1984 Volvo - MPG log for my "new" Winter beater - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum

mechman600 · 12-02-2011, 05:53 PM

A 1984 Volvo 244. I picked her up a couple of weeks ago for $400. I normally ride my Suzuki DRZ400S year round, but it is supposed to be a nasty winter here in the Lower Mainland (Vancouver area).

The Canadian Volvo's were a mixed bag of parts in 1984, built in Halifax, Nova Scotia. A B21A engine with a zenith CV carburetor and an AW55 3-spd non-lockup auto, both which were Canada only bits. So finding an EPA rating is impossible. EPA rates the fuel injected 4-spd auto car at 17 mpg combined. If I can beat that with the 3-speed, I will consider it a grand success.

This car is only used for short commutes and small errands, so mileage will not be great. I will fill every two weeks or so to keep the fuel above half full, because I have a feeling the in-tank fuel pump does not work, and these cars will not run on the mechanical pump only if the fuel level drops too low. I will be looking into that.

My theory about buying a cheap car is as follows: it is silly to buy a car for between $500 and $2000. If you spend $1000-1500 and it suddenly needs a $500-1000 repair, you basically have to fix it or you have blown a lot of money on a car that no longer works. If you spend $400 and it suddenly requires a $500-$1000 repair, you simply call the wrecker to pick it up, and they will usually give you $100-200 for it, depending on the car. My plan is to tinker on this car over winter so by the time springs comes, I can turn around and sell it for as much as or more than what I paid for it. My only investment will be time, but I love tinkering anyway.

Tank #1 results

Pre-tuneup. 6.5 km commutes in 0-10C weather, so it barely gets hot. One 60 km freeway run at 105 km/h. Lots of idling time while I adjusted dwell, timing and carb just before I filled up.

189.6 km / 27.840 L = 14.7L/100km, 19.2 mpg (imp), 16.0 mpg (us)

Sort of what I expected. The next tank should be better, post-tune up.

brucepick · 12-03-2011, 09:07 PM

Welcome to e.m. with your 240! They're not known as gas sippers but definitely good cars.

I was a Volvo 240 guy before we bought my Civic and the wife's Accord. Our family has owned six of them, and we still have three of those. I've spent many hours tending to the various needs of those cars. Everything from tuneups + brakes to seat rebuilds, roof rack re-mounting, and even the notorious in-tank pump replacement.

We had an '83 with the early fuel injection setup - no carb. I think maybe the carb'ed version didn't have an in tank pump? Try find out, if you didn't already. Access to in-tank pump is via a rounded-corner rectangular panel at the far forward raised end of the trunk, under the carpet/mat. One lead is for the fuel gauge sensor, one is ground (you'll see the grounding screw). If you see more than 2 wires they are for a pump.

I've replaced 2 or 3 in-tank pumps on these. Doable, but not a quick job. I have a brass tool dedicated to remove the bung nut at top of tank. Overpriced at about $50 from ipdusa.com. I hear you can use a sink basin nut wrench but haven't tried that.

Our family still has 2 '89's and a '92 - though one of the '89's is headed for Volvo Valhalla soon.

mechman600 · 12-04-2011, 01:27 AM

Awesome! It seems to be a trend among 240 owners: "our family has owned six of them." So funny. Honestly, I have never wanted one. But in a search for $400 beaters I didn't want a dime-a-dozen Civic or Corolla. I wanted something interesting. My purchase was hugely inspired by one of those $100 car Top Gear challenges. Top Gear S04E03 comes to mind.

I know for a fact that my carbureted engine does in fact have an in tank fuel pump. There's a fuse for it in the fuse panel. But I'm not sure how I am going to determine if it is working or not. The only way to really know is if it doesn't start when the tank is less than 1/2 full. Maybe I should buy a jerry can? Ha!!

mechman600 · 12-05-2011, 08:56 PM

Picture time. My wife is a photographer. I convinced her to do a "photo shoot" of the $h!t Brick. Check it out:

THE VOLVO / because I promised my husband » Vanessa Voth Blog

AndrzejM · 12-06-2011, 03:49 AM

Nice car, nice shoots

Good luck with the Brick. To be honest I like those old Volvos much more than those new ones. Few mods and you'll get a nice ride with decent FE.

I'll keep my fingers crossed!

Nonhog · 12-09-2011, 12:40 PM

Volvos are pretty heavy for a smaller engine.
I've been installing a 5.0 Ford engine in my wifes 80 Bertone that in large part due to the O/D trans (that it did not have stock) should do better than stock
MPG. Still wont be great but will be fun. Hoping to see high twenties on the freeway. Much better than the old 5.0 home (Explorer)

Sounds like it may not be something your interested in doing but you could add an O/D trans pretty easy on that car.

mechman600 · 12-10-2011, 01:16 PM

A 5.0L in a Swedish brick sounds like fun! The curb weight of my car is right around 3000 lbs. It gives the 105 horses (when it was new at least!) something to do.

When you factor in my $400 purchase price, there really is no point in modifying anything on this car, especially considering how short my commute is. At today's $1.23/L ($4.56/gal including currency difference), my 13.0 km daily commute at [hopefully] 14.1L/100km (16.6 US MPG), 5 days a week, costs $11.27 per week. THAT is cheap.

This thread isn't about modifications. It is an exercise to see what affects mileage of an old beater. I am going to fill up again soon to see how my tune-up affected mileage. On the next tank I will try to implement some hypermiling techniques, if at all possible with a 3000 lb worn-out carbureted car with a non-lock up torque converter. My commute has 5 stop signs and 2 traffic lights, usually with congestion during the rush, and that sure doesn't help.