Daughter and son-in-law have '92 240 sedan. It now has 200K miles and in good shape. They see an opportunity to replace it with a '98 S70 with 280K miles. Likely these miles are mostly from highway driving. Asking price is $2000. I've not seen the S70. I'm not very familiar with the S70 model. I may take the 240, bringing the driveway up to three Volvos and another make/model for just two drivers. I do alot of my own work on the current 245 and 760 and have a number of parts for a '92. I don't think that this couple has the time or patience to keepup the '92 240 and they might see the S70 as a car requiring less attention. All cars are NC so I would not expect rust or other environmental blemishes.

So, any opinions comparing the two models with respect to these circumstances? In general, does the S70 have a positive reputation for reliability?

I guess that means there will not be a new 240 in the neighborhood. See you around.

You wrote, "I don't think that this couple has the time or patience to keepup the '92 240 and they might see the S70 as a car requiring less attention." But then you said the S70 they are considering has 280K. This does not make any sense at all. Any car at 280 k is an old, well-used machine and will need all sorts of ongoing maintenance, even a Volvo.

Perhaps it would be best to stay with the '92 240 with 200K miles than a 6 year newer '98 S70 with 280K miles. The high mileage does give one pause. A front wheel drive is appealing though. They might sense fewer nuances in a car that is 6 years younger.

Ironically, the 240 with RWD is probably a little better in snow than the S70. A 240 with good tires is pretty incredible in snow.

I'd avoid that particular S70. 280K miles on those cars is pretty rare, aftermarket parts are fewer and further between. Dealing with these cars at that mileage is pretty much an unknown. Could be great... maybe not.

A newer, more comfy car, while still "cheap" to maintain and reliable would/could be a nice 940... a little more robust than the 240, though the 240 at 200K miles is still a puppy.\

I dunno... they say stick with the devil you know. People usually tend to part with cars when they have problems they don't want to pay to fix.

-Ryan
--

Athens, Ohio
1987 245 DL 314k, Dog-mobile
1990 245 DL 134k M47, E-codes, GT Sway Bars
1991 745 GL 300k, Regina, 23/21mm Turbo Sway Bars
Buckeye Volvo Club

if they think they can slack off more on maintenance with this 280k s70, maybe you should let them buy it and have them learn the lesson.

I'm thinking that their '92 240 has a number of nuances and the attraction of a 6 year newer car may not presently share those same detractions. Perhaps the perception of Volvos reputation for "bullet proof" motors may minimize the '98 S70s high mileage of 280K versus the 240s 200K miles.

Do you know anything about the high mileage reputation of the S70 five cylinder?

i suggest you read the 700/900 FAQ under "buying a used 7xx/9xx". especially toward the bottom of the page.

I just read the FAQ you referenced. Thanks. Minutes before logging on, daughter called and said they inspected the S70 and drove it. Per the FAQ, the AC had been replaced. Car has 220K and not 280K miles. Engine had been cleaned. That raises suspicions. They decided to pass on this and stick with the 240 a while longer.

I say stick with the 240. My '89 just reached 321K miles yesterday and runs really well. I commute 120 miles each weekday and we just took it from CT to Philadelphia and back, fully loaded with stuff on the trip down.
--
Sven: '89 245 NA, 951 ECU, expanded air dam, forward belly pan reaches oem belly pan, airbox heater upgraded, E-fan, 205/65-15 at 50 psi, IPD sways, no a/c-p/s belt, E-Codes, amber front corner reflectors, aero front face, quad horns, tach, small clock.

That's the right choice. Been there done that. Besides the rear main seal there would be numerous and haunting electrical gremlins.