An iconic model is both a blessing and a curse for automakers. It’s impossible to make a car an icon on purpose; it has to happen on its own, and when it does happen, it can create a rut that’s hard to break out of. Volvo, whose rectilinear car designs were so iconic they became a movie gag, has come a long way since those days; it dropped the “boxy” part but kept the “good.” But is the old boxy one still better?
You all certainly preferred the older choice yesterday, when we looked at two eras of Dodge Dart. But then, the Slant Six engine is something of an icon itself, and the modern Dart is just another little sedan, so I guess I’m not too surprised.
That old Dart does look like a pretty good deal, for the condition it’s in. And the pushbutton transmission certainly adds cool points. I don’t have anything against the newer Dart, and I’d be perfectly happy with one as a daily driver if it came down to it, but yeah, that old ’64 is hard to pass up.
Volvo’s styling lagged behind the market trends for many years: its PV cars in the 1950s looked like American 1940s designs, and the Amazon that followed them in the 60s looked a lot like early 50s Chrysler designs. But starting with the 140 series, and continuing on into the 240, Volvo created a shape that was not really of any time at all: a bit brutalist, but well-proportioned, and instantly recognizable. Even its replacement, the even-boxier 740, couldn’t put it out to pasture. It wasn’t until the 2000s that Volvo’s designs finally broke out of the box. Its engineering was always state-of-the-art, however, especially when it came to safety; you’re probably still safer in an old Volvo than in anything else contemporary to it. But would you still rather have the newer one? Let’s see.
1983 Volvo 240 GL – $2,200
Engine/drivetrain: 2.3-liter OHC inline 4, four-speed automatic, RWD
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
Odometer reading: 162,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well
It’s hard to imagine someone designing the Volvo 240. It looks as though it just sort of came into being by sheer will, its shape carved out of a block of solid steel by unseen forces eons ago, as though it has always been and always will be. It was in production for eighteen years, which is part of what gives that impression of immortality, but another part of it is that they’re really hard cars to kill. I’ve admired them for years, but never owned one. I came close a couple of times, but it just never worked out.
This 240 looks as though someone tried to kill it, or scrap it; the grease pencil marks on the windshield in the photo above look like they’re from an impound lot or a wrecking yard. My guess is that someone rescued it before it went into the yard, or bought it at an auction, and discovered it was in pretty good shape. The seller says it runs and drives well, and its transmission shifts smoothly. Obviously, we have no idea of its history, but for this price, that hardly matters.
It’s a little grubby inside, and the steering column trim is missing, which lends credence to the impound lot theory. There’s also a Bible between the front seats; I wonder if it’s from the current owner, or if it was left there by whoever owned it before? I guess it doesn’t matter, and I’ve found weirder things in used cars before. What’s more important to know is: Does the HVAC blower fan work? It’s prone to wearing out, and replacing it is a major undertaking.
About the only thing that’s fatal to a 240 is rust, and being a southern California car, this one looks like it’s in the clear in that regard. The clearcoat on the hood and roof is shot, but the rest of the paint looks all right. I know the wagons are popular for their practicality, but I’ve always preferred the look of the sedans. And I like the turbine-style wheels on this one.
2012 Volvo S60 T5 – $4,499
Engine/drivetrain: Turbocharged 2.5-liter DOHC inline 5, six-speed automatic, FWD
Location: Tacoma, WA
Odometer reading: 131,000 miles
Operational status: Runs and drives well, I’m going to assume
Volvo was late in joining the front-wheel-drive revolution; it wasn’t until the 240’s successor, the 850, that both the old Red Block engine and the straight axle it drove were finally retired. And it wasn’t until halfway through that car’s life that Volvo’s three-digit model numbers went away, when the 850 became the S70. The new nomenclature makes sense, as soon as you understand it: S for sedan, V for wagon, C for coupe, XC for crossover. Bigger number equals bigger car. So this S60 is a mid-sized sedan, bigger than the S40, but smaller than the S80. The T5 on the end of its name indicates that it is powered by a turbocharged five-cylinder engine.
The five-cylinder engine dates back to the 850 days; it sits transversely in the engine bay and drives the front wheels through a six-speed Aisin automatic. The Aisin transmissions in older Volvos had an excellent reputation, but this one isn’t quite as invincible; keep up on the fluid changes if you want to keep it shifting smoothly. This one is for sale by a dealership, and once again, there’s no information about how well or poorly it runs and drives, just a list of features a mile long. C’mon, guys; would it kill you to throw in a “runs great” or “could use new brakes”?
It does look like it’s in good condition, though. The price is a little on the low side, as far as I can tell, so be sure to try everything out to find out if there’s a reason why. And there’s a lot of “everything” to try; this thing is loaded.
The first-generation S60 was one of the first Volvos to do away with the square design, and it was a really funky shape. This one is actually a lot more subdued, and strangely, looks a little Saab-ish to me. Someone was copying someone’s homework, I think. It’s a good-looking car, though, and it’s in good shape. I thought at first there was a wrinkle in the right rear door, looking at the photo above, but it’s just a reflection. It looks fine in the other photos.
The trouble with an iconic model is that it’s a hard act to follow. You can either try to make the next model an homage to it, which rarely works, or you can abandon it completely and hope your customers like the new one. No newer Volvo will ever be a 240, but they are still awfully nice cars, and still more or less built like tanks, from what I understand. Still, old 240s are still around, if you want one, and they’re not even terribly expensive. So which one will it be – the icon, or the upstart?
There are two ways to replace the HVAC blower in a 240. The factory way, which is shear unadulterated misery taking about the heater box that is held together by the most vicious spring clips known to man and a tangle of random wiring when you take the whole center console apart to get to the heater box, or the expedient way which is cutting a hole in the side of the damned thing and then duct taping it back together after. I have done it once each way, I will NEVER touch one of those misery clips again.
I have owned 13 redblock Volvos, including three 240s. I would own another one, though at this point I really don’t want to daily drive one. Just too crude. I have owned one whiteblock Volvo, and I have less than zero desire to ever repeat the experience. German running costs but it drives like a Volvo is not a winning combination. So ancient brick for me here.
With an auto, I’ll take the quirky I5.
A nice solid 244 shell is worth the price, V8 kits are plug and play and I’m thinking 400 hp is a doable number on pump gas for a fun sleeper build, it’s been a while.
I went with the 240 that came from the Russian School of Design.
Just wondering if clearcoat contains or in fact is UV protectorant?
Gotta go w/ the classic iconic bulletproof 240…I’ve heard so many great things about them. I really like the blue but how bout a brown manual diesel wagon? Ha ha
Not interested in the newer Volvos at all, although that seems like a decent price for someone who needs a car
I’m not against either, but as neither is a wagon, I can’t get excited.
100% with you on that. It is the way.
My daily driver for 10 years was a Volvo 240. Virtually indestructible, can haul a ton of crap, reasonably economical and sold, predictable performer, though no thrill ride. Also very good sight lines out of the car.
My mom’s 2012 S60, on the other hand, is the dog’s dinner. Electrical gremlins out the yingyang, oddly cramped interior, frustratingly limited trunk space, mediocre economy and horrifically bad view outside, especially for short people (got no reason to live …). The engine’s solid enough, but the transmission is very needy. Looks OK I guess, but just like a half dozen other sedans from its era. The only real plus is that it predates Volvo’s South Carolina plant, which has produced the S60 since 2018. You don’t want to own or ride in anything made in SC, not Mercedes Sprinter vans, not the BMW X series of SAVs and coupes, not Boeing Dreamliners, and probably not the upcoming Scout vehicles. Don’t say I didn’t want you.
It’s the 240 for me.
“My daily driver for 10 years was a Volvo 240. Virtually indestructible, can haul a ton of crap, reasonably economical and sold, predictable performer, though no thrill ride”
Too bad you didn’t have the turbo:
https://tflcar.com/2016/11/weekends-intern-1984-volvo-240-turbo-oped/
Nope, my only turbo was an ‘86 Saab I owned for 30 years and over 500,000 miles. Apparently all Swedish turbos are not created equal. My 240 was decidedly a basic model.
I am more interested in the 240 to be fair,but it’s an automatic and the S60 looks like a good deal provided there are no hidden issues.
Got a soft spot in my heart for the official car of college profs in the 80’s, but there would be a whole lot of bad to sort out before you’d get to the good in this one. I honestly don’t know what I’d be getting into repair-wise on the new one, but it appears that it has a pretty good head start on the old one.
Both are winners imo, so a bit of a tough call. I’m giving the slight edge to S60 for modernity as a daily driver.
240s and 245s reminded me of celestial eye goldfish with their headlights. Back in the 80s, a neighbor had a 245.
That S60 is tempting, and I live about 5 miles from there. I might check it out tomorrow. I love my ’17 Accord V6, but seriously? $4,500? Maybe take my money. But maybe, used car lot…
As soon as I saw “Volvo 240”, I was set on voting for it for sentimental reasons. My mom had a late-70’s version, and although it was quite slow and stodgy, I liked it. But then I saw that it was up against the S60, and my dad had one of those. I thought it drove pretty well, and this one looks like it’s in good shape. I’d be pretty shocked if everything on that long list of options actually works, but that’s fine so long as the mechanicals are good. So sentimental and clean S60 wins out over the sentimental but sorta trashed 240.
I own both an ’89 240 wagon (manual) and an ’04 XC90 (automatic, the only way they came in the states), so not unlike the pair of cars in today’s showdown.
It’ll come as no suprise that I like BOTH the 240 sedan and S60 sedan pictured above, and I voted for the S60 only because I haven’t owned one of those yet. It will be safer (probably), quieter (definitely), and more comfortable (somewhat) than the 240, but it will be also more complicated to work on, and likely more expensive to fix when something breaks.
With that said, they’re both appealing cars. The clearcoat on my ’89 is all baked off too (from that late 80s-90s period where all manufacturers were switching to water-based coatings I think) but the wheels look great and as long as the interior doesn’t smell too funny, it looks salvagable. $2,200. feels like a good price… I recently paid twice as much for almost the exact same miles, but mine’s a wagon and has a manual transmission, both of which drive up the price. This sedan looks as if it has air conditioning, so that’s also a plus if it works (mine’s always on low I think, no matter how I have the controls set… something I need to look into).
The S60 is miles more contemporary, and I’m not opposed to that. Plus, it predates today’s Volvos, which seem defined as much by their software as by their hardware, which is something I’m not happy about. It’d be better if this particular S60 came in one of the more interesting color combos Volvo offered at the time, like that metallic teal paint over the Atacama orange interior that you see online once in a while (including that Doug DeMuro review). But black and tan it is, and it’s kind of blah/generic/conservative to look at, but provided everything works, $4,500. feels OK to me… maybe a bit high but bearable.
Of course, I’d take almost any intact/running Amazon over either one of these cars. 😉
The 240 sedans are endearing, but the wagons are very appealing to me because of their sheer capacity – you can carry a concert harp in one, and I’d be curious how many 3-string haybales would fit.
S60, because I have fond memories of (apparently, who knew? Not me) that same turbo 5 in a friend’s 850.
That said,
Ok, what’s even remotely “weird” about buying an ancient Volvo and figuring, “I’m gonna need all the help I can get keeping this thing alive.” I’m not even a believer but I’d totally keep the Good Book if it came with the car, if only in the boot.
“I’d totally keep the Good Book if it came with the car, if only in the boot.”
In the boot? Are you kidding? It’s the perfect hood ornament! People see THAT coming up behind and they won’t be able to get out of the way fast enough.
I voted for the S60, but this is a perfect “both” day: a useful, modern daily driver plus a classic for tinkering, all for less than seven grand.
It would be a mistake in the end to take the modern cash suck version, especially from a Buy Here Pay Here stealership like that, but come on, that is one pretty little thing with an actual 5 cylinder volvo motor. It lacks the boxy but good reputation, but still.
I had a 240, it was called the SloVo because it couldn’t get out of it’s own way. This wasn’t a big deal back in the day, but now, with so many drivers in John Force mode, a 240 would be a roadblock.
This is a tough one.
As much as I’d love a rolling breadbox, the newer S60 is something that at least I had some experience with. The same generation estate was my first car I drove after getting a license (company car, too). Smooth, quiet and fairly foolproof, too bad I worked too short to start enjoying the ride. Still, I have this model in my sight as potential future daily – once I get rid of my silly jalopies, of course.