[lamski]

Hi everyone - <BR>I need a 3rd car (actually a 4th but my '66 MGB doesn't always count) and I'm considering joining the ranks of the 240 owners. Wife is getting a little tired of my borrowing her SUV on weekends to haul kids/bikes/junk. From what I've read on this board, it sounds like 240s will run forever! <P>My questions are: <BR>1. Turbo or non-turbo? Used prices seem about the same, but do the turbos require more maintenance or are they less reliable? Speed is a secondary consideration here - I'm happy to drive a slower non-turbo if it means less hassle.<BR>2. Looks like I can find a late 80's 245 in the $3k range. What are the trouble spots I should look for? Which trouble spots are cheap/easy to fix, which are costly? Being in LA, rust shouldn't be a problem and I'll be sure to avoid any rust buckets.<P>Thanks<BR>Jon

 

[[email protected]]

That's funny you should mention that. We just did the same thing. I bought a 1990 DL ('90s on have a driver airbag) with power windows and third seat for $2500. There's no rust on the car as the newer ones are galvanized (you won't find a galvanized turbo I believe, though in CA it doesn't rightly matter does it <IMG SRC="http://www.swedespeed.com/ubb/wink.gif"> ). <P>The turbos are definitely quicker, more rare and thus have a better resale value. The non turbos have less to break and are newer. One may deduce for that reason that they are more reliable. For me, it was a matter of finding a car that was believably reliable. Our car, while it has 190K miles on it, was a two-owner car that the second owner put all the miles since 50K on in the span of 4 years. It was dealer maintained and mostly highway mileage. While the body isn't in fantastic shape, I believe it'll be a reliable car and that's of utmost importance to me. That said, there are guys who know a TON more about the 240s than I do, so I'll bow out to their greater knowledge.