The B23F and M46 is a nice combo for '83 and '84. In one of those years, I cannot remember which one, the B23F had dished pistons and a higher compression ratio. It was the difference between 107 hp and 114 hp. With the M46, either version of the B23F gives decent performance. Mid-range power is very good. Stomp on it in 3rd at 40 mph and you're doing 65 in the blink of an eye. Gas mileage is probably a smidge better than the B21F as well, if only because the '23F has LH-Jetronic instead of K-Jet.

Hi,

You might want to look at this chart of systems used on other models to make a decision on what to pick up for another car.

http://www.nuceng.ca/bill/volvo/database/ecu.htm

You might want to think on whatever the wrecked cars parts that can or will work on the future car.
I saw on your profile you happen to like older cars!
I don't envy you expecting trying to break even on losing your car!
You should be able to work a deal to get that car from them.

I got a 1984 w/ 112K, from a good friend, some 20 years ago! It now has 188k.
They got it from their insurance company for $700, that I paid them gladly!
It had only a left rear door damage.
I got one JY $40 door the same the matching color. It has some minor other lower damage around the rim at the bottom coming up to the door that I left that way!
It was a parking lot accident cause by free rolling Saab going down a grade, because he didn't set the parking brake!

What don't like about the whole wreck scene, you painted, is the insurance companies are going to treat your car as if it was a "piece of tree limb, that got in the way of the two cars!
In other words, the tree is worth has nothing to warrant replacement it to them!
They don't give more than a few hundred bucks to a homeowner for a tree!

This is despite the car was doing a job within your lively hood like anything on the road. That car in front of you or behind you was doing the same so there is somewhat equal damage in this inconvenience. This gets it in the personal realm quickly!
If you average their cost, you were probably sandwiched between a $8,000 VW and in all likelihood, up to a $40,000 SUV vehicle.
This is Not even considering their real year value upon replacement or when the Insurance companies "cheating" Blue Book, is used on all the parties, to low ball them!
They think about bottom lines and it's all the peoples bottoms, they are looking at!
Yours will be nice and supple!

That SUV will probably get all of its damage fixed and your cars value won't even get up near the cost of the bumper replacement or let alone if a tailgate is involved!

With this in mind, don't let them pick off the leaves from your cars limbs, by throwing it to a junk yard. The JY will eventually get more money out of it than what the insurance will offer you!
The JY can give the insurance a kick back on top of that! The Wrecker companies even get to be the on their "dealing lists" of both shops and the JY's too!

If you were driving anything newer, they would be looking at a more money payout.
You were doing them a favor being there between the VW and the SUV.
I bet you didn't get a break on purchasing your insurance, over the years, that the car is a rolling around bottom line cushion!

Were you able to drive the car home?
You were rear ended, so don't sign any agreements to settle, until you know your neck or back wasn't hurt.
It may take several days before something swells or you feel that it's like it was several days before!
They should be thankful to you, that you were in a Volvo "Tank," that had a deep trunk and real "dead weight" bumpers! If it was a new car, it would have like a blown up, plastic coated marshmallow in there!

I had a relative that a officer in a highway patrol car that got rear ended on a freeway.
He thought he was only only slightly injured! Even though His seat broke backwards, he didn't think much of it!
He didn't make a workman compensation claim, Because, He played pro football, when he was young and this happened many years later in his career, so he was plenty good before the incident!
Well, later he had some issues and luckily this was a traffic incident, that was documented!

Now, there is the "move over or slow down law," not because of him, but many others and it was many years too late!

Those car mileages seem awful low! Beware of that, but if the prices are high use them in dealing with the insurance companies, including even with yours to battle it out!

All of this is, IMHO, of course!

Phil

1. It is a larger displacement engine.

2. It has a forged crank. Turbo guys look for these blocks for their projects for a reason.

3.I believe the B23 is a 10.3:1 vs the B21F which has a compression ratio of 9.3:1
Much more spunkier engine.

4.The Coupe models are EXTREMELY hard to find parts for. The doors cause hinge/ door alignment issues.

5. Chrysler ignition system/ Jetronic FI has never failed me.


You didn't say if the '80 was a manual or automatic. Unless you state otherwise; I'm going to assume that it has the M46 as well because that is what was standard in that car for that year.

My opinions are based on owning and using either example as a daily driver.

"Guess the only major difference would be the engines, the B21F vs, the B23."

I would say the difference between the 2.1 and the 2.3 is insignificant compared to the difference between a 2 door and a 4 door. Me? Body style I preferred would drive my decision.
--
82 242-6.2L; '17 Mazda3; '16 Crosstrek

What a choice to be made! Mostly it comes down to personal preferences -- on the one hand -- on the other hand. If both are in similar good shape you can be looking at 250-300k more miles with minimal expense with either car. 2 doors looks nicer but they are heavier to open. 4 doors kind of clunky looking but I like to be able to lower the rear windows a few inches to keep the draft off the front seat occupants with the front windows down. You didn't mention which transmission your car has--or the other 242. I like the M46 and have that in my 1980 245. I bought mine at 125K and the previous owner had the clutch done at 115K (they towed a camper trailer). My car has over 300k now. Which color do you like better? Interior condition and material (vinyl or cloth)? 2 or 4 round headlights look better (my opinion) and give better light than the 4 rectangular lamps of the '83.
If your 1980 runs well and you haven't had to give the car up to the insurance company you have a lifetimes worth of spare parts for the fuel injection and ignition (and you are probably familiar with the K-jet system). The '80 probably has solid front rotors, the '83 vented -- but the brakes on either will stop the car just fine. The '80 may have engine wiring in better shape.
So--on the one hand--on the other hand. -- Dave

i've had 3 kjet 242s. good cars and relatively simple. i would still jump at the 83. lh2 injection is better than kjet. just make sure the engine harness has the newer 1. if you look at it, let it run and wiggle the harness where it crosses the intake. or look at the tag for the part number near the firewall plug. might still be there. good luck, chuck.

Extra low-mileage 240s that I've happened upon for sale in the past few years have all been 5-figure expensive. They're transitioning to collector car status. If that's the market you're in, then I'd suggest at least trying out a newer Volvo. 5 year old S60s are in the low teens with well under 100K miles. They're fast, reliable, and comfortable. Mid-2000s Volvo S60/V70, S40/V50, and XC70s models each have their nits but are plentiful in the $3-5K range.

If you're stuck on 240s then it's condition and maintenance above all else (except your heart).

IMHO, with few exceptions, the newer the Volvo the better it is.

Hi. Glad you are ok. Sorry for your car. I like the older cars but the over all condition is what I would look at. Fresh brakes, hoses, belts etc. I envy you the south cars. Good luck... Paul