By and large a 240 is a 240.

Generally, you'd want to avoid a model that has model year specific parts (especially if those parts are no longer available or hard to upgrade to a more common part). Such examples include the 1975 models with the B20F engine, the 1982 models with LH-Jetronic 1.0 and/or Chrysler ignition, the 90 or 91 models with the odd air bag and ABS layouts, the late 70s California models with their NLA control pressure regulators, etc.

I honestly don't find much about owning a turbo to be a pain.. except the $@# K-Jetronic fuel injection. It is more complicated and tedious to tune and maintain than LH-Jetronic. The solid metal fuel lines don't endear me to K-Jet either. The idle system doesn't bother me too much, nor does the oxygen sensor stuff.. except that the o2 sensor system can be a bit delicate (frequency valve and insane relay anyone?)

If you can stand having a really underpowered car, the question then becomes how to find a rust free early 240. Otherwise, the later ones are a bit superior in terms of rustproofing and overall power (at the extremes, 99hp for later B21F engines to 140hp with some B23E engines, to 162hp with the B21FT-IBS).

- alex

'85 244 Turbo
'84 245 Turbo

From a body point of view, here are some important changes for US model:

1983: prior to 1983, the 200 series had 5mph bumpers. The 1983 and newer years had weaker bumpers, although the older ones supposedly can be put on.

1986: prior to 1986, the 200 series had sealed beam headlights, which are inexpensively replaceable, and can be replaced with ECE lights if desired and legal in your area. The 1986 and newer years have an "aero" headlight that is not very good, clouds up, and is expensive to replace. However, the 1986 and newer fender came pre-drilled for a side turn signal repeater (which can replace the badge there).

Some time between 1979 and 1982, the seat belt design was changed to improve 35mph front crash test performance (1 star in 1979, 4 or 5 stars in 1982 and later). Supposedly the length of the belt was shorted to reduce stretching / spoolup in a crash (anyone with both a 1979 or earlier and 1982 or later car want to check the length of the belts?).

Prior to the mid-1980s, separate overdrive units were used on the transmissions. These had a durable reputation, except for the electrical relays and wiring. Later models had true 5-speed manuals or 4-speed automatics.

The 91-93 models would be in the "best" category.

Best air conditioning
Best options
Best noise reduction including updated glass trim front & back
Good computers
Best safety features (ABS 91opt, std 92, SRS 90)

A loaded 91 is almost like a 93.
A 92 is virtually identical to a 93 except for one or two things
A 93 is the 'best' 240.

These points are arguable, but in recent history, the last three years of the 240 is the best.

The 90 is a good model too with flush tailgate glass and new tailgate design, plus most of them had updated engine control modules for better reliability. But the tailgates on the later 240s are NOT aluminum (no 240s have an Al tailgate)

The 89 is a little odd with a weird steering wheel (pre-SRS but looks like it should have it), and some iffy control modules. First year for LH2.4

The 88 is really good. I think most of the 88s had the "better" B230F. Also the solid LH2.2 Jetronic which was ultra-reliable. A very good car. 87/86 not too bad. I see a lot of rusty 86s.

87 was first year of true 5-speed, which is good because it got rid of overdrive issues, but bad because the 5sp wasn't quite as durable.

86 first year of body changes.

Etc.
--
chris herbst, near chicago

1] Avoid a '75. It is a somewhat bastardized model. Some parts are NLA.

2] '76-80 4-cyl are some of my favorites. K-Jet without CIS. Simple, rugged, durable.

3] '81-82 4-cyl have K-Jet with CIS. Odd combination of mechanical injection and electronically-controlled idle. And the flame trap is a bear to service!

4] '82 with LH-Jet 1.0. Avoid. Many parts difficult to source on this oddball.

5] '83-'84. Some of my favorites. More prone to rust and wiring problems than later models, but have the beefy B23F

6] '85. Almost as good as the 83-84, but with the slightly weaker B230F.

7] '86-mid-'88. Have the weaker B230F. Lousy headlights. Some improvements to wiring and rustproofing.

8] mid-'88-93. Wiring and rustproofing improvements. Still lousy headlights. Torx fasteners (ugh).

9] V-6, diesel, and turbo cars. Unless you can see proof of meticulous maintenance, avoid. Turbos are expensive to replace. V-6 and diesel are junk unless they have been recently repaired, or not one oil change has ever been missed.

Also see the article "Beaters" here - http://www.vclassics.com/archive/beat1.htm

While it generally applies to cheap 240's, many of the tips can pertain to all 240 cars.

I own a 1984 240 that has had to have just about allof the engine compartment rewired due to harness problems. But it has been one HELL of a tough ride! Very very dependable... until lasdt week I have been having some problems but I will let ya know how it turns out and wether or not the problem can be associated with one specific model year.

The '88 and newer have better wiring harnesses. I've owned 4 pre-'88 and have only had to do minor rewiring though. The two wires for the alternator and oil pressure switch which run under the front of the engine go bad and are easy to re-route. I'm told that the '88 and newer have better galvanizing also. Again, the rust problems vary greatly with where you live. If you live where salt is placed on the roads in the winter, rust will surely be a concern. I live in Oregon and have never had a rusty 240.(well, just a couple of minor spots around the tailgate on my last 245). With the '90 models, you get some self-diagnostics in the computer. I've never had one that new so I don't know how useful these are. The B23 engine has a strange crankshaft pulley arrangement which has pluses and minuses. The B230 engine is prone to have piston slap which is annoying but goes away when the engine warms up. Our family has had 6 240's ( '80, 83, '84, 86, '88, '88) and liked all of them. We've liked the newer ones better. The 240 seems to run for very high mileages with regular maintenance and is fairly easy for DIY. I do all my own work except for the AC and clutch replacement. Here's a site with advice in buying a used 240:
http://www.sonic.net/~zipzippy/volvo/robs-tips.html

No, the ECUs are not really an issue ('89s with 561 and the B23s with 503/510 problems) with good used units available for $100 give or take. Maybe the wire harness problems of the 83-87 and the floor rust problems of the mid 80's are more noteworthy. Both issues can be easily seen though in a prospective car purchase so that should not be a problem if you remember to look.