(first published 3/27/2012) The Volvo 140 series was introduced in 1966 as a ’67 model. This car, with continuous updating over the years, finally ended production in 1993 as the 240. The 140 was much more modern than the 122/Amazon it would eventually replace, and cemented Volvo’s reputation for the next thirty years as safe, reliable…and boxy.
The first postwar Volvo was the PV444, a two-door sedan that was powered by the inline-four B4B engine with 40 hp. Designed for middle-class Swedish families, it was a very efficient and practical car. The first Volvo model imported to the United States was the PV444. The first Volvo distributor in the US was Nils Sefeldt, a 44 year old Swede who took his family, $3,000 and a PV444 to America to make a go of it. He set up shop in Texas, and his first shipment of five PV444s arrived in late 1955. Volvo was slowly but surely making inroads in the North American market.
The 444 and 544 were deceptively fast. Volvo got a lot of free press when race-prepped 444/544s started besting more obvious sports cars on the track. Many an MG or Porsche driver were shocked when this funny little Swedish car that looked like a 3/4 scale 1948 Ford blew them away. By the late 1950s the four was producing 85 horsepower and 0-60 times of 14.3 seconds.
Due to its racing successes, Volvo heavily promoted it as a family sports car – practical and durable enough to drive to work, but with superior handling and performance to have a little fun on the weekend. The 444 and its 445/Duett estate version were continuously improved, but it had been in production for nearly ten years and a new model was due.
In 1956 the 120/Amazon series was introduced with very strong American design features, especially its Imperial-inspired grille. The four-door Amazon was a boon to the US market, as previously only two-door models were available. It did not, however, replace the 444 as had been expected. Instead, both models were offered concurrently for close to ten years, though the 444 was heavily updated and redesignated the 544 in late 1958.
An Amazon station wagon joined the two-door and four-door sedans in 1962 and was immediately popular. The Duett, as versatile as it was, only had two doors and a four door wagon was welcomed by many. The last 544s were built in 1965 and the Amazon became the sole Volvo model. This was potentially a problem. The Amazon was a fine car, but its design was clearly from the ’50s and by the early-to-mid ’60s it was getting dated. Volvo knew this and a new model had been under development since 1961. What would become the 140 would launch the ‘boxy Volvo’ design theme that would last all the way to the last 2000 Volvo S70 and V70 models.
The 1967 Volvo 140 was first shown to the press in August 1966, and it was a revelation. The design was very modern, if a little bland. It was not obvious that this was a Volvo, as the gently rounded styling of the 544 and Amazon was gone. The only styling cue to link it with the previous model was the split grille. It also introduced Volvo’s new model numbering system. The first digit showed the model series, the second digit was number of cylinders and third digit designated the number of doors. Thus, the 144 was a four-cylinder four-door sedan.
While it was intended to replace the Amazon, both models were available until the last Amazon was built in 1970. The 140’s wheelbase was unchanged from the Amazon, as were the powertrains. Standard 140s had the B18A four with 85 hp and a single-barrel Zenith-Stromberg carburetor. If you wanted a little more motivation, you could opt for the 144S, which added the B18B with 115 hp and twin SU’s. Initially offered only as a four-door, a two-door was added near the end of the first model year. The 145 station wagon debuted in March 1968.
An interesting variant of the 145 was the Express, meant to replace the Duett. The biggest difference between it and the 145 was a raised roof for greater cargo space. It came with or without a back seat, and a version with blanked out windows was also available. The 140 Series had several new safety features, such as four wheel disc brakes and a dual-circuit braking system. In 1967 the 140 received the Swedish Automobile Association’s gold medal for its brake system. It was also Sweden’s Car of the Year.
The 140 became available in the United States in March 1967, priced at $2995 with the four-speed transmission and $3175 for the automatic. In fall of 1968 all 140s received the B20 engine, with the standard B20A producing 90 hp and the B20B S version having 118hp. In addition, an alternator replaced the generator.
In 1971 Volvo divided the 140 into three trim levels. The basic 140 was unchanged, but a new DL model (for DeLuxe) received a new matte black grille and wheels with larger ventilation slots and revised hubcaps. The diagonal bar with the Volvo iron symbol, a trademark going back to the original 1927 ‘Jakob’, returned to the grille. The B20B engine was modified and became the B20D, which delivered 105 hp @ 5500 rpm.
A new top of the line GL (interior photo is a 1970 164, which was virtually identical) added all the DL features plus a 130 hp B20E four cylinder with fuel injection. Leather interior and fog lamps were standard, and the hubcaps were replaced with chrome acorn nuts with a bright center cap. The GL could do 0-100 km/h in 10.5 seconds with the four speed and 11 seconds flat with the automatic.
For 1972, the door handles were now recessed into the body, and the long-handled shift lever was replaced with a more modern short-throw version that had already been in use on the 164.
The 140 received quite a few revisions for 1973. The front end received yet another new grille, while bigger, more visible taillights updated the back. Bumpers were enlarged and on US-bound models were impact-absorbing up to 5 mph. A new black instrument panel had round gauges in a rectangular cluster and replaced the somewhat dated woodgrained version with a strip speedometer.
DLs had a very bright, very ’70s cloth interior option, as seen above. Quite a contrast from the black, gray or tan interior choices of today’s cars, eh? I kind of like it.
New safety features included reinforced supports in the doors for increased side impact protection and child locks on the rear doors. 218,155 140s were made in 1973. It just kept getting better. It seemed that this Volvo had legs, and would be around for some time.
That was true for the car, but it would only be called a 140 for one more year. The same basic car received a new front end in 1975 and became the 240 that would last all the way to 1993. But that’s a story for another time.
The 1974 models received even larger bumpers, and the front vent windows were eliminated. While the bumpers were not very attractive, they had to be added as federal regulations required them in the US. Volvo just equipped all 140s that way for efficiency’s sake. On a positive note, you now had bench seating on the outside of the car when it was parked. Fuel injected 140s received Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection with continuous injection (CI), replacing the earlier D-Jetronic version.
I have been wanting to do a CC on the 140 for some time, but I haven’t seen one in twenty years – maybe even longer. When I was a kid, friends of my parents, Dee Dee and Ward, had a seafoam green 140 identical to this one that Paul found in Eugene. It was their only car, and was still in great condition in the early ’80s. Ward replaced it with a silver Renault Fuego, believe it or not.
When they had their first child, the Fuego was traded in on a gunmetal gray Renault Alliance sedan. I don’t recall if he had problems with either (I was five, you know!), but in 1987 they got a new cream colored 240DL wagon, which they drove until at least 1998, when they moved to Michigan. Funny that his 240 was essentially an improved version of his old 144. Altogether, 1,205,111 140s of all types were built, and the 240 would go above and beyond those numbers. Yes, this car had legs.
The subject car is an exact twin to the ’72 144E my brother owned. Interestingly, our Volvo dealer here in Richmond took on the franchise in 1957 after their previous offering, Packard, became untenable.
I remember our family having the same coloured four door model that was a secondhand car from 1978 until 1982 when we bought a new dark green 240 DL. The sea foam colour is very 70s and the rust finally was taking a toll on the body being with the salt they put on Montreal roads.
Oh the 144 memories: where to start and stop? My brother’s college buddy bought a new one in 1968, the first year. I was deeply impressed. It was so airy, modern and Swedish, and he drove the piss out of it.
And the trip out to Ocean City with that girl in her Dad’s new ’70; got to drive it and finally figured out overdrive; been hooked ever since. Still love these cars; there’s quite a few around here yet.
Paul, what about that girl, did you finally figure her out as well…
The first Volvo I drove was my girlfriend’s mom’s 245DL, with four speed and overdrive. It was a 1975 model and this was about 1984. It was a revelation to me. I was used to American Iron and, at the age of 18, convinced it was the Best in the Universe. Then I drove the Volvo. The materials, fit and finish would shame a modern day luxury car. There were no rattles, squeaks or thumps. The car handled beautifully, safe, sure and secure. My dad’s 1979 Impala was junk compared to that Volvo and it was a lot newer.
Really, in a way, driving a Volvo at that time changed my life forever.
people write a lot about how japanese cars changed america’s perception of automobile quality. although the japanese made a fine car which was a tremendous value, it was actually the volvo 140 series that woke many americans up to what a car should be. everything about it said quality. unlike a benz, it wasn’t about status. any sensible person would pay more, if they had it, for a car that was safer, drove better, was more reliable and lasted longer. if they still made the 245 now, i would buy it in a heartbeat.
Capitals stop working?
too expensive…
I’ve had crazy pipe dreams about Volvo bringing back the 240, this time using the XC90 instead of the 140 series as the basis. After all, the XC90 has been in production since 2002, so it is likely amortized. Give it a basic level of equipment (i.e. cloth seats, steel wheels, generic double-DIN radio), basic trim inside and out (even sealed-beam headlights if necessary!), some durable and efficient engine, and sell it for $2x,000. The options from the factory, much like Scion’s, would be limited – owners would customize their cars during/after purchase from catalogs. The car and accessories would be designed with IKEA-like plug-and-play customization capabilities.
If Volvo won’t do such a thing themselves, maybe another company should buy the tooling from them.
Ah yes the proper boxy Volvos- they don’t die, they just move to Oregon. I still drive an ‘early’ 245dl with the square headlamps- ’79/80 only. The 140’s were much more stylish than the 240’s, but they were also much more rust prone- I see many rusty 140’s in the UK still- granted they’re 40 years old and still driving. However, both the Amazons and 240’s were much better at resisting rust. I still get my oil filters (with the non-return valve) at the local Volvo dealer in Ticehurst- its a little family run place, in a posh twee commuter village whose middle class (in the British sense) residents have been buying Volvos since time began. Every time I go in there, the salesman compliments my Volvo- which is 33 years old and used everyday, and asks what it would take to get me into a new one? Like clockwork, my answer is ‘only if that new one was built like an old one- and not just a jazzed up Ford Focus’.
If Volvo brings back a durable, RWD easily repairable car with a carburettor, over-engineered mechanicals and supremely comfortable seats, commando bumpers capable of surviving 20mph smashes, manual windows, Laycock de Normanville electric overdrive, and a 40 year life expectancy, I’d be the first on the waiting list.
I don’t think there is anything a modern car can do that a 1970s Volvo can’t do equally well.. … well, as long as you live somewhere that Aircon isn’t needed. They weren’t too good at that.
Something like this, perhaps? I took a photo of my mom’s XC90 V8 and chopped it to look more like a car. Call it a 285 GLE.
Yes, thanks!
yea, just like that only boxier!
Tom,
Is the Volvo you own a 740, or a 940? I can’t remember which one 🙂
I just purchased a one-owner 1991 740 sedan (base) the other day. It is extremely clean, always pampered, and has a mere 141k miles on it. I got it for $950.
I had (past tense, unfortunately) a ’91 940SE, which was basically a 960 with the 2.3L turbo four. My dad ordered it brand new, and I started driving it in 1997. Sold it in August of 2004; wish I’d kept it. I have a 2006 V50 2.4i wagon now.
Got any pics of your 740 yet?
Tom,
I haven’t picked it up yet since the owner isn’t departing from the area for another two weeks, but once I get my tags on and registration squared away, I’ll definitely send you some pics.
The headliner is also being glued back on, since it was failing right before I bought it.
Was your 940 SE reliable when you were driving it? I’m sure you also remember the 780 Bertone coupes – Volvo only made 400 of them in 1991, which turned out to be the model’s last year.
Well, the turbo did go out at about 75,000 miles, $1200 later it was good as new (this was in 2002). The service tech at Lundahl, who’d been a Volvo mechanic since the ’70s, said he’d never seen an original turbo last that long! I imagine most new Turbos were driven pretty hard.
In about 1999, it had an intermittent stalling problem when I was slowing to a stop. It would start right back up though. That was an easy fix, a can of injector cleaner and it was fine. It had 28K on it when I started driving it, and 102K when I sold it to a friend of my dad’s.
I sure remember the 780. They were big bucks, $40,000 in the late ’80s. When my dad got the 940SE, it was $32K. It was also the first car we had with a CD player. It had a six-disc unit in the trunk – all factory.
No regrets though, I loved that car.
Volvo went to a water-cooled turbo not long after bringing out the turbo option. I’m pretty sure the replacements were also water-cooled.
My suspicion is that Volvo developed the turbo to replace the POS PRV V6.
Awesome write-up! Can’t wait for the 240 series write-up.
I was just noticing the other day that my 850 has a closer resemblance to the 140 series than any other Volvo. And the first gen s/v60-70 (not the renamed 850) series really looks like the 240 series. So it’s like they repeated the 70’s and 80’s again. Too bad they weren’t RWD redblocks.
My sister had a ’75 244 sedan (with the electric overdrive) that she bought in 1990. It had 100,000 miles on it, and had been very well maintained. There was a garage nearby that specialized in Volvos, so she never had a problem getting parts or service for it. The only major problem she had was when the radiator was stolen out of it one night…in my parents’ driveway! She drove it for a few years, bought a new Honda Civic, and gave the Volvo to her husband’s nephew as a first car. He was just learning to drive at the time, and it would have been a pretty forgiving car to learn on. Her husband had a 245 wagon for a few years until they moved to the US from Canada and had to sell it. Also a great car.
To think about why Volvos became legendary in the US, its important to think about them in the context of other imports in the 50s and 60s. Volvos were ‘normal’- RWD, solid rear axle with strong diff and gearbox, water cooled cast iron engine, simple and not high strung, and were not only reliable, but were advertised as thriving on abuse. Volvo surely did know the American midset! They also were not excessively expensive- they were around the price of a Galaxie or Impala in the ’60s, although exchange rates changed this as the ’70s wore on, moving into Buick and then Cadillac territory depending on the kroner/dollar rate that year.
Starting with the 140 series, Volvos were also ‘right sized.’ They were the same size as early American compacts, or late 90s Camry. The wagons were particularly useful, and were advertised to stay at home mothers who wanted a decent size car that seated 7, yet did not want to maneuver a country squire or Kingswood, which by 1972 had reached proportions that were grotesque. Having owned both a 1971 Ford and a Volvo 240, I can see the appeal. Remember until the Volare/Aspen, nobody made a wagon that could compete with the 240. The only one close was the Hornet Sportabout, and its layout was much less practical. I think the big 3 intentionally avoided making a compact wagon, as they would have probably appealed more than the high profit margin wood paneled big block yachts offered when the 140 was current.
Above all, Volvo showed the world that you could sell cars on safety and longevity. Although Volvos aren’t the most reliable car or the best built, they are the most durable. These two words don’t mean the same thing. Hondas are very dependable, but like Toyotas, they lack longevity. Ten years ago, 1986-93 Accords were everywhere. Now they’re gone. Old Volvos on the other hand, they just keep going- used like beetles as transportation in their third or fourth decade of life.
Volvos are now properly classics. They have an identity, and what will make them immortal is their mass ownership as first cars- usually a hand me down, or a 20 year old example purchased by one’s parents on the basis of their safety. These were the youth wagons that took us to punk shows, camping in field parties, displayed a remarkable ability to drive its owner home when they were in no condition to operate machinery, and were part of other legendary transgressions of youth. Everyone has a friend that inherited his parents beat up Volvo with 300K miles and had not had an oil change under his or her custody, yet kept chugging along. I’d say in 20 years, when people my age have grown children, these old wagons will occupy the space that the splitty camper occupies to the hippy brigade by us old farts tryin’ to relive our youth by paying stupid money for the crappy cars we drove when we were young.
I roll.
“Remember until the Volare/Aspen, nobody made a wagon that could compete with the 240.”
which is really strange because they used to make wagons that were only slightly bigger. my family had a blue chevy II wagon (110″ wheelbase) that wasn’t that much bigger and very space efficient. and lets not forget the rambler wagons.
He meant that the Volvo wagon was about the only compact wagon available in the U.S., made during early 70s, besides the AMC Hornet Sportabout. Come to think of it, there was the Peugeot 505 wagon too, but we didn’t see nearly as many in the U.S. as the Volvos.
I agree. That’s what I like about Volvos of this vintage. There was nothing pretentious. Nothing flashy to go out of style. No planned obsolescence.
Makes me miss my old 142
Yes the safety aspect made them dangerous in traffic lots of owners knowing the inherent strength used to drive like in a demo derby happily banging into other cars. A Volvo without the corners beaten in was a rare sight.
Yes – growing up we got a 1973 144E; the “E” designation I think means it’s fuel injected, which I think was necessary to meet California’s emission standards. Had the the B20F engine. The car was a bit of a slug (especially with the Borg Warner slush box) but it was really boxy, roomy and had a huge trunk. Really comfy seats with the adjustable lumbar support – that appealed to my dad who had back problems. It was our first imported car.
It was pretty durable but the parts and service were fairly pricey. I think we had the car until 1989, when my parents gave the car to a couple of Chinese dissidents who fled China after the June 1989 Tienanmen Square crackdown.
“On a positive note, you now had bench seating on the outside of the car when it was parked.” Lol, so true. My grandparents’ 1973 164E (they bought it new here in New Zealand, it replaced their 1959 Plymouth Belvedere) had regular size bumpers, but the 264GLE they replaced it with in 1980 had the positively enormous ones. I distinctly remember as a 6 yr old that my 4 yr old sister and I would sit on the bumpers at family picnics. When the 264 was replaced in 1984 by an XE Ford Fairmont Ghia my sister and I were most saddened that the bumpers were integrated. But we were getting too big to use the Volvos ones as seats by then anyway.
It’s not a 144, and I’ve posted about it before, but the 164E was an awesome car. Dark blue-green exterior, orange leather interior, 4 speed + overdrive, a/c and sunroof. Even today it would be quite a pleasant proposition for a daily driver.
Re the quarter-windows, I believe that they were deleted on cars with factory a/c.
I always liked the 164. My folks were close friends with the local Volvo dealer, and his wife had a small-bumper 164, probably a ’69 or ’70 in the mid-’70s (before my time). She said it was a really nice car. And she drove just about every model and trim level of Volvo for 25 years, so she really must have liked it.
It looks like the 164E in the ’73 brochure was the same color combination as your grandparents’ car.
Yes, that’s it, gorgeous colour. Having the factory a/c their’s didn’t have the front quarter windows, which cleaned the design up nicely. It’s the one car they regret selling. We still have the factory Volvo child seat from it (a chrome and leather thing, would be completely useless and probably dangerous today!).
I recall that some car magazine in the late 60s had a test of the NEW Volvo 164 + the “NEW” MGC in the same issue. They both had 3-liter 6s. The Volvo blew away the MGC in every way.
Yes, it was certainly quite the rocket ship here in NZ at the time. Although the fuel injection system couldn’t cope with altitude, and the car suffered serious fuel starvation on mountain ranges – but as long as it was closer to sea level it was great!
The Amazons and Bricks get all the glory but the 140 series may have been one of the best cars of all time while yet being totally underrated and all but forgotten.
One of the things that still stand out to me was the tremendous amount of front and rear legroom and the cavernous trunk. The packaging efficiency achieved by Volvo with its front engine RWD live axle layout puts plenty of FWD midsizers to shame.
One of the guys in the rally club I’m in calls his the “Viking longboat”. Had a ride in a 242GT around a rally stage a few months ago, the car was pretty standard but certainly got along ok – mentally I was pushing the non-existent brake pedal on my side a few times!
Dad considered Volvo’s when it was Obvious He Was Going To Gamble On The Opel Kadett Otherwise. He Wasn’t prepared for a $ that started with a firm 4 for a base Volvo… He Could Get 2 Opel Kadetts for That, So He Bought One…after all Its Almost a Buick Right? Ok Dad, It Beat The 62 Rambler American he handed to my sister with love.
My Brother’s first wife insisted on one of the 144s shortly after the Audi Fox she piloted was totalled.
I never Liked Them much, But I would Like To Experience driving In One.
One of my early cars was a 1972 142S in a pretty sky-blue color. I loved that car! Comfortable, fun to drive, very spacious, big trunk . . . I only had it less than 6 months before it was totaled when a guy ran a red light and I plowed into his passenger side. The Volvo, who I had named “Ingrid” (I still have the 1980 Virginia vanity plate that spelled out her name) was pretty well crushed, right up to the windshield . . . which didn’t even have a crack in it. Tough damn car. I was shook up and sore for a week, but whole and alive. I still miss that car terribly, never found a good replacement for it. I don’t see 140 series Volvos much at all any more here in Richmond. I would love to find one in restorable condition in that light blue, 2-door S version.
The first car I distinctly remember riding in as a child was my mom’s green 1975 244DL. The Volvo was already nearly ten years old by the time that we got it and was pretty basic in specification, compared to contemporary cars of the time (my dad worked at a Volvo dealer at the time and regularly switched demos- the original 740 Turbo being particularly memorable, with its black-and-white checked cloth seat inserts and black striped “louver” appliques on the rear quarter windows).
But the 244 was definitely a tough car with its big, sturdy bumpers and was none worse for wear after being lightly sideswiped by a beat-up Colonnade-era Malibu coupe while parked in our local shopping plaza. (This somehow stands out as a memorable incident of my youth. Returning to the car with my brother and I in tow, my mom had to chase after the Malibu driver across the lot after being tipped off about his transgression by a helpful witness. As a six-year old shocked by this hit-and-run in the making, I think I became suspicious of ratty-looking Seventies Detroit iron afterwards.)
The 1983 Accord sedan that later replaced the 244 was luxurious in comparison, equipped as it was with A/C, a digitally-tuned stereo and tape deck, and mouse-fur velour upholstery, but it never gave off the same sense of fallout-shelter solidity as the Volvo.
By the way, it must be some measure of the automotive strides made over the past two decades that used cars seem to age much better these days. That Accord, five years old when purchased, already had chalky paint, whitening bumper rubber and some surface rust on the sills. The 1998 Volvo S70 that my family has owned since it was four years old and which I drive today still looks reasonably presentable after a wash, in spite of all the battle scars and bumper rash inflicted by NYC street parking.
My middle sister briefly had a used bright yellow ’73 base 142.
She was dating her soon to be first husband and they went car shopping and 2 cars i remember her checking out as I was with them was a 1972, I think Fiat 128 sedan, in red, and this bright yellow 73 Volvo and this was in 1978.
The Volvo had the basic black interior and an AM radio with the single rear speaker mounted in the middle of the rear parcel shelf and not much else. It had the 4spd manual transmission and manual steering.
She ended up swapping cars with my Mom as she took the ’72 Gold Duster my Mom was driving and they took the Volvo and the payments as she could not handle them herself at that time (still a college student) and we sold it not long after that but remember riding in it at least once. Loved that grill used for 1973 only as the nicest grill of that series IMO.
2 friends of mine had Volvo’s later on, both 1990’s era 740’s if I recall right and both were wagons too, both bought used in the early to mid Oughts IIRC.
I think the 140/240 series are one of the greatest cars of all time. Easy to drive and maintain, simple,comfortable, durable, powerful and in 145 version immensely practical. I believe three ‘165s’ were made- a pity Volvo didn’t make more, as this would have been the ultimate transcontinental load lugger.
I’d love to see Volvo return to it’s roots with a 140 series for the 21st century. Fiats’ new 500 and the ‘new’ mini has been very successful. In Europe Skoda have stolen the role of the old Volvos. Jimmy
I live in Ghana where you don’t see any 140s at all, but growing up in Nigeria in the 70s exposed me to a large number of them.
There was a large expat community back then, and quite a lot of Nigerian Academicians returning from The States brought back a lot of Volvos (both 140s and 240s).
Three neighbours had four Volvos between them in 1979 – 80.
A 244DL, (US spec), a 244L (UK LHD spec, with a square, red fog light right next to the license plates) and a 264GL (Swedish spec, 2.7 liters Automatic), and a 240L.
Living in Ghana now, a very large number of 1981 – ’83 Volvo 240s are used as commercial vehicles plying the Ghana/ Nigeria route.
not sure if i am hoping those animals are alive or dead. the things people do out of necessity.
Thank you for this article! Yesterday, my son just bought this very car in Eugene as his first car. It now has the emblems that say 145e so I assume it’s been damaged and repaired and they’d couldn’t salvage the 144e badges. It’s great to have this article as part of the car’s history.
Mike, Great! I actually shot this in Eugene a few years back; 2009, probably. It lived not far from my house, but then moved on. Good luck to your son with it; I’ll keep an eye out for it.
I think I saw this 144 for sale on ebay last year sometime, but I passed it over and bought a yellow 142e instead. I love the car for its cavernous trunk and great visibility, and the fuel injection works beautifully. The overdrive should be considered essential if you are shopping for one, because you can’t cruise at today’s highway speeds without it.
The 140s were very good during the winter with their 165/15 wheels. I have learned drifting them and being faster than local heros with more powerful cars when I was younger. Now after 25 years Volvo driving I sit in a V40 and miss the old RWD beasts. Here in Germany the 140s were slaughtered as spare parts for the Amazon and PV with the result that they are quite rare now. The design of both 140 and 240 is like a good wine and super serious. I look forward to find a good old 144 in Sweden one time.
I remember seeing the Volvo 144 and 145 a lot when I was a boy. At the time I thought it was the ugliest car on the planet. Its boxy shape didn’t help its looks any. Nevermind safety and durability, at the time, I liked cars that were stylish and had performance. If it was safe, that’s great. If it was durable and reliable, excellent. But at 5 to 7 yrs old, I cared more for how attractive it looked.
Fast forward 35-40 yrs, I see Volvos of today being sold, and I find them to be the ugliest cars on the planet, and I find the Volvo of the 70s more attractive. How crazy is that?! 🙂
They held no interest for me as a kid growing up in the 60s and 70s,the only Volvo I liked was the Saint’s P1800.Volvos were quite a rare sight in 60s Britain(I don’t remember seeing many where I grew up).
I’m too young to have seen The Saint, but I’ve seen plenty of P1800s, and they were perhaps the best looking Volvos on four wheels.
Volvo came a long way. And volvo was the first car to offer seatbelts. And front headrests on it. Volvo always stands for high safety.
Front headrests, but not rear seat headrests. That wouldn’t come until years later. Why that was, I’ve never understood.
excellent write up tom.
I miss those days when a Volvo looked like no other car.
Once a upon a time this model was everywhere and so many were still on the road into the early 2000s.
Well engineered, well built, safe, good on gas and many of them well balanced that even with RWD and only snow tires on the back, you could drive winter roads with ease. Well, at least in my part of the country.
I remember seeing these on American roads. If only all cars of this vintage were this well built. 🙂
Great car and a great history of it! I’ve had many experiences with later 240 models, as a number of friends’ parents and such, and ultimately some of my friends drove these well into the 2000s. I even know at least two people who purchased used 240s after 2000 to replace significantly newer vehicles. Tried and true vehicles.
I like the later 240 versions of these cars, with the square headlights and the big bumpers. Yeah, guess I’m a bit of an oddball. Never driven a Volvo, but those seats look wonderfully comfy.
Distinct lineage up until Ford bought Volvo cars.
Still have my 1988 745 Turbo wagon with only 166k clicks.
It’s unforgivable that Ford bought Volvo. Why did they do that?
Here’s a What-If to ponder: suppose AMC had taken a different course, analyzed how Volvo engineered and crafted their cars in the late 1960’s, re-engineered the Rambler American to Volvo specification, re-configured their assembly operations to emulate Volvo craftsmanship, jettisoned all their other models and built just one line into the 1970’s: Success? Failure? ????????
I’ve always liked Volvo 140 series, 240 series, and 740 series cars.
There are so many what-ifs to ponder with poor little AMC. What if they’d introduced the upscale Concord models with all the fancy bells and whistles in 1974-75 right after the first oil shock, when they still had the compact wagon market all to themselves? What if they’d concurrently built a one-price Hornet America as an entry level model? What if they hadn’t squandered precious resources on the stupid and ugly Matador coupe? What if the Pacer had been built as Dick Teague really wanted? What if they’d switched their entire line to 4-wheel drive, with comfy passenger cars to compliment the Jeep line instead of hooking up with Renault?
So many lost opportunities. If only they’d grasped that they needed something different to succeed in the US market as a small independent, such as Volvo-like upright designs and quality, something the Big Three were not offering.
If only AMC had the money. (Sigh) yes if only things had been different. Hindsight is….
It’s a shame that hadn’t happened.
Great cars. I still see many running around in Portland, especially the wagons. I was told the PV 444s shared the same rear side windows as VW bugs. Is that true ?
Great overview Tom. And what a beautiful hue on the feature car.
Family member had an 89 5 speed 244 DL for several years. Only paid $1500 for it. Good paint, interior and body. AC didn’t work. That car survived a lot of abuse, including adding oil when the light came on, or maybe a day or 2 later. I finally broke her of that habit before it was too late. Put a lot of hard miles on it. Finally sold it with a blown clutch with around 270k miles on it, engine still ran fine. Durable car. Easy to work on. Sold in 08, that car is probably still on the road today.
sådan här bil var en awsome och annorlunda utseende .
Got a Beauty for sale. on Ebay. if anyone is interested.. Cambridge oh.. starts on thurs the 2nd of June 2016 email for details.. mick@ohioland4u.com 1973 144 E there are only about 300 of these left. from 1.2 mill total production..
We bought a rust free 25 year old 144 from our neighbour, an early one with the long gearstick. It had spent most of its life in Gibraltar and southern Spain driving up and down one of the most dangerous roads in Europe, the Med coast highway.
We put many miles on it. So easy to fix. When doing a decoke I could stand inside the engine bay. Eventually the UK salt took its toll and we gave it to the fire station next door to practice on. They liked Volvos coz they’re so tough. They got the hydraulic choppers out and cut it into little pieces.
The first of many Volvos in our lives, we next had two 240s, then a 740 and later a V70. Great motors.
They are even more of a hoot to drive than either the 544 and 122. Of those two, the 544 has a much more supple suspension than the 122, and would be my #2 pick after the 144. The one I drove was a wagon, but though it was a (borrowed) Mom car – literally – it had that lovely hooligan attitude I love in cars.
I ought to sit down someday and make a list of favorite hooligans. Two Plymouths come to mind, too: a ’62 hardtop loaner when my 544 blew its fuel-pump diaphragm and instantly degreased the crank bearings on the second day I had it, and I was delighted with how Volvo-ish that big rattletrap was … and then an early Valiant station wagon I borrowed whenever I could. Nobody even <]MAKES cars like that any more!
Yeah, The boring & boxy Volvos weren’t perfect. But by the mid 90s, like most European makes, they had lost their way and lost their minds, building high-tech money-pits that could barely outlast the warranty, much less survive for decades. Now, they belong to China!
M. D.