|
|
|
I'm getting back into Volvos. My usual car was the 240, which I've done work on myself, but my family needs an automatic and we would like a wagon.
I just found a deal for $850 on a '95 Volvo 945 with a sunroof, 235k miles, and original owners. It failed smog in 2016, then passed in 2016, but is overdue for another smog (also required prior to sale). The clearcoat paint is peeling big time on the roof and hood.
I'm unfamiliar with the 940s, so I'd appreciate any tips.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Had a 91 240 for many years of which I just upgraded to a very nice
well taken care of (always serviced by Volvo) 940. Very pleased. Much
smoother quieter and comfortable driving machine than the 240. A very
noticeable difference between the two. Also roomier. Best fortune. Dominic
|
|
-
|
|
|
hi,
i went through a similar experience as you are now. each model has it's peculiarities.
some things i learned, sorry if there's any duplication with others.
1. check/read faq in bb.
2. look for rust, i believe the faq has a list of areas prone to rust.
3. a vacuum bellow for the vent/defrost/floor tends to fail, but the replacement servo motor is no longer sold. i replaced mine a few years back but the new one failed shorter than the original.
i think i found replacement bellows and i posted a while back.
4. the 940 has 2 different kinds of fuel and ignition systems. bosch and rex/regina. a bit bizarre for 2 systems, and i have the rex/regina.
5. my clear coat failed too, but had it painted some years back and it's still looking great.
6. have a source for spare parts, i'm going to get the blower resistor and fan from a local yard here. suggest you get one too.
7. suspension is a bit different from a 240. i bought the volvo engine mounts.
8. the volvo radiator has a side plug for a fan thermistor switch. the rubber plug sometimes fails and leaks the fluid. get a couple of those as spares, and replace if you are not sure about age. maybe some 940 aftermarket radiators don't have that side plug.
9. the windshield trim is different, not rubber.
10. the visors tend to fail on these.
11. NA models range in years 91-95. in europe, they lasted until 98. so these cars are getting harder to find for parts. you can look at ebay germany, etc for parts. shipping can be expensive.
i only bought a 940 with a good interior; i can repair the rest. i got a great deal, too, and have been looking for a number of years before i bought one.
good cruising car, and has a big trunk. my 4th appears to be burned up, but i'm going to try to swap the 4th gear (overdrive) with another tranny i bought. mine is an aw71l.
great engines (late model b230f), best suspension, lots of vision all-around, smooth running car.
it had some issues that took some time to diagnose, such as the rough idle during damp days. i thought it was a lot of things until i sprayed some electric-dry or something like that in the distributor cap.
since i was new to rex/regina, i attributed some problems to that system, wrongly.
upgrade to euro-glass headlights, but if you have standard lights, you will need to get the grill and some parts from a junker with the foglights in the front. depending on the light setup, these have 2 different-sized grills.
and as always, you have experienced brixters right here at no extra charge! always good people here to help you keep your volvo rolling.
regards,
byron golden
86 245
92 245
94 940
|
|
-
|
|
|
Started out on 240's, a couple 740's and a 940. One thing I really like is how solid the geometry of the front suspension on the 7's and 9's is. Tighter than my 960. I've grown to like the chassis over the 240's. I'd still go for another 240 if the right one would come along.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Thanks to both of you for your thoughtful replies.
Where can I find a link to the transmissions used in the 940s?
Is the transmission the same in the 940, ie an AW-7x?
If not, is the transmission interchangeable with an AW-7x?
|
|
-
|
|
|
https://www.brickboard.com/FAQ/700-900/TransmissionAuto.htm
Lots of other good stuff in FAQ/700-900
--
Mine:3-940s running, 1-740, 2-940 parts, dtrs:4-940s running
|
|
-
|
|
|
Thanks.
I read the link. The 940 4 cylinder N/A seems to take an AW-72L. Are the AW-70 and AW-71 interchangeable, such that I can put one of those into the 940?
|
|
-
|
|
|
Dear 1908242DLa,
Hope you're well. Most 940s sold in the U.S. came with an Aisin-Warner 71 transmission. Most normally-aspirated (non-turbo) cars came with the AW71L transmission. The "L" designates a locking torque converter, which feature improves fuel mileage. Most cars with turbo-equipped engines were not factory-equipped with an AW71 transmission, that had a locking torque converter.
While these transmissions (AW71 and AW71L) may interchange, I'd advise against that. Volvo engineers got most things right. Thus, I'd not second-guess them on transmission specification.
Further, these trannies seems to be quite durable, so long as the fluid is changed every 50K miles. Rarely does one read on this Board of a AW-71 transmission failure.
Hope this helps.
Yours faithfully,
Spook
|
|
-
|
|
|
The AW72 (the L indicates lock-up torque converter) is meant for the 16 valve version of the red block. A difference between it and the 70/71 is in the gearing. -- Dave
|
|
-
|
|
|
Does that mean that an AW-71 or AW-72 will or won't work in a 1995 940?
|
|
-
|
|
|
A 70 or 71 will bolt in - use the torque converter (and be careful that the ignition timing "cage"--can't think of the correct term at the moment--is the same as the one on the 72 torque converter) that comes with either. If the motor in the '95 940 NA is a 16 valve the gear ratios will not be ideal--you may lose low speed performance (or get more), highway cruising rpm may be higher or lower (I don't recall the specific differences) and gas mileage may either suffer - or go up. - Dave
|
|
-
|
|
|
Thanks.
Just to be clear, the non-Ls are interchangeable with other non-Ls, the Ls are interchangeable with other Ls, right?
Are there any computers/check engine light issues with that vintage car to deal with when doing the above?
Thanks
|
|
-
|
|
|
Non-L transmissions are interchangeable - but as I explained, gear ratios for a 70 or 71 are different than a 72. As for the "L" -- Volvo didn't use any electronics for the lock-up feature--it's all done mechanically in the torque converter as far as I know.
I don't know if there are any computer/check engine light issues involved.- Dave
|
|
-
|
|
|
Dear 1908242DLa,
Hope you're well. If the original owners have the maintenance records - which show oil changes at regular intervals and no over-heatings - this car may be worth having.
With time - which you may not have - low-mileage (under 100K) 940s can be found. I'd seek such a car, so long as it did not "live" in a northern state, where salt is used as snow-melt. Florida can be a good source of such a car.
Once you find a qualifying car, supply the last six or seven digits of the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) to Volvo dealer service departments near where the car "lived". The service department should be able to tell you if there are maintenance records.
Given privacy concerns, be very clear you seek no information about the owner, but just want to know if the oil was changed regularly. An owner, who made sure that the oil was changed regularly, likely made sure that other maintenance was done on time.
Hope this helps.
Yours faithfully,
Spook
|
|
-
|
|
|
Thanks.
About your recommendation of less than 100k miles, I don't understand why. On the 240 thread, they don't seem to care about mileage on those cars. The second half of the 240 generation used the same engine, B230F.
Thanks
|
|
-
|
|
|
Dear 1908242DLa,
Hope you're well. A car is more than its engine (and tranny). A car made in 1995 is about 23 years old. Parts deteriorate with time and mileage. Thus, a 1995 car with 100K miles is likely to have fewer things that need fixing, than is a 1994 car with 235K miles, presuming both cars "lived" in the same general area and were driven the same way (e.g., highway versus in-town miles).
An example may be helpful. The factory-supplied, limited-use spare tire in a 1995 car - even if this tire never once touched the ground - is not safe to use. Rubber deteriorates with time. If it is used, a 25-year-old-tire is a disaster waiting to happen. It could disintegrate without warning. Many tire shops won't mount any tire, that is more than ten years old.
A car that lived in the "rustbelt" is more likely to have corrosion than is a car that lived in inland Florida. A car that was garaged, is more likely to have a finish in sound condition than is car that was never garage-kept.
Hope this helps.
Yours faithfully,
Spook
|
|
-
|
|
|
940's are among the handful of truly great and durable rear wheel drive automobiles ever manufactured.
imo having owned multiples of both 240 and 940 cars the 940 vastly exceeds the 240 in every respect
a friend of mine with 35 years of professional tow company experience tells me of all the cars on the road volvos and subarus are towed the least.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Thanks.
What are the advantages, if any, of a 940 over a 240 of the late 1980s to early 1990s?
Are 940s filled with more computers and other things that can go wrong compared to, say a 1988 or 1991 240?
Does the 1995 have OBD-II? If it's an OBD-i, how do I evaluate check engine lights?
Thanks
|
|
-
|
|
|
OBD-1 with underhood diagnostic read out boxes like a 91 240 (I owned a 90).
940's are slightly more complex than 240's but share the same/very similar major mechanicals.
Most noticable difference is that they are a superior road car. Yes, more luxury but also a better road car. Improved ride, handling, comfort and power (with turbo).
I agree with trying to find a low mileage car. Fewer problems and the car might still be tight. However, I once almost bought a 93 940 turbo with over 300k. It was well maintained and drove great! Maintenance is the key for longevity whether it be a 240 or a 940. Expect to spend some money on any car with more than 150-200k on it.
|
|
-
|
|
|
Thanks.
I saw another Volvo (1988 240 DL), but here's the problem. Seller bought slightly over 1 month ago, smogged it (passed), but never registered it. He claims he paid $1,500 and that it's insured. I have the same insurance company and they require that the title be in my name AND I insure it within 30 days of purchase, or they won't cover me. Am I being obsessive, or is there a red flag with this seller?
Also, I just found a 1992 940GL with reportedly 107k miles with reportedly a clean title and pics showing clean interior and partial pics of the body that look good. I don't have further details, esp smog check status. However, a poor resolution pic shows an Oct 2015 tag, meaning it's non-op and not street legal.
Advantages: it's closer to where I live, about 30 minutes on public trans (the 945 that's the subject of this post is a two hour train ride, because I'm the only person in the family who can legally drive right now).
Obviously, the mileage is more than twice as much with the 945 (235k), but the 945 is a wagon and $150 cheaper at $850 OBO (it's been unsold for nearly two weeks and I suspect that few would buy a 945 with peeling clear coat and 235k miles, so I might get a REALLY good deal).
I'd like, but absolutely don't have to have, a station wagon. Durability and reliability are the most important (along with an automatic)
All things equal (and they rarely are), is it better to buy that lower mileage, 3 year older 940GL, or, as other posts imply, the engine itself is so durable that 107k vs 235k is not an issue?
|
|
-
|
|
|
Having run a 240 to 300K+ and an 850 to 250k+ the engines can go to high mileages if maintained. The problem is the rest of the car! Other parts get tired and wear out. I would go with the lower mileage car if you can do it. Are you in California? Is that why smog is such a big issue? Here in MA any car more than 15 years old doesn't have to meet pollution standards when inspected. Just a safety inspection.
One other thing. Whether you buy a 240 or 940 (even heavier) wagon with an automatic, with the whole family aboard the car will be dangerously slow when merging into traffic. A genuine concern - IMHO. Don't be afraid of a turbo if you find a well maintained one. Those are strong, reliable turbos in the later 940's.
|
|
-
|
|
|
The car is registered in California.
|
|
|
|
|
