Thursday, November 17, 2011

1984 Volvo 244 - A LOW Mileage Example (How Unusual Is That?)

Volvo 240 owners love to brag about their high mileage cars. It's boring. 240s are so well put together and so dependable that high mileage is common. "Yeah, yeah, your car has 475,000 miles on it. So what?"

Here's your chance to do something different... Own a low mileage 240.

This 1984 244 has just 69,560 miles on it. I've heard 240 owners call 200K "break in mileage". What would this be, then? Test drive mileage?

200 Series Volvos are not sexy, but their boxy look has a certain charm to it.

This is an unmolested car. Other than a couple of small dents on the trunk, it looks to be in nice condition.

This is a 27 year old car you could drive everyday with the same confidence you'd drive a 3 year old car. Plus, chances are, when that 3 year old car has already been recycled into soup cans, this Volvo will still be running.

Or, you could just bring it to shows, keep the mileage low and see the reactions of other Volvo 240 owners... "69,000 miles?!? I thought they all left the factory with at least 100K on them..."

Located in Newport, RI, click here to see the Craigslist ad.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

The 240 almost bankrupted Volvo.

Between the amazing longevity, the barely changed parts (cheap, plentiful, not need to be sourced from the dealer), the unchanged styling (pretty hard to tell how current it is for status).

I've heard that the 740 was introduced to lower production costs as well.

If 240s were made out of stainless steel, you'd have to crash them to get rid of em.

Mike Gulett said...

These are great cars. My wife drove a Turbo version for 10 years.

Anonymous said...

Yes, but...

(and I speak as a lifelong owner of Volvo 240s, and the former proprietor of a small business fixing and parting them)

...this is the least desirable 240. Nobody wants sedans. Practical people want a 245 (wagon) and aficionados want a 242 (coupe). Most nuts want stick shifts, and the people who *do* want automatics don't want to crank their own windows.

Further, many things that go bad with any car go bad with years, not miles. On a 240, I'd rather buy a car with 269,000 and a solid service history than this car.

Dan DiBiase said...

I had a 1982 240 Turbo sedan, 4-speed with the electric OD. LOVED that car. Would definitely want a sedan again. Best. Seats. Ever.

Anonymous said...

I'd have to agree with the second anon poster. The 3 speed auto box was a slug, and nobody wants sedans. However, everything can be remedied given enough motivation. I have a '79 245 that I purchased with 59K miles on it, and it was serviced every year at the Volvo dealer. It was an automatic, but I wasn't going to pass up such a rust free cherry car. So I found a rotten GLT and harvested its overdrive manual box and related gubbins, which I then transplanted into my 245. It was not an 'easy' job, but it was very straightforward, as all of the holes are there for both cars. Now, I have the Volvo I want.

I must agree, however, that little used cars can throw up all sorts of problems when they are taken from doing 3K miles a year to 10K or more a year. Prepare to renew the cooling system, heater, brakes, timing belt, and all of the other rubber bits that have survived since 1984. But if its cheap enough, it'll be a helluva car.
-Brian

TsiArt said...

I own 1979 264GL with 2.7l v6 PRV engine and that has only 120000. Cool thing about this motor that if you pop the hood on a 1983 DMC you'll see exact the same engine. It might be different displacement like old Eagle Premier (a.k.a. Peugeot) had the same engine but in 3.0 and different fuel injection/intake manifold.