Checking out a 1991 940 turbo did not go yet but I am only a 240 owner! Person told me the turbo sounds loud..... Does that mean the turbo is going?? What happens when it needs to be replaced! How is the cost? And can the car be used with no problems without it?? Personally I do not need turbo. Also it has 125,000 miles normally on my 240 that is just breaking in. Also is the engine the same as the 240??? I need something that will go300 400 thousand like the ones I own. What else about the 940 is the same , what are the weakness if a 940....... Also what would you recommend another 249 or an850 with front wheel drive? Thanks for the help lynn

We have owned 4 740s - the last a '90 744 TI.

As for handling, the '90 Turbo was much nimbler than the wagons or the base sedan.

At one time we had - '95 855 base, '95 854 base, '96 855R, and the '90 744 TI.

We had 4 drivers. mom. dad, and two daughters.

The 744 TI was always the first car out of the yard, even when I drove!

With half-worn snow tires, I could drift it around an oval 1/4 mile round rotary!

We all loved that car, but one of my daughters leased a new Subaru when she got a job and lived out of town, with no AC, the '90 had to go.

the new owner drove Evander until 275k when I lost track of him.

You check for if the turbo is going out by checking for play in its bearings (there should be some) and scrape marks or broken/bent fins on the compressor wheel.

If you don't want a turbo, my advice would be don't get a turbo. It is necessary for the car to function, unless you replace the exhaust manifold and the downpipe for the exhaust.

They DO tend to be quite durable, and a water-cooled turbo should last several hundred thousand miles provided it gets fresh oil and is maintained.

The engine is the same as SOME 240's, but not most. 125,000 miles is rather low mileage, and if the price is good, I would personally be all over it.

My car is a turbo, and it has been reliable for the most part (only stranded me twice in 10 years, once at home). I just rolled over 300,000 miles, HOWEVER the B2xx engines are prone to engine damage when overheated. The car came with an engine from a different year (2nd engine), then my parents blew it up by overheating it and cracked the block - they repaired that, then I screwed up a thermostat change and finished off the engine. I still drove it a few miles to the store and work with a bad head gasket for 6 months.

Now it has a rather nice 94 B230FT out of a 940T, and it's pretty sweet. A 1991 does not have the nifty oil squirters (referred to as an L-block) to cool the pistons, but that's not critical.


All that said, I would not want a non-turbo 240 or 740 or 940. They're just not fun enough for me to be happy (and feel safe) driving them.


As for recommending a 240 vs an 850.... I hate FWD so I wouldn't recommend the 850 to most people. They had problems with ABS pumps, transmissions, and AC. They also have a lot more things crammed into a smaller space than 2/7/900's. 240 problems are well known and documented and they're been around forever. I'd get a 94 850 over a 79 240, but any 240 newer than an 88 would suit me better than an 850.


Good luck!

I have a '91 945 SE and an '89 745GL. There are a lot of similarities in the cars. I do like the turbo better, generally, but I live in the DC metro area and it comes in handy getting on the freeways with short ramps. I did have to replace the transmission because I tried to accelerate at the same time it was shifting and it blew it out. The transmission on the 745 is the locking transmission and I have never had a problem with it, just the mounts, which is common. My old '84 242dl was completely different (B23F instead of the B230F or B230FT.) I like the interior in the 945 much better, but not so much the roundness of the exterior. I bought the 745 in 2003 with under 125k miles and now have over 239k on it. The 945 I got from my sister(2nd owner)in 2010 with 215k on it, but is was down for 3 months after an accident and 9 months waiting to get the transmission replaced (used). It has over 234k now. I'm not a big fan of the FWD, but my sis had a xc70 and now has a v70 and likes them.

Just a quick note that some of the parts on the 940 Turbo are pricier and a little hard to find than the non-turbo. The radiator hoses, for example, that are unique to the turbo (expansion tank hose, lower radiator hose) were out of stock at Tasca, IPD, the Volvo dealership, Napa, etc. -- only FCP could get them to me in short order. They also were pricier than the non-turbo counterparts. I love the 94 940 turbo I recently acquired, but it isn't as easy to get parts for as my old non-turbo 740. Much more fun to drive, though!

Maintenance is key. Does the car have a service history at a reputable shop? If it's an owner serviced car has he been using high quality parts and fluids?

I've had 35 or so Volvos over the years, from early 60s up to an '05 V50, and currently have both a '92 245 and a '92 945 turbo. They're both great cars, though different. A 940 will never feel as nimble as a 240, even with a full IPD suspension. The 940 is bigger, heavier, more luxurious, and has a more modern wiring system. The 940 has a poorly designed heater control valve, and a poorly located heater core. Make sure the front carpet in the footwells is dry. Crank the heat up and make sure there isn't an odor of coolant.

The 940 is more refined at highway speeds. I mostly drive the 940 these days, though I really do like getting back in the 240--it's like a breath of fresh air. The 940 is a very nice car, but, even with a full IPD suspension, Bilsteins and an M46 swap, you're still more isolated from what the car's doing than in a 240.

Assuming it's a properly maintained car don't worry about longevity--it being a 940 instead of a 240, or a turbo instead of a non-turbo, doesn't make a big difference IMO. Mine's a low mileage example, but a good buddy of mine is cruising around in a '91 945 turbo with 400k+ on its original motor, turbo, tranny, etc.

Dear Lynn,

Hope you're well. Whether or not a turbo is essential depends on the kind of driving you do and how you do it. If you drive mainly on highways, with limited room to merge, then a turbo can provide helpful acceleration and may betimes be a true life-saver. If you enjoy being able to "jack-rabbit" away from another car, then a turbo can be helpful. Finally, if you live in area wherein survival may depend on rapid acceleration, e.g., to escape a machine-gun toting motorcyclist, then a turbo is well worth having. Absent these, a normally-aspirated engine should suffice.

The key to buying any used car is to get the service records, especially those relating to oil changes. If an owner ensured that the oil was changed on schedule, it is less likely that such an owner neglected other things. If an owner did not get the oil changed regularly, it is likely that other things were neglected. Without service records, you will need to replace items - e.g., radiator, heater hoses, and radiator hoses - because failure of these items not only strands you, but may lead to over-heating and an immediate or early headgasket replacement.

If a 940 is what you want seek a '94 or '95 model. Be advised that on the '95 940s, you will need to replace the door panels, with those from an earlier 940 or a 740. The reason: the adhesive used to attach the covering to the substrate fails, allowing the covering to "bunch-up" at the top edge. This does not make the panel unserviceable, but it is unsightly.

The 940s share with the later 240s, the B230F engine and the Aisin-Warner trannies (AW71). Both of these units - with on-time maintenance - will last for 300 or 400K miles, or more. One simply changes oil and coolant (engine) and automatic transmission fluid (tranny). None of these things is especially hard or costly to do.

Hope this helps.

Yours faithfully,

Spook

The 940s share with the later 240s, the B230F engine and the Aisin-Warner trannies (AW71)

True Spook. It occurs to me to say, 'and almost Nothing else'. Seats, glass, shocks, front brakes (rear brake pads and rotors do), bushings, electrics, none of it interchanges.

What year is the 240? Many of the important parts may be the same.

I would say look for a 94 or 95 without a turbo or sunroof

--
89 240 wagon, 94 940, 200K, 94 940, 135K

The "turbo whine-or whistle" can be heard under normal circumstances. Has the owner been driving the car a long time--so as to determine that it is louder than before---or is he just making a comment on his perception without comparison. A turbo going bad will cause the motor to burn oil. At it's worst, clouds of oil smoke will follow the car. The turbo can be checked (when cold) by removing the intake hose - stick you finger in and see if the impeller spins freely-then see if it has any play in the shaft (side to side, up and down). There should be virtually none - at least in a new or rebuilt. I bought a '92 940 turbo needing a cylinder head - car had 167k - I bought it figuring it would need a turbo too as the owner (from new) told me he never changed it. It was fine for the 15k I put on it till it got wrecked while parked. Turbos are rebuildable--either with individual components or as a finished unit. I haven't priced out the job in many years - might be a range of $800-$1500. It's not really practical to think of driving it with a bad turbo -- see my comment about in the worst case.
The turbo motors are just as sturdy as their NA counterparts - our retired '83 242 turbo had 213k and the motor was still strong--the 245ti I'm driving now is a baby at 142k.
Personally I didn't care for the "largeness", lower seating position and numb handling of the 940--but it was a pleasure to drive on the highway--quiet--got 25mpg with regular gas.
You might want to post a question regarding the 850 models over on the "other" side. I've done some work on one and found most people like them.
My own preference runs to the 240 because it's more like my next favorite-the 140, which is my next favorite to the 122, which is next to my favorite - my first Volvo - a 1965 544 "Sport".
See if you can determine how the car was serviced - turbos and turbo motors are sensitive that way. The use of synthetic oil is best. -- Dave

I've had 16 Volvo's, or is it 17... Since 2001 I've had 7, 7/9 cars, and I would not go back to a 2 unless I had plenty of time and money to do to it what I wanted.
My 93T had 295k on the unrebuilt motor, turbo and trans when I turned it in. It ran great, was quite strong, burned no oil. It had too many other issues like heater core to keep it going. My current 94 and 95T cars run fine but have much lower miles, 140 and 150k.
My own oil choice, Strongly infuenced by others, is Chevron Delo 15/40. I simply never have to clean the throttle body or the breather system any more.

The 7/9 cars are bigger, roomier, nicer, easier to work on, and can handle pretty well if some mods are done.