Pop quiz: What is the most boring 2012 model car in existence? The Camry, you say? Well done. Now, what was the most boring, competent and efficient car of the 1980s? For those of you who missed the ’80s or were too young at the time to remember them, may I present the 1982 Volvo 244DL. It’s not a hot rod, not fancy, not exciting. But by God, it was competent, comfortable, and you never had to fret over it breaking down or needing constant mechanical attention! There was good reason why in the ’80s, Volvo was known as “the car for people who think.”
My parents were Volvo people. Starting with the ’73 1800ES and later on with the ’77 245DL, they were a practical choice for a young upper middle-class family with kids in the plan for the near future. Safe, reliable, well-built. European, but not flashy or pretentious.
This was nothing new to Volvo Car Corporation. The Swedish company made its bones in the North American market with sensible, roomy and reliable sedans and wagons, starting with the Amazon/121/122 and making even more inroads with the 1967 140 Series. Despite the no-nonsense design and sensible shoes marketing, Volvos were never cheap.
The 1975 240, itself a redesigned 140 with MacPherson front suspension and crumple zones, was about the same size as a Plymouth Valiant or Dodge Dart, but pricewise was closer to a larger Oldsmobile Cutlass or Eighty Eight. But for “Volvo people” like my folks, the extra money was worth it for the peace of mind such a car afforded.
The 240 itself was treated to a couple of facelifts between 1975 and 1982. In 1978 it received the domed hood and squared-off grille of the flossier 260 Series, albeit with quad round headlights instead of the rectangular units the ’78 and up 260 models had. In 1979 the rear deck was smoothed out and wraparound taillights were added.
Another minor facelift appeared on the 1981 models, which included smoother hubcaps, quad rectangular headlights on DLs, a new grille, and wraparound taillamps on wagons.
For some reason, 1978-80 242s did not receive the domed hood, quad headlights and square grille as the sedans and wagons did, but this was finally rectified in 1981.
1982 models received white reflectors below the headlights, as seen on our featured car – 1981s had black horizontal grille bars in the same space.
As has been documented in my 1984 240GL CC, my folks had several Volvo 240s. Before the GL (seen above) came along, my dad had a 1981 or 1982 242DL coupe, maroon with a beige cloth interior. It had been a demonstrator at Lundahl Volvo in Moline, and he just had to have it. He recalled recently that it was one of the last years you could get a two-door version. I was still quite young when he had this car, but I remember riding in the back and playing with the pop-out rear quarter windows.
This car replaced Dad’s previous brown-over-beige 1979 Bonneville sedan, and it marked the end of his American car ownership, at least until his 1995 Jeep Grand Cherokee Orvis Edition. When he got that one I remember him saying, “Well, the Grand Cherokee screams Yuppie but I’ve had Volvos for years, so I guess it doesn’t matter!” But that’s a story and CC for another time.
I liked this car, but I associate my most vivid memory of it with pain. When I was three or four years old, Dad and I were coming home from someplace or another. He parked in the driveway, got out, and locked the car just as I slammed my fingers in the door. Naturally, I was yelling to beat the band, and my frantic Dad had to unlock the car so I could extricate my hand–which, amazingly, was OK. There would be no trip to the ER that day! And if you’re wondering about the only pictures I could find of Dad’s 242: he was not sentimental about his earlier company cars, so the only shots of it were these damage photos when somebody bumped into it. I wish there were better pictures; it was a sharp car.
By 1982 the DL was still the value Volvo, but was a bit better equipped than it’s mid-’70s forebears. The tried-and-true B21F four-cylinder remained as standard equipment in DL, GL and non-Turbo GLT models. The overhead cam design featured a cross-flow head with 98 hp @ 5000 rpm, and 112 lb-ft of torque. A 4-speed manual with overdrive was standard, but 3-speed and 4-speed overdrive automatics were available at extra cost.
Inside, central locking was standard on DL models, along with cloth seating, a quartz crystal clock and child-proof locks on the rear doors of sedans and wagons. Plenty of options were available, such as air conditioning, a manual-crank steel sunroof, cruise control and power windows. In addition to the four-cylinder B21F, DLs could be equipped with a 78 hp D24 six-cylinder diesel. Of course, the very comfortable, orthopedically designed seats with adjustable lumbar support remained.
Another major boon was the wonderful glass area. A tall roof and thin pillars were great for passing and merging, and the ample room inside meant the Not-Niedermeyers and their best friends (or the Klockaus and the Josephsons) could drive to dinner in comfort.
As you CC Volvophiles know, Dad’s 242DL was traded for an ’84 244GL, most likely precipitated by my little brother’s arrival in late ’83. As for the two-door 240, it lasted to 1984 in DL and Turbo versions, but disappeared from the 1985 Volvo roster, never to return. I guess all those practical-minded 1980s Volvo buyers thought the sedan and wagon more in line with sensible transportation. Pity; I rather liked the coupe.
Special thanks to Paul for spotting what may be the nicest 240 in Eugene. I know these are all but invisible to you in the Volvo Elysian Fields of Oregon, so thanks for taking the time to get some photos!
In 1980, Lisa Birnbach quite possibly did more to spur the sales of this car than anyone in history, featuring it as de rigueur transport for the Madras- and Lacoste-wearing set in her opus, The Preppy Handbook.
And with that, another quirky niche vehicle turned into a status symbol for the well-heeled masses…
My Dad bought the same car in 1982, it was a nice green with beige interior. As we lived in Montreal, it was a Halifax, Nova Scotia assembled one with the winter block heater for those cold January mornings. We had for 10 years before the rust started to take hold. I remember going some memorable summer road trips to the Maritimes, windows down as we did not have any A/C. The passenger side mirror was an option! It had over 200K kilometers on it when he traded it in on a 1992 Subaru Legacy, which is still going today. In some ways Subarus have become what Volvos were in the 1980s and early 90s.
I had no idea Volvo built cars in Canada! Wikipedia just enlightened me–I guess they were CKDs, but still, that’s pretty exotic for Volvo. Like discovering an IKEA store in your basement or something.
In the 1970s, I think that there was only one family that I actually knew who owned one of these. And they were of swedish background. 10 years later, they were all over the place.
In the 80s, my flight instructer was a young swedish guy (named Lars, of course). Before coming to America and getting into flying, he had been a mechanic in Sweden. I told him about my then-current fascination with Saabs. He rolled his eyes and said “Get a Volvo instead – much better cars – except the 6 cylinder.” From one short sentence, a summation of all wisdom about swedish cars.
I find nothing boring about the 200 series Volvos. In fact, they strike me as one of the most distinctive, interesting cars built in this time period. 80’s Corollas, Camrys, Sentras, & Stanzas — ugh — now those are boring.
Junqueboi,
“I find nothing boring about the 200 series Volvos. In fact, they strike me as one of the most distinctive, interesting cars”
I love your sense of humor, you really crack me up!
To paraphrase Tom’s statement with Cars (UK) Magazine’s opinion of Volvos we have “the car for people who think they like trucks”.
I have a number of friends that have made very good livings owning their own independent Volvo repair shops, so I don’t have any illusions about the myth of Volvo reliability or longevity.
My experience of Volovs of the era was that they were not as reliable as their aficionados like to claim but when they did break, they were really easy to diagnose or fix. The big exception, of course, to this was the dreaded Volvo heater fan motor, which was really a face-palm kind of design.
The DLs in particular were very simple cars: no power widows, the BW automatic was practically impossible to kill. Compared to Detroit stuff they were good cars but they were never, ever, cheap.
You know there are plenty of japanese car repair businesses as well.
The 240s were durable but not necessarily reliable. My wife and I had a base 1980 2-door DL, which was bought used in 1982 with 31K miles and sold in 2003 with about 245K miles. There were niggling little problems along the way, but the only repairs costing over $200 were for the fuel distributor (about $500) and the infamous heater blower fan motor (about $400) — WAY better than the new 1990 Mercury Sable that became our primary driver.
Rust and electrical problems eventually did it in, although I was able to sell it to a new owner, rather than having it scrapped.
The car had no power steering, no a/c, and only a 4-speed manual (no electric overdrive for a 5th gear). After one stifling summer, we had the dealer install a/c (all DLs at the time came from the factory sans a/c, so we were getting the same unit all a/c-equipped DLs had at the time).
As I recall, the 5-speed overdrive became standard in 1981, power steering in 1982, and factory a/c in 1985.
This example in Eugene is in remarkable condition — no visible rust and the driver door map pocket, made of hard plastic right where you’d easily kick it with your foot when getting out of the car, appears to be intact. I went through several of these by buying junkyard parts and painting them as necessary.
Volvos of that era developed big rust holes in the sheet metal just behind the rear wheels, in front of the mudflaps in the salt belt
If Volvo 240s were such great sedans, then why did Sweden’s police use Plymouth Valiants during the ’70s instead?
In contrast, the Falls Church, VA police used Volvo 240s in the mid or late 80s. Not coincidentally, Don Beyer Volvo was a major dealer in this small DC suburb.
I’m from Virginia. Some corruption is so overt that people have to develop calluses on their myopia.
I grew up around the (Tyson’s) corner in Vienna – made plenty of trips to the Don Beyer Volvo parts counter fixing up my 122S and dad’s 144.
Well, they did use 240’s. In fact, the police community have a long standing agreement with Volvo even to this day. There was a very famous engineer at Volvo that walked at great length to specially equip the cars to the needs and requests of the police. All that experience made Volvo a good provider of police cars not only for Sweden, but also for the rest of Europe. They export a lot of police cars to the UK, among other countries.
But yes, the Valiants were famous in Sweden for being one of the most loved squad cars of all time by the Swedish police force. No V8’s though, I think the slant six was mandatory. At the time, the Volvo 140 and Saab 99 was seen as too small for serious police work, even if they had a lot of Volvos. There simply wasn’t a large Swedish car on the market that suited the needs of the police force as well as the Valiant did during those years.
Most cars were Volvos, though. 240’s, 740’s, 940’s. All sedans. Beginning with the 850’s, they only bought wagons. First gen Saab 900 sedans was also used, in smaller quantities. No 9000’s, but beginning with the 9-5, they seemed to alternate between the 9-5 wagon and the Volvo V70. During the 60’s and 70’s, they even had some Porsches, for high speed pursuit.
And to me, a police car should be black and white. There simply aren’t a more menacing color combination. Instantly recognizable. Here’s a photo of a 240 black and white, as I remember them from my childhood.
http://i28.tinypic.com/t8qb13.jpg
I was mostly kidding around, as the Valiants stopped production in 1976. They did have a very good reputation with the Swedish police though, which suggests they were better than other cars that the police used.
Funny about your color preferences. As a kid visiting Sweden several times (in the eighties) I thought those 900’s and 240’s looked sharp in their multi-colored livery.
Like this:
Probably because the Valiants cost a lot less.
Considering they were CKD assembled locally and modified in some unusual ways, I doubt they were actually meaningfully cheaper than Volvos in Sweden. They were considered unique in their ability to withstand the abuses of cops, which suggests that other car were not similarly robust.
…because they could be had with V8’s?
Having read the rest of the comments, I guess not. I was remembering the way my 1976 Dart Pursuit handled, I suppose.
My mom had a 1984(?) 240 turbo wagon. I remember some odd things about it, like the fact that the outboard rear seats tilted inwards a bit, because the wheel-wells intruded on the back rest. That was obnoxious. Much better to spend long trips in a sleeping-bag in the way-back, fighting with my little brother.
I love the idea of the car much more than the execution. My mom’s car always suffered from some sort of little gremlin–until the day the brakes failed. If you buy a car for safety, you can put with a lot of stuff, but not brake failure. It was swiftly replaced with a rock-solid Camry wagon.
Once summer when home from school, I borrowed an out-of-town friend’s 1984 240 DL to get around town. By then, I had gotten used to Japanese V6 engines, so this turd-brown automatic-transmission brick was so-bad-it’s-funny on the highways. It’s a good thing I had snagged myself a girlfriend before picking up that car! On the plus side, I was able to perform miracles of parallel parking thanks to its 2-foot (more or less) turning radius. I’d still like a 240 as a city car: easy to park, big black bumpers, and no blind spots to hide idiot-drunk-college-student-pedestrians.
The North Shore Valiant as they are known in Sydney
In 1974 when gas prices spiked, my dad went shopping for a fuel efficient car. He had heard about Volvo cars so he priced one out. I remember his shock when a Volvo 244DL with overdrive (and nothing else, not even a radio) stickered at $8000. That is $37,000 in today’s money, a lot for a poorly equipped car. He reasoned an expensive Volvo would rust almost as fast as cheap Corolla, so he got the Corolla for $2500, or $11,000 in today’s money. We had to Toyota for eleven years, so seems he made the right decision from a financial point of view.
Volvo indeed made good cars but their volume was so low they had to have high prices to build in quality. This in turn severely limited how many cars they could sell. In 1975 there was a good argument that a Volvo was the safest car on the road but by 1990 there were many good, safe cars around. Kind of meant the writing was on the wall for Volvo, as evidenced by their sale to Ford.
I have driven lots of old Volvos. They are strong, tough cars. They are also ponderous and slow. I don’t think I could ever stand one as a daily driver.
You raise some great points. Our 1980 Volvo, purchased for $8000 (in the US) as a 2-year-old used car, cost MORE than it did when new (about $7700 MSRP as I recall), due to rampaging inflation at the time. A new 1982 model started at about $12,000. We wanted a bigger, safer car than the tiny first-generation VW Rabbit we had at the time, because we had two young sons.
Volvo 240s were indeed strong, tough, ponderous, and S-L-O-W. At least ours had a manual transmission and a dealer-installed tachometer. The tight turning circle was much appreciated though.
By 1990, when my wife wanted a driver airbag, we had only a limited choice among affordable midsize/large cars — Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable, Olds Delta 88, and Dodge Dynasty, plus the more expensive Volvo 240 and even more costly Volvo 740. The 240 was rejected out of hand because we considered it outdated by that time. The 740 was too expensive. We settled on the Sable — great-looking car, and decently reliable until it hit the 65K mile mark, and then the problems started…
The Sable soldiered on for 10 years and 135K miles, but the Volvo was kept 3 years longer — until 2003, because it didn’t surprise us with $300+ repairs every time you thought you had the car fixed.
Sure, compared to America stuff of the era, Volvos were relatively reliable. The thing is when the Japanese started making really good stuff circa 1990, people like myself got used to the exceptional reliability of said cars. Volvo had lost its claim to fame and itself saw the writing on the wall.
It wasn’t long ago that regular repairs were a fact of used car ownership. Many people have forgotten that.
Neighbor had a late 70s early 80s 2 door. The wiring harness was bio-degradable to the point that the sheathing delaminated from the wires and he ended up dumping it after 4 or 5 years. From the outside it looked great, he always took care of his cars but the evil lurked underneath. He replaced the Volvo with a Rabbit. He said he should have kept the Volvo.
Yes, Volvos were built in Halifax from 1963 until the end of 1998 (it was Volvo’s sole North American assembly plant ever…). The Wikipedia article is a bit mistaken about the opening of the larger final plant, as Bayers Lake (industrial park) did not exist until the 1990’s. The plant location that was in operation the longest was right on Halifax harbour in the city’s north end.
Interesting tidbit…..in the sixties (I believe), the company had occasion (for some reason) to scrap a bunch of cars. So they simply dumped them in Bedford Basin, just north of the plant. Some thirty years later, the Bedford Institute of Oceanography was doing a side-scan sonar mapping project of the entire basin and harbour regions. Turns out, the distinctive outlines of several Volvos were still visible on the bottom of the basin…!!
Also, there were some attempts to promote the use of Volvos as police cars in Halifax, but I think they were not popular with HPD due to the lack of interior space in the front seats as compared to the typical American full-sizers. The mayor always seemed to be driving one in those years, though..!!
A superb design and very under estimated .I ran an old 240 auto for 11 years and it did everything you could ever expect from a car I would love to own another one now.
They weren’t THAT slow. If you compare a base 240DL with an automatic, and say, a pre-1990 Accord with an automatic, you’ll find that they’re both about as quick as one another, but the Volvo is a lot more relaxed and torquey. They also are more fun to drive, thanks to steering which has actual heft to go along with feel.
The 240 was quite dated when discontinued in 1993, but old Volvos were luxury cars in their own way. Spartan and dated, certainly, and also inefficient and somewhat crudely built, but until the very late ’80s and early ’90s, they outclassed their more precisely assembled, efficient and chic Japanese rivals in road manners, comfort and substance. Their 740/940 successors were lateral moves and not any meaningful improvement to most buyers. They weren’t any safer, they weren’t much more comfortable, they weren’t any faster (sans turbo) and they handled only a little bit better.
By the time Volvo got with the program with the 850, RWD was back in favor for posh cars and the cheaper competition was beginning to make safe cars also.
Perry, I’m going to have to kindly disagree with your assessment about old Volvos.
I own a 1991 740 that’s non-turbo. I actually enjoy its 13-second 0-60 time. In fact, I love its slowness to the point that I’m always smiling every time I try to pass something on the highway!
I agree that they aren’t that slow. I’m able to keep up with highway traffic and merge just fine in my 98hp ’82 242. I always get a kick out of people insisting they need 200+ hp to be safe these days.
I don’t agree that the 740/940’s were a lateral move though. They were a lot more modern than the 140/240 in many ways: structurally, safety-wise, electrically, and they were a lot more rust-proof. I mean, they almost NEVER rust (and I live in New England). The did have the good old b230 engine though, so I guess that’s pretty lateral.
Thanks for posting this Tom!
I still daily drive an ’82 242 with about 230k miles on it. I’m a little confused about some of these comments about their reliability. 30 years out, this car still continues to be really reliable. And mine’s been a New England car its entire life. I spend more time and money fixing rust related problems then I do fixing mechanical problems.
I will someday however have to address the rotting wiring harness. Mine’s still in pretty good shape though.
Funny how some people claim that older Volvo’s were not that reliable to them and others claim that they were dead solid. Makes one wonder…
It’s strange to see cloth seats in a Volvo, I guess I have always found vinyl in the ones I have owned. I sure wish I could get those hubcaps for my 245!
Dude… so boss… tweed seats 😀 brilliant idea!!!!!!!
I bought an 82 244 DL used, thinking it would be solid and reliable. It was solid but not reliable. It had been mistreated by the former owner, coming to me with a cracked head and a nasty case of piston slap. I pulled the engine and had it overhauled, and replaced the cylinder head with a good one from a wrecking yard.
At one time or another during the 40,000 miles I owned it, something was always acting up. The overdrive solenoid on the transmission, a couple of water pumps, an assortment of little problems that drove me nuts. Good thing I was mechanically inclined and could do my own repairs. I called this one my Swedish Harlot.
I sold it to my brother with about 110K miles on it, with full disclosure of all its ills. He was the type to just drive it with all the small issues unresolved, and that he did for another 100K or so (the odometer broke). He finally traded it in with a steaming radiator, an automatic that was permanently stuck in 3rd gear among other maladies.
This did not stop me from buying a 95 960 (50K miles) when my daughter was of driving age. That car went through two teenage drivers and over 100K of our ownership with just cosmetic issues. That thing was a trooper.
1982 B21F CI INJECTION 4SPD. W/O.D. LOOKS LIKE TURBO W/ WHEELS 380,000 miles original radiator, engine, transmission, driveline,
Are you the original owner of that car?
I have owned 9 240’s and found them to be extremely reliable, fun to drive once aftermarket sway bars were installed, easy to repair, comfortable and a great investment. All but one were sold for more than I paid. I probably drove close to 500,000 miles in 240’s and was only left stranded once, when an air mass meter quit.
As long as the cars are maintained properly, the only fragile components were air mass meters and fuel pump relays. Both are often carried by 240 drivers as spares in the trunk and take less than 15 minutes to replace at the road side. The AC fan is problematic, but typically takes about 15 years to wear out, and yes, it is a pain to replace. The AC system is easily upgraded with Ford Explorer components to where it’ll turn the inside of the car into a deep freeze.
Additionally, the engines are extremely easy to modify for improved performance. For about $400 you can put a hot cam and high flow exhaust and gain about 30 horsepower, and about 5 mpg. Professional tuners get 250+ hp out of the B23 engine easily and they remain bulletproof.
After 1986, the cars were zinc-dipped so that pretty much eliminated the rust problem, except in salty climates.
I sold my last 245 with close to 200,000 miles to a jazz musician in Austin, and he is still driving it and has had no problems at all.
A very reliable source for these cars is Classics Corral in Eugene, Oregon. They advertise on Craigslist in Eugene regularly and often have nicely reconditioned 240s at reasonable prices.
My family has had a couple of good Volvos and some bad ones.
Really good: 1979 Volvo 244DL. Canadian, so carb’ed 2.1L I4 with a 4-speed manual. Baby poo yellow. Never had a problem you couldn’t ignore. Brown cloth seats were ugly but so comfortable I wish I could transplant them to my current car (a VW Golf). It went (probably) 80,000km with us for almost 10 years. We bought it as a 2-year car for $700. Driven everywhere, even on trails you would have sworn would take a truck. Solid as a rock, right to the end, even when crashed into ditches and garage doors. Good mileage for a brick, and the total parts expenditure on that one (besides oil changes), was probably less than $250.
Good: 1982 Volvo 245DL. Carb’ed 2.1L I4 with 4-speed overdrive manual. Blue-ish in spots. Bought for $450 with 450,000km on the clock, because we were desperate. It came with the full set of instruments, including an outside temperature display. The overdrive would switch on and off all the time. We only took this one 40,000km, but it moved our house’s stuff, and never left us stranded anywhere. It overheated once, and we removed the thermostat and kept driving it. This hauled like a truck. Nasty sticky vinyl upholstery, though. Parts? 1 U-joint.
Mediocre: 1980 Volvo 244GL. 2.1 I4 carb with overdrive automatic. Silver. $400. This car ran spongily, for a year. The manual sunroof was interesting. Power windows: ooooo. A working factory cassette deck. No parts replaced, or even notable problems. Then it ran out of oil.
Bad: exactly the same as above. The strut went through the hood about 100km after it was bought. I didn’t even see it running. That was it for Volvos. Back to Toyotas and Hondas, with a few Fords and GMs for interest.
My favourite feature of Volvos is the seats. The most comfortable for me ever.
Exasperating: The odometer never works consistently.
Reliability: Good for a few years (or in a rare case, almost a decade), then you dump $800-$2000 in them and they’re good to go for about 7-8 years on average. They rust from the wheels out.
I’d have one again in a heartbeat.
I’ve a 1979 Volvo DL244. Mustard yellow with round front light lenses. Safe like a tank and reliable. I’m the second owner of this car since 1994 (the 1st owner also lived in San Diego) and am trying to sell it to a person who can appreciate this car. (My husband bought a car that can tow a trailer so we’re starting to run out of room).
What doesn’t work:
Odometer
AC
Radio (connection problem?)
Any advice where to best sell this car would be welcome.
Thank you!