 2- what do ya think. i know, they are not awd, but we decided that we could save a ton and buy winter tires,rims. one is a 940 4 cyl. turbo

http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/car/212927270.html

hers a 850. what engine do they have? the third row would be nice, and it is a little newer but has 20k more on it.

http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/car/214732025.html


fwd vs rwd, what else am i missing.

ohh- so you all know, i did try posting at a couple volvo sites, but there is way more interset here

p.s.- we could buy these without going to the bank, so that is a plus.

thanks, mo

__________________
1984 123.193 372,xxx miles, room for Seven.

1999 Dodge Durango Cummins 4BTAA 47RE 5k lb 4x4 getting 25+mpgs, room for Seven.

I would go with the 940. Might try to talk them down depending upon miles. See that it is missing the alloy wheels. Can be found at the wreaking yard. If it's an "SE" It might have indipendent rear suspension, not sure about the wagons though. This will be a much better car then the 850. This was basically as good as they got, if it has the b230ft, this motor is fairly bulletproof. Good luck

I am pretty sure the 850 is a five cylinder.

well, i just got back from looking at a different 94 850-5cyl fwd it was pretty rough-only 154k on it, but it had been hit in the front- or more like had hit something. the dash was falling apart,from airbag deployment, maybe? and it was full of dog hair. this was on a lot. they must of picked it up at auction and just put it out on the lot. only asking $1850, but wasnt even worth that. the ps pump or alt? or something deeper was making horrible clacking. seemed to be a tite motor, though.

on the good note, i now dont think that i am interested in a 5-fwd. looking at doing a timing belt would be a nightmare.Do swedes have small hands, too?

also looked at a 95 940 126k 4 cyl rwd. not a bad car, but it was at a lot, also. they want $4k, so we would have to borrow a little to get that one. but i think that is the layout(4cyl,rwd)I am more interested in working on,and most brickheads i know rave about these, almost like a 617 for gasser brickheads . if anyone can steer me to the better 4 bangers, or what to watch for, please speak up. well, the search continues......

__________________
1984 123.193 372,xxx miles, room for Seven.

1999 Dodge Durango Cummins 4BTAA 47RE 5k lb 4x4 getting 25+mpgs, room for Seven.

o.k/- i am going to checkout a couple of rwd wagons today-

a 90 940 turbo 164k, dealer car, so? on the history.

93 940 w new rotors-pads all the way around,newer t- belt,no a/c. private party.

is the older car gonna be built better? seems the 93 prolly is not a turbo, so no boost for me!!

__________________
1984 123.193 372,xxx miles, room for Seven.

1999 Dodge Durango Cummins 4BTAA 47RE 5k lb 4x4 getting 25+mpgs, room for Seven.

Given your location, the 940 wagons could be a sensible choice. They are really great cars for cold cold winters, do pretty well in the snow and the heaters work REALLY well.

The 4 cylinder B230F motors are really solid items, and should last a real long time, just change the timing belt every 60k or so.

Many Volvo fanatics favor the rwd versions (I am one of these) as the last of the real great Volvos. They are real solid, pretty slow unless you have the turbo and yet are super city cars too due to their incredibly tight (34 feet) turning radius and can really nip into those elusive parking spaces.

Due to the enviornomentally friendly adhesive used, their headliners can eventually sag, and the plastic pockets in the doors can get brittle and crack.

They get decent mpg, look good, and are very sturdy, and if you can find a good independent to work on them they are not too costly to maintain.

There is no appreciable difference in quality between the 90 an 94 940 wagons. I think either would make a real good choice, if you can get one in good condition.

When I was in Sweden on vacation about 5 years ago, I saw them everywhere. It was like the Swedish national car: A Volvo 940 wagon, red in color, with a pair of enormous driving lights on either side of the grille, a mesh screen behind the passenger seats, and a labrador behind it.

__________________
1991 560 SEC AMG, 199k <---- 300 hp 10:1 ECE euro HV ...

1995 E 420, 170k "The Red Plum" (sold)

2015 BMW 535i xdrive awd Stage 1 DINAN, 6k, <----364 hp

1967 Mercury Cougar, 49k

2013 Jaguar XF, 20k <----340 hp Supercharged, All Wheel Drive (sold)

I have never owned a 740/940 volvo, but I have been told that it is pretty eash to check the turbo shaft play on themk, wich I would have done. The turbos are really pretty good with these cars, but they will wear out in enough miles and will wear sooner with cheap oil/ extended oil change intervals. I would not be scared of that, but it is something to keep in mind. I think that you are on the right track. As I have said, I have owed a number of 240s, but would not heisitate to own a 7/9 series and they have the advantage of being a few years newer then the 240s, so one could find a nice example with less effort.

If you're into RWD Volvos, you might check out the 960, which was the last year of the full size, RWD, inline 6 Volvos.

The last year, possibly 2000, was rebadged as the S90, and it lasted for just one year, when it was replaced with the current S80.

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

I'll agree, the 4cyl engine used in the 700/900 series Volvos are BULLET PROOF.
Owned a 1988 740 Turbo wagon and loved it... with some suspension tuning products from IPD it really sharpened up.

I'd go for a 1995 940 Turbo wagon with a complete history and a clean bill of health. Mileage is subjective. Condition means everything. In 1994 Volvo improved the quality of plastics and interior construction- 1994 & 1995 940 dash boards are far less likely to be cracked, the same for door panels and trim bits.
Most 940 Turbo's were specced to the same levels as 960 models- though upholstery seams, grilles, and wheels were different.

The 960 models were equipped with Turbo fours, and more commonly the ill fated $$$$I-6. 960 models were full spec cars though- the top of the line Volvo in the day. electric heated seats, sunroof, premium sound, premium leather upholstery, premium alloy wheels, etc.... they also had a different dashboard design.

__________________
Nate

1995 E420
1992 BMW 525i
1984 300D Turbo sold
1993 Volvo 244 sold
1995 Volvo 944T R.I.P!


"The details are not details. They make the product."
-Charles Eames

www.cbs.nu

960 models had a straight 6, which I believe is very well regarded. I believe this 2.9 liter DOHC inline 6 engine is still used in the S80.

It was the 760 model that had the ill-fated V6.

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

They are nice car's but I not sure if their is real increase in driveability from the b230ft and witht the six cylender, if the belt breaks, it usually means bent valves verses just a tow to the shop, or your home to install the belt yourself.