Volvo 240 Thoughts? (A Family Car Search Thread, Bought a Sentra)

  • Thread starter Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 155 comments
  • 8,797 views
Okay so obviously I've been joking; I haven't made a serious remark in this thread in days. But this was just wrong:

Rotary Junkie
They also called the Taurus COTY in 1986.

The 1986 Ford Taurus is the best automobile EVER to come out of Ford, or any of Ford's brands. The 1986 Ford Taurus changed the auto industry in a way you aren't capable of understanding, Rotary Junkie. Very few Motor Trend Cars of the Year have ever been as significant or as game-changing as the 1986 Ford Taurus.

Don't ever make comments when you clearly have NO idea what you're on about.
 
now YOU seem to be the fanboy in this thread.
 
now YOU seem to be the fanboy in this thread.

:lol: Your posting history indicates you don't know much about cars. If I were you, I'd look up the impact that the 1986 Ford Taurus had on the auto industry before hurling insults like an 11-year-old boy. I'll accept your apology publically or privately.
 
you would like that, wouldn't you? Not a chance, buddy. and having owned a Ford from 80's and driven other ones that weren't mine, I can say that they are pile of fail that never should had emerged from FoMoCo's production lines.
 
you would like that, wouldn't you? Not a chance, buddy. and having owned a Ford from 80's and driven other ones that weren't mine, I can say that they are pile of fail that never should had emerged from FoMoCo's production lines.

:lol: Anecdotal evidence. Always welcome.

The Taurus' success ultimately led to an American automobile design revolution; Chrysler and General Motors developed aerodynamic cars in order to capitalize on the Taurus' success.

Along with the exterior of the Taurus, its interior was ahead of its time, and many features originating from it are still used in most cars today.

The 1986 Taurus was received very well by both the public and the press. It went on to win many awards, most notably being named Motor Trend's Car of the Year for 1986, as well as being named on Car and Driver's Ten Best List for 1986. Over 200,000 Tauruses were sold for the 1986 model year, and in 1989, the millionth Taurus was sold. When production ended in 1991, more than 2,000,000 First-generation Tauruses had been sold.

the front-wheel drive Taurus was a very influential design that is credited with saving Ford from bankruptcy, bringing many innovations to the marketplace, and starting the trend towards aerodynamic design for the American automakers.

When Ford set out to develop the Taurus, they employed a strategy of teamwork that would prove revolutionary in the car development process.

If the Taurus failed, Ford would have to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The Taurus, however, ended up being a resounding success, selling over a million units in its first generation alone.

Before going on sale, Motor Trend tested a few Taurus test mules, and praised the cars extensively, even calling them "the shape of tomorrow". Popular Mechanics also tested pre-production Tauruses, and praised them as well, describing them as a "totally new breed of car" When the Taurus was actually released in 1986, it garnered unanimous critical praise from automotive publications.

Although it was initially released 22 years ago, the 1986 Taurus continues to receive positive press to this day. It was #6 on USA Today's 2007 list of "25 Cars That Made a Difference", and was named a "Future Classic" by Autoblog.

This is amassed from eleven different sources, paraphrased by Wikipedia. The '86 Taurus is one of the most significant cars in auto industry history - for one, it single-handedly saved Ford from bankruptcy. Anyone who doesn't think it deserved MT's '86 COTY award - hell, it deserved a car of the decade award - is misguided and sad and I challenge them to think of another more significant 1986 model.

No matter how many 'piles of fail' you've owned and driven, you clearly haven't done the research here - and since you're driving them 25 years after they debuted, you're lacking the historical perspective to make any remarks against the car. Since you're the one pulling anecdotal evidence, you are the fanboy. Apology, public or private.
 
The Taurus certainly was a popular and influential car, but I'll only give it credit for saving Ford from bankruptcy, and helping them to convince our government to change the headlight regulations. I agree with Leonidae; it's not a good car. Ford just managed to copy foreign manufacturers well enough for the Taurus to stand head and shoulders above everything else coming out of Detroit at the time.
 
The Taurus certainly was a popular and influential car, but I'll only give it credit for saving Ford from bankruptcy, and helping them to convince our government to change the headlight regulations. I agree with Leonidae; it's not a good car. Ford just managed to copy foreign manufacturers well enough for the Taurus to stand head and shoulders above everything else coming out of Detroit at the time.

Ford really moved the everyman's car interior game up by about ten years with the Taurus. They took a few things from the European brands, like the center console tilted towards the driver. But you need to realize two things here: one, this was the first EVER non-European car with that feature, and two, European cars were nowhere NEAR as pervasive in 1986 as they are now. You can say Ford stole that from BMW, but the reality is that it wasn't like a major manufacturer stealing something that was clearly going to be in most cars in the next few years; it was a major manufacturer stealing from what was essentially viewed as an upstart. I mean, here's a time when BMW sells a FEW cars, Mercedes sells a ton, Audi practically doesn't exist, Japan has yet to sell a single luxury car, and Volvo and Saab make mainstream cars. It's not like now. If Ford stole BMW's ridiculously idiotic "inoperable turn signal" that makes decisions of its own, people would call them on it. Back then, it was more like them adapting something being used on cars for an extremely small segment of the population to be used on mainstream cars -- sort of like everyone stealing paddle shifters from Ferrari. It's easy to judge them now, since BMW is a runaway success and they had that design feature first, but it wasn't like that back then. Historical perspective is really important here.

There's other stuff though. Putting small indentations on controls so you could feel what they were without diverting your eyes from the road was seriously -- as unbelievable as it sounds -- major innovation in 1986. For some functions, Ford was the first to have done this. Front buckets coupled with a full center console was unbelievably a FIRST for American midsize sedans at the time.

If you want to see how it was truly innovative, though, check out the exterior -- not relative to today's cars, but relative to its competition. The second-generation Camry came out the same year as the original Taurus. Compare their styles. The Camry is so clearly the old-as-dirt three-box boring as hell sedan that marked the 1970s and 1980s. The Taurus really represented a new design direction, which Toyota only started to get with the next Camry. The Accord -- which, incredibly, ALSO debuted in 1986 -- is even worse, though its next model ('90) is much improved. The Taurus marked the first time the grille was really thought of as a stylistic element. That tradition is really continued today. The whole "style in midsize" tradition is continued today.

I think the reality is that if we want to say that anyone who says the car was nothing special has an angle. Either someone ignorant (previous posters) or a Euro car nut who's not going to concede much to a car that, admittedly, did steal some thing from the Europeans. You've got to realize it's bigger than that though -- it was the catalyst that moved the midsize sedan segment into the 90s and ultimately even the 2000s. We didn't get a similarly important midsize sedan until the '02 Altima, and while that car was significant for similar reasons, even it didn't reach the significance of the 86 Taurus. No car will.

The only car that I can think that's likely as significant as the 86 Taurus is the 91 Explorer (though still not nearly as significant), though we can have that discussion at a later time.
 
If you really want to judge a car by how significant it is you shouldn't try to argue against the ones made, surprise, by Volvo. Without their research we might have to do without things such as these ones in Wikipedia:

Volvo safety milestones

Also to the list of firsts can be added the oxygen sensor, called Lambda Sond by Volvo, nowadays a standard fit on pretty much every car.

You might also not know it but shortly after its launch the 240 became a target for the US car makers just because of its safety. The Volvo cars may not be fast or flashy but they're the ones that have been very influential in making the everyday car to be what it is now. The 240 was produced for 19 years and wasn't obsolete at any point of its production cycle in any area but its looks and even that can be debated. No matter how hard you try you can't change the facts, it's a perfectly good everyday car for those who prefer reliability and ease of ownage to bells and whistles.
 
I'm not claiming the Camry to be an interest car, all I'm saying is that it's a good, solid mode of transportation. Nothing more, nothing less.
The issue here is that the Volvo is just as good and just as solid. However, it is also interesting.

M5Power
So you honestly objectively think the Volvo is the better car? Honestly & objectively?
There really isn't anything to say otherwise, so yes.

M5Power
Motor Trend called the Camry Car of the Year in '07. That takes into account performance. Think about it, gents.
Car of the Year 1997:
250px-Chevrolet-Malibu.jpg

Import Car of the Year 1999:
250px-Volkswagen-New-Beetle-Convertible.jpg

Car of the Year 2002:
250px-Retro-Thunderbird.jpg

Car of the Year 2004:
250px-2nd_Toyota_Prius.jpg


Now allow me to play devil's advocate.

Rotary Junkie
They also called the Taurus COTY in 1986.
Wolfe
Ford just managed to copy foreign manufacturers well enough for the Taurus to stand head and shoulders above everything else coming out of Detroit at the time.
The Taurus was so far ahead of any of the Japanese or European competition at the time that it took them 10 years to catch up, with even that being a result of Ford totally blowing it in 1996. The Taurus was so far ahead of its time that they barely even did anything to it in 1992 and it was still better than all other midsize sedans on the market. The Taurus was one of the most influential cars any automaker ever built, and to say that its success was merely a result of copying ideas that the Japanese didn't even have until long after it was developed is an incredible disservice to the car and the team that made it, not to mention a total fallacy.
 
Last edited:
I question that wikipedia link you posted Greycap, because I'm pretty sure Citroen had disc brakes in their cars before Volvo did. But whatever, the 240 is an excellent car if you want something reliable and indestructible. Plus, it's an automotive icon, like the Mini, the Mustang, the Beetle, or the DS. Parts should be cheaper than parts for Mercs, too, assuming you'll ever need any. :lol: I think most Volvos have about 7 layers of primer paint, don't they? Not sure if the 240 did though.
 
The Taurus was so far ahead of any of the Japanese or European competition at the time that it took them 10 years to catch up, with even that being a result of Ford totally blowing it in 1996. The Taurus was so far ahead of its time that they barely even did anything to it in 1992 and it was still better than all other midsize sedans on the market. The Taurus was one of the most influential cars any automaker ever built, and to say that its success was merely a result of copying ideas that the Japanese didn't even have until long after it was developed is an incredible disservice to the car and the team that made it, not to mention a total fallacy.

+1

An unbiased viewpoint.

BTW I was joking on the Camry being a good car just because Motor Trend named it COTY. Some of those 'of the year' awards are so comically awful -- the best example being Automobile's 1996 winner. Hard to believe they didn't just stop publishing magazines at that point.
 
Taurus stuff

Fine, bad example. However, I don't find the Taurus to be a good car. Ahead of its time, maybe. Decent when new, maybe.

Thing is... They suck to own once they have anything resembling mileage. The AXOD dies far too easily, they kill head gaskets, they're just crap once they've been around.



Anyhow, I had been trying to point out that the COTY award didn't really mean much... Perhaps I should've used the 2002 COTY winner as an example instead? (Ford Blunderbird)
 
Current Camry V6 does 0-60 quicker than the Lamborghni Miura -- under 6 seconds. Think about it gents.
Mmm, can't win Pebble Beach with a Camry, though.
 
What's wrong with the Civic?

Whoops... meant 97!

Rotary Junkie
Fine, bad example. However, I don't find the Taurus to be a good car. Ahead of its time, maybe. Decent when new, maybe.

Dude. You've proven here that you don't know what you're talking about. Quiet down.

Reventon
Mmm, can't win Pebble Beach with a Camry, though.

:D
 
...the reality is that it wasn't like a major manufacturer stealing something that was clearly going to be in most cars in the next few years; it was a major manufacturer stealing from what was essentially viewed as an upstart...Historical perspective is really important here.
Each feature had to have been deemed good to be considered worth including. Seeing good ideas on other cars and implementing them into one of your own isn't groundbreaking, it's logical. Perspective certainly is important here. It's just that we'll likely have to agree that each of ours is different.

There's other stuff though. Putting small indentations on controls so you could feel what they were without diverting your eyes from the road was seriously -- as unbelievable as it sounds -- major innovation in 1986. For some functions, Ford was the first to have done this.
It was still done before. Which takes me back to the above point.

If you want to see how it was truly innovative, though, check out the exterior -- not relative to today's cars, but relative to its competition.
Yes, the exterior inspired by the Audi 100. Again, same point.

a Euro car nut who's not going to concede much to a car that, admittedly, did steal some thing from the Europeans
Wouldn't it be easier to type "you?"

You've got to realize it's bigger than that though -- it was the catalyst that moved the midsize sedan segment into the 90s and ultimately even the 2000s. We didn't get a similarly important midsize sedan until the '02 Altima, and while that car was significant for similar reasons, even it didn't reach the significance of the 86 Taurus. No car will.
Look, I don't disagree that the car was influential. But you're not going to get me to agree that a cheap FWD Ford family sedan with a few neat features is one of the greatest cars of all time. If it was, it would still be readily apparent to anyone who drove it today. The Taurus is good, but nothing more -- much like the Camry.

...which is why I think YSSMAN should go with a car that's good and fun and interesting, and buy the 240. :dopey:
 
Perspective certainly is important here. It's just that we'll likely have to agree that each of ours is different.

The difference of course being that mine is shared by nearly the entirety of automotive historians and period automotive journalists, while yours is pretty much unique to you -- who has an angle -- and Leonidae, who doesn't really know much about cars. This is an easy one...
 
FYI, I have graduated as a mechanic, but I forgive your ignorant assumption.
 
Can't say I've ever been ashamed to hold an unconventional view. Would it help ease your mind if I said the Taurus is one of the better cars I'd never consider owning or recommending to a friend? It's certainly no Chevy Cavalier.
 
FYI, I have graduated as a mechanic, but I forgive your ignorant assumption.

Just because you understand mechanical components doesn't mean you have any idea about the cars themselves... you've proven that.

Thanks for the forgiveness!!
 
My dad had one of those old Tauri. He says it was by far the worst car he had ever owned. I remember it with dread...

Blown head-gaskets, blown engine (!), blown CV joint, rattling exhaust. Yeah, best piece of Ford engineering out there. Best damn piece, right?
 
...which is why I think YSSMAN should go with a car that's good and fun and interesting, and buy the 240. :dopey:

While I don't disagree with you one bit, its important to remind folks that its for my brother and not for me. He seems pretty keen to it, apparently we could have the money for the Camry as early as Monday, but until we know how much it is, we really can't make any decisions as to what we're going to get.

Hes looking at Subarus now too. Not that you'd be able to find much thats anywhere near worthwhile for less than $5000 these days.
 
$5,000 could get you a properly thrashed SVX. Though I doubt your brother is quite as irrational as I am.
 
$5,000 could get you a properly thrashed SVX. Though I doubt your brother is quite as irrational as I am.

aren't there major heat-based tranny issues with the Subie Batmobile?
 
While I don't disagree with you one bit, its important to remind folks that its for my brother and not for me.
Well yes. But you're the one asking here and helping make the purchase decision. We're on the same page.

Hes looking at Subarus now too. Not that you'd be able to find much thats anywhere near worthwhile for less than $5000 these days.
What do you mean by that?

$5,000 could get you a properly thrashed SVX. Though I doubt your brother is quite as irrational as I am.
$5000 for a thrashed SVX? I think you're overestimating the value of the car by a significant margin. I only know because my best friend owns one. For that kind of money, you could bag a nice one and then equip a transmission cooler with the leftover cash. Or swap in a manual if you do the work yourself. They're quite unloved cars.
 
Back