BrickBoard Archives
The files contained in this listing have been automatically archived from the active forums. Because the vast majority of posts are now in one place, this archive is considered legacy. You should use the SEARCH feature OR choose your topic and select date tabs within the forum you choose.
164's[ALL/1988] posted by Thom Geer on
Friday, 30 January 1998, at 9:06 a.m.
A friend and I have been discussing a 164 as a potential project car. I was wondering the relative difficulty in working on them and their general reliability compared to other volvo's. I have noticed fewer 164 related posts than other models. I assume that is because they are not as common as the 200 series. The current plan is to get 2 or 3 164's locally. all three would cost less than $1000. Then build 1 or 2 useable cars, are the differences in years significant enough that it would be difficult to swap parts/engines?
Any input appreciated
thanks
thom
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Jim Milam on
Friday, 30 January 1998, at 9:45 a.m.
I had a 1975 164E for 13 years and 180K+ miles until my son finally wrecked it. The car was basically bulletproof other than the normal Volvo wiring harness deterioration problems. Never had the head off in the entire time I had it. The only thing that would break on a regular basis was the diaphram in the vacuum pump (for the power brakes). As I recall, the part was less than $10 and it was a really simple fix. It had an automatic and sort of "gathered speed" rather than accelerated, but it would cruise all day long at 90+mph (was in Germany for the first 3 years I had it). Sure do miss that car.
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Mark on
Friday, 30 January 1998, at 1:07 p.m.
I first was exposed to Volvo through my mom's '71 164 automatic. I recall it had twin Strombergs. The car had a slight shimmy when first starting, but the dealer told her (convinced her) that the automatics were mounted on softer rearend bushings and it was not a problem. Turned out it wasn't a problem, and that was the only disagreeable thing about the car. Automatics do "gather speed" as stated in prior post. And gather it they do. Shortly after mom got it, I drove it to work after school. Manager had a "hot" VW that he claimed could beat a 6 cylinder Volvo auto. NOT! Back then, there was a spot on the freeway outside of Portland with an "unofficial" quarter mile and no traffic. When the 164 shifted into 3rd (at about 84 mph), I could barely see him in the review. Don't try this at home!
My brother inherited the car and drove it until 1990, when he traded it in on a new Saab turbo. He was never sure he made a good deal. 164s are great, though I don't know what the part availability is now. Think I'd go for the bullet-proof manual tranny if it was my call. I think they changed the grill on this model during the production. Early ones had a sort of Mercedes type grill with fog lights. I like that style better than later ones.
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Glenn Goodspeed on
Saturday, 31 January 1998, at 10:08 p.m.
My wife owned a '75 164 for several years. It was a fast, well-balanced driver that could cruise at sustained high speeds effortlessly and handle winding back roads with aplomb. It seemed a lot of trouble to maintain, though. The fuel injection system required new seals about every 60,000 miles (a day's work), the automatic transmission was leaky and needed rebuilding every 80,000 miles (expensive), and the brakes needed attention periodically. As in many older Volvos, the air conditioner was effective only on the freeway, and we had to take care not to let the engine overheat while driving around town in the summer.
In spite of its limitations, it was a great car, and if it only had a manual transmission, we'd probably still be driving it.
Goodspeed's Volvo 1800 Newsletter
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Paul Mohney on
Sunday, 1 February 1998, at 2:35 a.m.
I have three 75 164E's I love'em
There are peculiarities to any6 breed. like it has a 4'000# curb weight
and as I chose to run organic pads I do the front brakes about every 6 months
but they are ATE/Girling and there isn't an easier brake system to use this side of dragging your feet,
If you want something to run like a bat from heck, and you have the ambition/
credit/income go ther early 240/IPD route
I personally love my 164's, I am one of about six people in the known world who will actualy admit owning/liking the species.
It is entirely possible thatv a properly maintqined 164 could run forever
Paul in santa ana
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Steve LeFever on
Monday, 2 February 1998, at 2:13 p.m.
I have been attracted to the 164 also. I prefer the pre '73 models sans federal mandated heavy bumpers. I do worry about the injectors. The D-Jetronic units are about $100 apiece and there are six of them.
What's your experience with the injectors? How long do they last on your three cars?
Steve in Orange
3 '65 PV 544's
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Jim Milam on
Monday, 2 February 1998, at 4:48 p.m.
I do remember that leaky injectors was a hassle, but it was fairly simple (and inexpensive) to replace the little rubber hoses on them so it wasn't too big a deal for me. I think I only ever really had to replace 2 injectors over 13 years.
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Glenn Goodspeed on
Monday, 2 February 1998, at 7:54 p.m.
I was not aware that pre-'73 models used fuel injectors. As far as I know, those models used a pair of SU carburetors. -Glenn.
Goodspeed's Volvo 1800 Newsletter
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Jim McDonald on
Monday, 2 February 1998, at 10:03 p.m.
Strombergs, actually.
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Paul Mohney on
Tuesday, 3 February 1998, at 12:50 a.m.
I have been told by people in great authority that these injectors
are not rebuildable , but unles you hit one with a hammer, they'll last nearly forever, The twelve I have in the cars are all OEM as far as I can tell .
As far as the bumpers go I like bumpers lots and lots of bumpers, sort of like a 66 Imperial, which I suspect may weigh more than an entire Ford fieassta
Paul in Santa Ana
Re: 164's[ALL/1988] posted by Stan on
Monday, 2 February 1998, at 12:12 a.m.
Back in the mid 80's I had a 164E and loved it. Mine had the manual transmission with electric(?) overdrive, and it would move very nicely. Acceleration was good and cruising speed was excellent. I used to drive to Nevada frequently and cruise at 100+ with no effort. I used to have to get it tuned up about once a year as it would begin running ragged. If memory serves it had about 180,000 when I sold it, and was still running good, but was due for new injectors in the near future.
This was a comfortable, good handling, excellent running automobile and if you can find a standard transmission with overdrive I think that you'll be happy with it. Best of luck.
Stan
PS. Yes, I wish I still had the 164E!!