Junkyard Find: 1983 Volvo DL Sedan With 327k Miles

Murilee Martin
by Murilee Martin

I've been writing about junkyardified cars here at TTAC since November of 2010, when I documented a pair of Fiat 128s in a Denver boneyard. Since then, we've seen plenty of discarded Volvos here, but no Volvo 200 Series four-door sedans!

That's not quite as bad as it sounds, because I wrote about 13 Volvo 240s all residing in the same car graveyard in 2011's Northern California Volvo 240pocalypse article. Half of those cars were 244s. There was a 244 with BMW grille as well, back in 2013, but that piece was about the grille swap and not the car itself.

But still, after so many thrown-away 242s, 245s and 262s honored in individual posts on this site (I've shot a single junked 264 since I started doing this automotive journalist thing, but I wrote it up for another publication), it's time that we did a proper Junkyard Find about that most iconic of brick-shaped Volvos.

I still find discarded 244s all the time, especially when I visit California. That's where I found this '83, at the Moss Landing (near Santa Cruz) Pick-n-Pull.

Now let's talk about what we should call a 200 Series Volvo with four doors, four engine cylinders and a trunk, because some of you are experiencing brain gasket overpressure due to the fact that you saw the title of this article and realized that someone is wrong on the internet.

Volvo came up with a sensibly European system for naming cars with its 140 Series, back in the 1960s. Three numerals; the first indicated the series, the second the number of engine cylinders and the third the number of doors.

This system carried over into the 200 Series, when production of that car began in 1974, with trim level designations added after the model number. All was well for a while, but then Volvo decided that, starting with the 1980 model year, the 200 Series cars sold in the United States would get trim level codes as their model names. Four-door, two-door, wagon, four-cylinder, six-cylinder— it didn't matter.

That means that Volvo called this car the DL Sedan when it was new (starting with 1986, U.S.-market 240s were badged with 240 followed by the trim level designation). Lately I've been trying to use whatever name the manufacturer used for their vehicles when new (even when it's something maddening, e.g., the 1988 Eagle Eagle or most Subarus of the 1980s). So, even though most of us default to the 1975-style nomenclature by calling this car a 244, I'm not doing that here. ¿ Entiendes, Méndez?

The 200 Series Volvos were screwed together pretty well, and many of their American owners love their cars enough to perform regular maintenance and get them fixed when something expensive breaks. This combination of good build quality, simplicity of design and strong owner-car bond means that many 240s rack up impressive final mileage totals before being put out to pasture. This is one of those cars, having averaged 8,186 miles for every one of its 40 years.

The highest trustworthy (as opposed to not-so-trustworthy) odometer reading I've seen in a junkyard vehicle was in a 1990 Volvo 240 DL sedan near Denver: 631,999 miles.

This car has the sixth-highest odometer reading I've seen in a discarded Volvo, after the previously mentioned '90, a 493k-mile 1990 740 Turbo wagon, a 393k-mile 1990 240 DL wagon (1990 must have been a good year at Volvo assembly plants), a 391k-mile 1985 240 DL sedan that goes up on another site any week now and a 338k-mile 1979 245 DL.

Overall this car stands at just 45th in the Murilee Martin Junkyard Odometer Standings, between a 330k-mile 1982 Honda Prelude and a 326k-mile 1996 Honda Accord wagon.

The DL was the lowest trim level for 1983 and this car doesn't seem to have been bought with many options.

No air conditioning, but it does have the automatic transmission, giving it an MSRP that started at $11,475. That's about $36,027 in 2023 dollars. Serious cheapskates could get a base DL two-door sedan with four-speed manual transmission for $10,650 ($44,437 after inflation). Meanwhile, the 1983 BMW 320i two-door with five-speed manual listed at $13,290 ($41,725 in today's money).

If this is the original naturally-aspirated 2.3-liter straight-four SOHC engine (likely but not certain, given the higher-than-average wrenching ability of your typical 21st-century 240 owner and the bonanza of these engines in junkyards nowadays), it was rated at 107 horsepower and 127 pound-feet.

That was acceptable power for a car that scaled in at just barely 3,000 pounds. Yes, they look bulkier than they really are; in fact, the Volvo 200 Series is very similar in size and weight (not to mention general chassis design) to the early Fox Mustang. I would know!

The 200 Series was just about the same car as its 140 Series ancestor from the A pillar rearwards, the main difference being the MacPherson strut suspension on the 200. Some junkyard shopper has purchased a fender from this car, giving us a good look at that suspension.

It has been picked over with the thoroughness I often see on these cars, because there are still plenty of Northern California 240 owners who need parts (plus even more eBay sellers of Volvo parts who prowl these yards).

Volvo began selling the intended replacement for the 200 Series, the 700 Series, as a 1983 model in the United States. As it turned out, the 240 sedan and wagon outlived its immediate successor in the showrooms, remaining available here through 1993. The last member of the 140-derived rear-wheel-drive Volvo Brick Family sold here was the 1998 S90/V90, meaning we got a solid three decades of these cars.

You ride in safety while you ride in comfort… in a Volvo.

Admittedly, the turbocharged version was more fun to drive. In 1983, a new 127-horse GLT four-door with four-on-the-floor manual cost $14,360 ($45,084 now), but Volvo threw in a sunroof on the deal.

1983 Volvo DL aka 1983 Volvo 244 DL aka 1983 Volvo 240 DL in Northern California wrecking yard.

1983 Volvo DL aka 1983 Volvo 244 DL aka 1983 Volvo 240 DL in Northern California wrecking yard.

1983 Volvo DL aka 1983 Volvo 244 DL aka 1983 Volvo 240 DL in Northern California wrecking yard.

1983 Volvo DL aka 1983 Volvo 244 DL aka 1983 Volvo 240 DL in Northern California wrecking yard.

1983 Volvo DL aka 1983 Volvo 244 DL aka 1983 Volvo 240 DL in Northern California wrecking yard.

1983 Volvo DL aka 1983 Volvo 244 DL aka 1983 Volvo 240 DL in Northern California wrecking yard.

[Images: Author]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by  subscribing to our newsletter.

Murilee Martin
Murilee Martin

Murilee Martin is the pen name of Phil Greden, a writer who has lived in Minnesota, California, Georgia and (now) Colorado. He has toiled at copywriting, technical writing, junkmail writing, fiction writing and now automotive writing. He has owned many terrible vehicles and some good ones. He spends a great deal of time in self-service junkyards. These days, he writes for publications including Autoweek, Autoblog, Hagerty, The Truth About Cars and Capital One.

More by Murilee Martin

Comments
Join the conversation
5 of 16 comments
  • Carson D Carson D on Dec 26, 2023

    The arrival of the second-generation Prius was a black swan event for the Volvo 240 population. It's only gotten worse since. The overlap between the sort of people who drove Volvo 240s and the sort of people who can't be convinced to drive an electric car is barely visible to the naked eye.

    • See 2 previous
    • 28-Cars-Later 28-Cars-Later on Dec 27, 2023

      The newest 200 series examples were twelve years old in 2005, I think the second or third plus owners couldn't finance a new car in the time period even if they were inclined to the Prius (you have to remember, decent 240s in 2005 were still a song at $1,500-3,500ish). I'm sure there were more than a handful of original and perhaps long time second owners of '86-93 200s who thought, "yes its time for a change" but Volvo's new customer base is/was somewhat well-to-do and most would be on late 90s or early 00s cars by the time XW30 Prius bowed. If you adjusted your argument to say post 2010 I'd agree as it was in the 2012-18 period which saw the denouement of the Volvo 200 series, at least in the junkyards.


  • Redapple2 Redapple2 on Dec 26, 2023

    Please note. The white lettering is still clearly readable on the heater's push buttons. At 14,000 miles and 1y-6mo, it was gone from my lovely, new 1984 Chevrolet. (you ve had time to memorize them dummie)

  • Bd2 Lexus is just a higher trim package Toyota. ^^
  • Tassos ONLY consider CIvics or Corollas, in their segment. NO DAMNED Hyundais, Kias, Nissans or esp Mitsus. Not even a Pretend-BMW Mazda. They may look cute but they SUCK.I always recommend Corollas to friends of mine who are not auto enthusiasts, even tho I never owed one, and owned a Civic Hatch 5 speed 1992 for 25 years. MANY follow my advice and are VERY happy. ALmost all are women.friends who believe they are auto enthusiasts would not listen to me anyway, and would never buy a Toyota. They are damned fools, on both counts.
  • Tassos since Oct 2016 I drive a 2007 E320 Bluetec and since April 2017 also a 2008 E320 Bluetec.Now I am in my summer palace deep in the Eurozone until end October and drive the 2008.Changing the considerable oils (10 quarts synthetic) twice cost me 80 and 70 euros. Same changes in the US on the 2007 cost me $219 at the dealers and $120 at Firestone.Changing the air filter cost 30 Euros, with labor, and there are two such filters (engine and cabin), and changing the fuel filter only 50 euros, while in the US they asked for... $400. You can safely bet I declined and told them what to do with their gold-plated filter. And when I changed it in Europe, I looked at the old one and it was clean as a whistle.A set of Continentals tires, installed etc, 300 EurosI can't remember anything else for the 2008. For the 2007, a brand new set of manual rec'd tires at Discount Tire with free rotations for life used up the $500 allowance the dealer gave me when I bought it (tires only had 5000 miles left on them then)So, as you can see, I spent less than even if I owned a Lexus instead, and probably less than all these poor devils here that brag about their alleged low cost Datsun-Mitsus and Hyundai-Kias.And that's THETRUTHABOUTCARS. My Cars,
  • NJRide These are the Q1 Luxury division salesAudi 44,226Acura 30,373BMW 84,475Genesis 14,777Mercedes 66,000Lexus 78,471Infiniti 13,904Volvo 30,000*Tesla (maybe not luxury but relevant): 125,000?Lincoln 24,894Cadillac 35,451So Cadillac is now stuck as a second-tier player with names like Volvo. Even German 3rd wheel Audi is outselling them. Where to gain sales?Surprisingly a decline of Tesla could boost Cadillac EVs. Tesla sort of is now in the old Buick-Mercury upper middle of the market. If lets say the market stays the same, but another 15-20% leave Tesla I could see some going for a Caddy EV or hybrid, but is the division ready to meet them?In terms of the mainstream luxury brands, Lexus is probably a better benchmark than BMW. Lexus is basically doing a modern interpretation of what Cadillac/upscale Olds/Buick used to completely dominate. But Lexus' only downfall is the lack of emotion, something Cadillac at least used to be good at. The Escalade still has far more styling and brand ID than most of Lexus. So match Lexus' quality but out-do them on comfort and styling. Yes a lot of Lexus buyers may be Toyota or import loyal but there are a lot who are former GM buyers who would "come home" for a better product.In fact, that by and large is the Big 3's problem. In the 80s and 90s they would try to win back "import intenders" and this at least slowed the market share erosion. I feel like around 2000 they gave this up and resorted to a ton of gimmicks before the bankruptcies. So they have dropped from 66% to 37% of the market in a quarter century. Sure they have scaled down their presence and for the last 14 years preserved profit. But in the largest, most prosperous market in the world they are not leading. I mean who would think the Koreans could take almost 10% of the market? But they did because they built and structured products people wanted. (I also think the excess reliance on overseas assembly by the Big 3 hurts them vs more import brands building in US). But the domestics should really be at 60% of their home market and the fact that they are not speaks volumes. Cadillac should not be losing 2-1 to Lexus and BMW.
  • Tassos Not my favorite Eldorados. Too much cowbell (fins), the gauges look poor for such an expensive car, the interior has too many shiny bits but does not scream "flagship luxury", and the white on red leather or whatever is rather loud for this car, while it might work in a Corvette. But do not despair, a couple more years and the exterior designs (at least) will sober up, the cowbells will be more discreet and the long, low and wide 60s designs are not far away. If only the interiors would be fit for the price point, and especially a few acres of real wood that also looked real.
Next