What sub-$3,000 Volvo makes a reliable appliance?

I would forego lots of things if I was pretty darned confident on the ability to get me to work and back home.

If a power seat broke or a window regulator crapped out or the interior trim went south I could live with it no sweat.

I'm considered manditory medical personel at work so getting me there is a must. (Pretty much the only must!)

Klayfish wrote:

ebonyandivory wrote: So what everyone is saying is I should look for the best Honda Accord or Toyota Camry I can find and be done with it?

In a word....yes.

I've heard some pretty inflammatory remarks on this board, but this is far and away the worst! Mods, please monitor this user and consider a ban!

Can anyone tell me why 2002-ish Subaru can't fit this bill?

The Lego-ness beckons me but I'm ASCARED of questionable reliability...

ebonyandivory wrote: Can anyone tell me why 2002-ish Subaru can't fit this bill? The Lego-ness beckons me but I'm ASCARED of questionable reliability...

2002 is right at the tail end of the head gasket problem years, though I doubt there are any still on the road that haven't been fixed. Rust would be the only real reason. If you can find a clean one, do it, and try to keep it that way with regular washes. Up here in Wisconsin we don't have inspection, so we just drive them until they are too rusty to be safe...they eat up the miles with routine maintenance, but you can also hear them rust on a quiet day...

Pretty much everybody on this board will have something bad to say about any car you bring up, so just buy what you want and stick to it. There are people who have had abhorrent experiences with Honda and Toyota too, you know. I, for one, think Hondas are a bitch to work on (Accords with the brake rotor behind the wheel hub, anyone?) and think the soulless nature of a Camry wagon is far worse punishment than a Volvo with seat heaters that only work half the time, or a Subaru that's a bit crusty around the edges.

Crusty I can handle... Can you quickly elaborate (like one sentence) what years post 2000 would be the best option regarding HG issues?

Thanks for the replies as well!

Keep in mind this is for 2.5L engines only (the 2.2 is fine), and as I said, at this point virtually all have been fixed anyway. Subaru updated the HG design a few times; if it's been dealer repaired, it should be good to go.

1996-1999: The majority of cars will have an external leak. These are the ones to really avoid. 2000-2002: Much smaller percentage. External leak again, but much less severe. Most of these seem to have been fixed early on and are fine now. 2003+: Problem pretty much fixed; .001% of owners seem to have oil seepage issues, but the coolant leaks were basically fixed at this point.

Opinions?

http://boston.craigslist.org/gbs/cto/4315571471.html

And thanks again for taking the time to respond.

Doesn't seem like a bad deal. I would ask who did the HG job and whether he used E36 M3ty parts store gaskets or OEM Subaru. With that description, I would assume he bought it with bad head gaskets, then did those and the timing set himself...could go either way.

So if a clean Subaru like above had a dealer-installed HG repair with factory parts and newish timing belt, the rest of the car is historically foot to go? (All else being equal and all that)

ebonyandivory wrote: Opinions? http://boston.craigslist.org/gbs/cto/4315571471.html And thanks again for taking the time to respond.

I would take it for a drive and see if you like it. My 2001 had a very noticeable clutch engagement "judder" that the dealer acknowledged but would not address under warranty. They quoted a number around $2000. to fix it. It and the head gasket issue pretty much made for a very sour first (and last) Subaru experience. And the 2.5 is painfully slow and the car has a shocking amount of body roll. I understand the nature of the car, but honestly, my current Mazda MPV is positively sportscar-like in comparison.

In reply to 1988RedT2:

You know I'm gonna tear my hair out now right?

Thank you for input though, even if I want to hear otherwise!

Relating to your original topic. Only 140K miles even: http://boston.craigslist.org/gbs/cto/4314578403.html

ebonyandivory wrote: In reply to 1988RedT2: You know I'm gonna tear my hair out now right? Thank you for input though, even if I want to hear otherwise!

Sorry about that!

I will add that, as much as I hated the subaru, I loved the Volvo 940 Turbo wagon that immediately followed it, in spite of it being much older and having many more miles. It transported my family safely and dependably for a little over a year, with the only issue being an intermittent stalling that went away when I replaced the igniter module. Where the Subaru was a wallowing pig, the Volvo was quick and cornered nice and flat.

Not a turbo, not a wagon, but looks like a decent car:

http://boston.craigslist.org/nwb/cto/4316866442.html

And if you wanted a Virginia car that happened to be turbo:

http://fredericksburg.craigslist.org/cto/4315736270.html

I'd go with an older brick for sure. Can I get some testimonial text here telling my wife I don't want (or shouldn't get) a later car!

Part of the reason I'm dumping my 1995 F150 is the age and increasing likelihood of things failing.

I am again going to suggest that OP just goes and drives some of these vehicles to decide what HE needs. I just sold my turbo brick ('88 740 turbo) because although it was fast and comfy, it got pretty dismal gas mileage (18-ish), seemed to be nickel-and-diming me to death, and didn't handle worth a damn even with $600 worth of iPd aftermarket suspension thrown at it. Not even going to get started on the "normal" redblock piston slap.

If you don't like the wallowy, truck-like feel of the Outback, get a regular Legacy wagon. Problem solved. The clutch issue sounds like someone broke it in wrong, or re-used some parts in the process...makes me think "crappy dealer" more than "crappy car."

Again, there is nothing really wrong with either a Volvo or a Subaru. They each just have different problems. You aren't going to figure out which one is better for YOU by asking on an internet message board, you are just going to get more horror stories from every camp. Once you get behind the wheel and decide which feels more natural to YOU, the choice will be much easier.

Possibly the worlds nicest 240 (judging by my self imposed price cap. No affiliation, never set eyes on it, etc.). Plus its from a rust-free state and there are GRMers about who might take a look for you. Haggle down to $2500, fly in, drive home.

What kind of mpg's do the v70 get. I have been looking into getting one. If the mpg's are not to hateful I wouldn't mind getting a turbo v70.

2003-ish about 17-19 city, 24-28 highway from what I remember.

With my '04 V70R I get low 20s with city driving and high 20s with highway driving. This is with premium fuel. I would guess the V70R would be the worst of the V70 lot for mpg.