Re: Are 240s really still safe? (konky2000)

CA is THE market (after Dallas, TX) for late-model 245 wagons with ABS and air bags.

In 1992 the Insurance Institute released fatality figures for all US cars from 1988 to 1990.

Number one? The Volvo 240 (any model).

The stats? Number of driver fatalities per one million miles driven = ZERO!

The down-side? Most perfect one-owner 245 are not for sale!

George Dill

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (gdill2)

I was just doing some queries on the FARS database http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

In 2004 there were 7 fatal accidents involving 240 Volvos for model years 1991-1993. About half of these involved driver error. Of the ones that did not involve driver error, about 3 were accidents in which either the driver or passenger side of the car was T-boned.

The 2000-2003 S40 has about the exact same stats as the 240 for 2004.

So, I guess I answered my own question ... since my commute is only 4 miles each way, and I have streetside parking, I think I'm going to go for a 240 and save myself some serious money.

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (konky2000)

Good call! I put 200+k on a 1986 245 and it is still being driven daily in Houston TX - the t-bone accident capital of the world.

My current '96 965 is a nicer/safer ride, gets 19/26 city/hwy and has front/side airbags with ABS/limited-slip all for under $6,000.

George Dill

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (gdill2)

I also have to put in a word about airbags. I would say the 240 is safer without them, because God only knows how safe a 15+ year old airbag is. Aren't you supposed to replace them every once in a while (not that anybody does...)

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (gdill2)

gdill2..

I have two 240's. A 1990 model that was my sons, which my neice is now driving (198k) and a 1991 (234k) which is my daily driver. They are both solid/dependable/durable /SAFE. I would recommend a 240 over any car if you only have a 4 mile drive!
That being said..........finding a nice one is tough!
I also have a 96 850 GLT (93k)...wifes driver and NOT for sale!
There are probably more decent 850's on the market than nice 240's...at least that is the case in Charlotte, NC

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (konky2000)

I'll put it this way...

My previous car was a 1996 Taurus, generally rated as one of the safer cars around.

When I got my 245, my first chore was to inform my insurance agent of my purchase of a new car. As anyone who is with my insurer (Allstate) knows, they don't pass out discounts very readily, and their rates can be on the high side.

My premium dropped by HALF.

I think that says it all.

http://********************/smile/emthup.gif

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (danemodsandy)

The lower insurance premium for a Volvo 240 reflects both the car AND the insurance loss data on Volvo 240 owners/drivers (very low).

George Dill

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (konky2000)

I have heard many stories from friends about their 240s. One, who had a family member drive off a road, roll down a hill, have the car land on the roof, and they climbed out, walked back up the hill to flag down another driver for help. If thats not safety, I dont know what is. I have also heard of old Volvo comercials where they lift a 240 upside down on a crane, then drop it on the roof (height unknown) and the roof does not collapse, as well as another comercial where they stack two 240s on the roof of another 240. In my two accidents I had the police men and bystanders come up to me and say "Well, at least you were in a Volvo" some, being previous or current 240 owners. Also, back when the 240 was first released in the early 70s, the United States purchased some 240s, and used those cars to set the American Saefty Standards that all other cars needed to meet. I am a biased 240 fanatic, but I would say the 240 is a great example of Volvo's idea of safety, even for a car without fancy airbags, whiplash protection (though I think I would like that), and other bells and whistles. Rolling Strength!!

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (MenardVolvo)

MenardVolvo:

The head restraints on your 240 were state-of-the-art whiplash protection when they were new. Unlike the adjustable restraints on most American cars, the Volvo restraint could not be lowered; it was always in place to catch your head in an accident. Its concave, basket-like shape guides your head towards the centre of the restraint, maximising protection. On American cars with adjustable restraints, a fully lowered restraint can actually serve as a fulcrum for the backwards motion of your head, increasing the chance and the severity of whiplash injuries. If your head position doesn't happen to be right in front of the restraint, a flat American restraint does nothing to guide your head; your head can go off the edge of the restraint and you'll be injured. Nothing in this world is foolproof, but Volvo didn't leave the position of the head restraint up to idiots; they made sure it stayed where it needed to be in case of accident.

So far as airbags are concerned, I'm agin' 'em- always have been, always will be. If people are properly belted in, most non-freeway accidents are very survivable. Airbags add greatly to the cost of a car, they have to be serviced periodically to remain effective, and their replacement cost after a crash is horrendous- so expensive, that there are a lot of used cars running around that have been in a crash, and then repaired cosmetically without replacing the airbags. Seat belts are extremely cost-effective technology; they save the majority of users, dirt-cheap. Airbags save a few more, but at a very high cost; I'd rather see more enforcement of buckle-up laws and driving laws in general.

Most people don't even remember how deadly cars were in the 1950's and 1960's, before seat belts and interior padding. It was pretty common to be badly hurt in fender-benders. Kids often wound up dead from being thrown into pointy chrome knobs on the dash; the knob would wind up imbedded in a child's head (this happened to one of my grammar-school classmates in 1961, in fact).

We've come a long way.

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (RearWheelPaul)

Paul:

I have one other qualm about airbags. Since their deployment systems lose effectiveness with age, lower-income drivers (who are most likely to be driving an older car) will not necessarily get the protection that more affluent drivers in newer cars will get. Lower-income drivers are also the group most likely to suffer severe economic consequences from being injured in an accident. It's also possible for a lower-income driver to believe he has airbags when he doesn't- there have been cases of used cars being sold without their crash-deployed airbags having been replaced- these cars were cosmetically repaired, but not safely repaired.

I'd rather see the Volvo philosophy of old applied to auto safety- what is simple, robust, and gets the job done? There is entirely too much sophistry in today's cars, and it's resulting in cars that can only be considered safe and reliable for a few short years. Eventually all the gee-whiz electronics age, and then- oh, brother.

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (RearWheelPaul)

Just a quick comment about the 4 point safety harness... volvo has been toying with these in their prototypes so hopefully not before too long..

i dunno, it may become a reality. anyway so yeah..... i should probibly have my airbag checked out shouldnt i?

what if its not all good! the horrors!! anyone know exactly how these airbags go bad and what they do to fix them, and what it costs? the woman i bought my volvo from said she was in an accident and the airbag deployed and it cost her like 1600 bucks

to fix. this was like 1992 though so..... still that much or more?

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (danemodsandy)

Just to be clear, I have no qualms about the features in my car

I agree about the car safety stuff too. New cars, while they may be safer, really too much on electronics. I think the 240 was an entirely safe car even before ABS and Airbags became optional equipment. I do not like airbags either, my car has them, and I only keep them for the insurance break. Also, I have a 92 240, would I need to do anything w/ the airbag since its been 13 yrs?

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (MenardVolvo)

MenardVolvo:

Your local Volvo dealer should be able to test your airbags, as well as correct any problems found. Typical faults include electrical problems and aging propellant canisters. If you don't want to go to a dealer, there is also a company called Airbag Service International; they do mobile testing and repair of airbag systems nationwide (they're franchised). Their Website is http://www.airbagservice.com , or they can be reached at 1-800-2AIRBAG, to find the nearest franchisee in your area.

As Paul Grimshaw has said, ten years is about the effective life of an airbag system without being checked, so your 13-year-old car is due for a check. Paul's also quite correct that DIY measures are not recommended; I know of one driveway mechanic who suffered a broken arm when he accidentally triggered the airbag of his car during a dashboard repair.

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (RearWheelPaul)

Quote, originally posted by RearWheelPaul »

When technology was expensive and craftsmanship cheap, cars were designed to be rugged and simple. Today the opposite is true.

Paul:

Well, people also want too darned much nowadays. I've often said that it's impossible to build a car with almost every bell and whistle found on a Lexus at a third the price, and still retain the quality of a Lexus. Yet many a car sold nowadays is "loaded" with features to a degree that would have been fantastic two decades ago, because even the most impecunious shoppers demand all the goodies. It's very difficult to find a car of honest quality nowadays- one that is well-designed mechanically, with all of its components made to a high standard- because it seems that more and more R&D dollars go into designing these trinkets instead of coming up with sound engineering. Even more difficult is the job of discovering which cars might be well-made. The average consumer nowadays is giving up, sighing, and signing up for five years of payments and an extended warranty. In five years, the cycle begins anew.

I bought my 245 wagon after seven years with a late-1990's car that was a nightmare, full of badly-designed, shoddily-made components. It died, absolutely and forever, at 66,000 meticulously maintained miles, due to an egregious design flaw (major electrolysis current) in its cooling system that the manufacturer could not find means to correct.

After that, I said, "Somewhere out there, there's an old Volvo that needs a good home."

 

Re: Are 240s really still safe? (danemodsandy)

Finally, some people I can agree with, through a forum about safety. I too do not like what is being cramemd into cars. I truthfully will only buy 240 or earlier volvos. I like the new cars, but I do not trust new cars these days. DVD players, navigation systems, I-pods and integrated cell phones. Give me a nice 240, solid steel frame, tape deck, and manual tranny, and I am good to go. I am of the believe that my father raised me with. The 240 was the best of the volvo line (though I myself am partial to p1800s as well), and I do not plan on buying any other kind of car. I trust mechanics much more thatn I trust electronics.

 

I would disagree that the Volvo 240s are safe to drive, and I the newer Volvos are significantly better. The old Volvos are loved dearly for doing their best to protect their occupants for the time, but compared to early 2000s Volvos, the vintage Volvos are not safe to drive save for your love of the car or the vintage experience.

You were right to wonder how old airbags aged. Volvo recently recalled some cars from the 2000s to replace the original ZF/TRW-sourced airbags after an incident where an original airbag exploded with shrapnel.

Volvo said they no longer believe that there's an expiration date on SRS systems, so the SRS system is expected to work for the lifetime of the vehicle as long as there's no warning light. The recalled airbags are presumably a defective design or construction rather than proof of an expiration date (the replacement airbags use a different propellant, and it appears that the recalled airbags were damaged by humidity just like Takata airbags, despite using different propellant than Takata). Airbag Expiration Response from Volvo

The new Volvos are better due to more advanced materials (like boron steel) and structure, and even the 1990s Volvo 900 series, despite being derived from the older 700 series , received more advanced metal meant to improve safety (therefore it is safer than its predecessor, the 700 series and the 200 series).

The newer Volvos also have one of several generation of SIPS to protect you from side collision.

Also the Volvo 200 series, despite being able to support the entire weight of the car in each pillar (from the advertising), does not have as strong a roof as you would hope. As you can see, the 240's roof can't handle a severe rollover. A 2003 XC90 can (albiet the test is not as severe), probably due to stronger materials and thicker pillars.

This poor 940 got really mangled from a small modern Renault! I think it's the most compelling evidence that the old Volvos are not "safe" to drive depending on your risk tolerance.

The side impact airbags and side impact structure significantly reduce injuries, by at least half compared to the 240 or other Volvos before SIPS was implemented. You can compare the side impact injury rates (representing MAIS2+ injuries) from this study, baseline being the 240 and similar, gen 1 being Volvos from the 90s with SIPS.

Volvo side impact protection generations (cars sampled)
Baseline

• 240/260 MY - -93
• 740/760/780 MY - 92
• 940/960 MY -91

Generation I

• 850 MY 92–94
• 940/960 MY 92–95

Generation II

• 850 MY 95–96
• 940/960 MY 96–98
• S70/V70/XC70 MY 97–99

Generation III

• S80 MY 99–06
• V70 MY 00-08 (classic)
• S60 MY 01–09
• XC70 MY 01–07
• XC90 MY 02-

Generation IV

• S80 MY 07- -
• V70/XC70 MY 08- -
• XC60 MY 09-

Injury rate is defined as the number of injured of a certain level of AIS divided by the total number of occupants (injured as well as uninjured) in the group considered.

Volvo said "A continuous improvement in
car structure and implementation of different specialized safety systems have resulted in significant improvements in car safety over the past few decades. Isaksson-Hellman and Norin (2005) showed a reduction of the risk of MAIS2+ injury by more than two thirds in Volvo cars when comparing cars designed from 1970s to the most recent models."

Also check out the diagram from a Volvo article showing the deformation of the 240 from a 35 mph side impact, vs the 35 mph crash tests by IIHS or Euro NCAP performed on modern cars. We would call it a bit more than preferred, even if some people escape with minor injury from side crashes in 240s.

It's still impressive that the baseline (240 series) injury rate is not as high as I'd expect for the old design!

If I had to choose a vintage car to experience and drive, I'd choose a 240. Or a Mercedes (since they invented the crumple zone). Maybe an Audi with proconten. 🙂 I think driving a new safer car could be an important difference if you god forbid find yourself in a crazy crash. Like those head on crashes.