Banged-Up Boxy Sedans: 1987 Toyota Camry vs 1990 Volvo 740

Sbsd 5 15 2023
ADVERTISEMENT

Welcome back! I hope everyone had a good weekend. I spent most of Saturday becoming better acquainted with a Nissan VQ35DE engine. I came, I saw, I conquered the valve cover leaks. This morning, we’re going to take a look at a couple of dented-up sedans, but before we do, let’s see how Friday’s Subaru competiton went down:

Screen Shot 2023 05 14 At 6.09.34 Pm

Another close race, but the old brown Brat squeaks by with a nineteen-vote win.

Before we continue, I want to give kudos to reader “OrigamiSensei” for coining a brilliant new term:

“Nastalgia (noun): Having fond feelings and memories for things that were not that great in reality.”

I think that’s a perfect descriptor for my feelings towards an awful lot of old cars, and maybe some movies and music as well, and I intend to start using it, so I want to be sure to give credit where credit is due. Well done, my friend. Well done indeed.

Now then: Today we have two rather rectilinear sedans, with around half a million miles between them. Both still run fine, but both are a little worse for wear cosmetically. Which one is the better deal? Let’s take a look and find out.

1987 Toyota Camry – $1,495

00u0u 6fryf5lhpyv 0ci0t2 1200x900

Engine/drivetrain: 2.0 liter dual overhead cam inline 4, five-speed manual, FWD

Location: Gladstone, OR

Odometer reading: 289,000 miles

Runs/drives? Yep!

Toyota’s first-generation Camry came out swinging, but it wasn’t until this second generation that it really came into its own. It was about the same size as its predecessor, but it felt bigger, fancier, more substantial. And car buyers loved it. These things were absolutely everywhere, and they continued to be so for a good fifteen or twenty years after the next generation took over. The old automotive nemesis, rust, took most of them off the road in the more wintry parts of the country, but here on the West Coast they stuck around, racking up miles.

00h0h Hucd2gedca8 0ci0t2 1200x900

This pale yellow-beige Camry is closing in on 300,000 miles, and the seller says it still runs fine. It’s a five-speed manual, which was not all that uncommon back when this car was built, but of course it isn’t even available now. I still think that, a century from now, the beginning of the end of the automobile will be recognized not as the last production V8, nor the inevitable closing of the doors of Morgan Motor Company (you know it will happen one day), but 2011, when Toyota dropped the manual transmission option from the basic four-cylinder Camry.

00000 Erct5jh9o49 0ci0t2 1200x900

Inside, this car is showing its age. The driver’s seat is shot, and the carpet is stained and worn. And I can tell you, as a recent owner of a 270,000 mile Corolla, that while everything inside probably still works, it’s not anything you could call “nice.” The hard plastic is getting brittle, and the soft plastic will have a layer of grayish-brown grime on it that just won’t come off. The almost pristine back seat tells me that this car spent most of its life as a one-person commuter.

01111 Lwmcfujrs4 0ci0t2 1200x900

Outside, it may not be rusty, but it has a pretty good wrinkle in one fender. It looks like it lost a fight with a parking lot bollard. Still, it looks more respectable than a lot of $1500 cars. This won’t be a pleasant vehicle to own, nor a fun one to drive, but it probably still has some miles to give.

1990 Volvo 740 GLE – $2,400

00l0l 4g1kocwyz1f 0ci0t2 1200x900

Engine/drivetrain: 2.3 liter dual overhead cam inline 4, four-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Tacoma, WA

Odometer reading: 205,000 miles (but may be more)

Runs/drives? Sure does

The Volvo 740 was meant to replace the 240, but the 240 wasn’t having it, and refused to go out of production. Instead, this somehow-even-boxier sedan and wagon moved upmarket, with fancier equipment and more power. Readers of automotive magazines back in the ’80s will remember Volvo’s wonderful ad campaign comparing the 740 Turbo Wagon to various sports cars.

00e0e A1mcnnepdsp 0ci0t2 1200x900

This one isn’t a wagon, or a turbo. Under the hood of this 740 is a twin-cam version of Volvo’s famous “redblock” engine, which still makes it more sprightly than your average 240. It sends power to a basic but sturdy solid rear axle through a four-speed automatic. It’s all good solid stuff, with a reputation for longevity.

01414 A7xirznkez4 0ci0t2 1200x900

This old brick is not without its faults, however. The entire passenger side is banged up and scraped; it looks like the car side-swiped something. The seller also lists a number of electrical and mechanical items that need atttention, including the blower fan motor. I know this repair is notoriously difficult in the 240; I don’t know whether the 740 is any better. But I have heard Volvo devotees say that the blower motor is the first thing to check on a used 240; if it doesn’t work, they walk away. It’s that hard to get to.

01414 7kz8frfwcjf 0ci0t2 1200x900

They also say this car needs a new gauge cluster, which means the listed miles are suspect. Volvo odometers are not known for their reliability anyway; most of the time you can just assume the car’s mileage is “a hell of a lot” and leave it at that.

That’s what I’ve got for you on this fine mid-May Monday morning: two dinged-up old sedans with a ton of miles, but some life left in them, for nice reasonable prices. So you tell me – is your next beater coming from Japan, or Sweden?

(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)

About the Author

View All My Posts

47 thoughts on “Banged-Up Boxy Sedans: 1987 Toyota Camry vs 1990 Volvo 740

  1. Nostalgia: every time I look at my wife, she looks the same as she did when I met her 30 yeas ago.

    Morgan ain’t going away. They will, at some point, pivot to making autonomous flying carpets, somehow wierdly made out of plywood.

  2. I like both that gen of Camry (it was much nicer looking than its predecessor) AND the Volvo 7xx. I had a Volvo sedan just like that one (but in an awful rust-brown-orange color) though it might have been a 760 or 780… I really don’t recall (the car was already old when I bought it from a used car lot in Studio City). I mostly remember it being big, safe-feeling, and quicker than you’d expect (it was a turbo). It wasn’t pretty, but I liked it for the same reasons I like my current daily driver, an ’04 Volvo XC90: it feels safe and holds a lot of stuff.

    So, even though I’ll surely be in the minority, I’m gonna go with the 740 here, thanks to the big windows, high roof, ample trunk, and theoretically better crash outcomes. Both cars are on the rough side (and yes, the Volvo parts will be costlier) but I stand by my vote. 😉

  3. Ooof. If the Volvo weren’t wrinkled on one side, then it would be a decent project. But $2400 for a damaged, 30 y.o., Volvo with no HVAC?!? I know used car prices are stupid right now, but really?!?

    I’ll save $1000 and suffer through the mousebelts of the Camry with the creatively located dents.

  4. Thanks for the shoutout, Mark.

    Regarding today’s competitors I want to like and pick the Volvo but I believe the Camry is ultimately the better choice.

    The Camry is exactly what it appears to be – a $1500 cockroach that will not be enjoyable but it should get you there. The automatic seat belts REALLY suck, though.

    In better shape the Volvo would certainly be a nicer and more enjoyable car, but a number of the things that are wrong with it are too much of a hassle and/or will be too expensive to fix properly. By the time you deal with the blower motor (a job I’m currently doing on my Jaguar, what a pain!) and replace the dented door and some other things the end result simply wouldn’t be worth the time and money. I think you can find a better starting point if the 240 is the car you really want. It’s not the car, it’s this particular example.

    1. I thought the same thing. The 240 has a following, so it could in theory be a restoration effort with some chance of ROI, but the list of issues is pretty deep and the price up front is similarly steep imho. If I am going to get a cheap daily, I will take the cheaper of the two with working AC and a manual trans.

  5. SAMHSA is going to start handing this choice out as a depression screening. My dudes, are you going to submit yourself to purgatory of Toyota. Destined to get you to work till the sun collapses with only momentary joy. Or, call the squad cause you have hooning to do. You and your cliq rolling on Hydras sideways through a high school parking lot. Tire smoke pouring in the windows, system bumping. Quit your job, gets in the way of a good hoon. So what if it’s auto. Your never leaving first. The only thing that’s stopping you and the crew is the inevitable light pole you slid the passenger door into. Be your own Saint Peter, chose a Swedish Burnout Heaven.

  6. If the Volvo had a manual, or didn’t have the blower issues, it would win.
    If the Camry had an automatic, it would lose. The new clutch is a big plus at this price point. So it wins.

  7. Camry FTW. Spend a weekend deep cleaning the interior, exterior, fresh fluids etc, and you got a cheap, solid car to drive for a couple years. Bonus is the perplexed faces from people after you chirp the tires from a light !

  8. This was a tough one. A 5-speed Camry with the annoying automatic belts, or a Volvo with myriad issues. I could easily have chosen the Volvo, but I went with the Camry this time around because I miss my old 5-speed Subaru.

  9. To the average purchaser, Toyota.

    To me, the Volvo, as a project with more upward momentum. I drove one years ago and I really liked the feel of it. Trans swap and go-fast bits are likely in the future.

  10. The only things to survive nuclear Armageddon are twinkies, cockroaches, Indiana Jones in a refrigerator and this here Camry.

  11. The 16v Red Blocks were interference engines. Without knowing when the last timing belt service was completed, give me the Beige Wave Camry.

  12. Kenw people with each of these cars when I was a kid. Buddy of mine drove his mom’s old 740 through high school & college. It was named Hans. Great memories in that car. No such fun names or memories in the Camry.

    Hans for President!

  13. It’s funny to me to see this headline calling the 2nd gen Camry “boxy.” I had the 1st gen, which truly was a box, and when this new one came out it seemed all round and aerodynamic and modern by comparison. Now, looking back at it with modern eyes, look how boxy it still was!

  14. If you’re a fan of weird OEM car parts that nobody else cares about, the Volvo is worth it for the cylinder head alone.

    The 16V DOHC B234f motor was designed with Porsche, a spiritual continuation of the R-Sport 16V cylinder head sold by Volvo’s R-Sport ‘Competition Service’.

    That R-Sport head is of course the real prize, but it’s totally unobtanium. (There is one listed on KL Racing website for $11000cad right now.) It was advertised as producing 225hp… carbureted, which is a shocking amount of power from a 2.3L tractor engine in the early 80s.

    The B234f head is obviously nowhere near as special, but provides the same performance. It is the most reasonable route to building a powerful redblock motor, as it will flow better stock than a $$$ built 8v, allowing 5-600hp to be achieved relatively safely and affordably with catalogue parts and a big turbo.

    So If you’re into high performance RWD Volvos, this 740 is the sort of thing to keep an eye out for. 740s have never been a hot commodity, and this one is arguably worthless due to the body damage. Low ball the seller, part it out and take the 16V for your 240.

    Ignoring all that, it’s still a better/safer/more enjoyable RWD car than the Camry, even without the stick shift, and has my vote. 153bhp is nothing to sneeze for the malaise era. There are plenty of modern cars on the road with worse performing 4 cylinders. (Cough Subaru, Cough)

    1. The hot ticket with that head is to turbo it. A turbo 16v 2L was available from Volvo in Italy, so factory manifolds are around, if rare. Or build your own.

      Replace the timing belts often. Never use Continental timing belts. I had two fail at under 40,000 miles.

      1. Yup, unlike the rest of the redblocks, this is an interference motor. There are a few people who sell fabricated manifolds.

        Apparently the 16v Volvo head will also bolt up to the 2.3L Ford Lima engines.

  15. For once, the lure of a manual transmission isn’t enough to push me toward the Camry. The Volvo, being a Volvo and having 87,000 fewer miles, gets my vote.

    At their respective prices, either wouldn’t be much of a gamble.

  16. I wanted to vote for the Volvo, just because I’ve worked on old Camrys before and it would be fun to try something different. But these are not comparable at all. You have a stick shift in decent condition that’s approaching 300k miles (basically, see how black the exhaust is and try to use oil consumption as a metric for how much life the engine has left).

    On the other hand you have a Volvo of unknown miles, with significant body damage and multiple known problems.

  17. Super easy one for me. Had this generation of Camry stick shift that couldn’t be killed (or couldn’t until some boomer ran me off the road at 65 mph). If this one wasn’t so far away, it’d be in my driveway.

  18. Volvo, please.

    The Camry is a 5MT and according to the ad it has a new clutch and throwout bearing, all of which is nice, but it also has those damnable automatic seatbelts. Those are a deal breaker for me.

    The Volvo does need some [probably expensive] work, but the gauges and the blower motor can be done in one go when the entire dash is pulled apart, and its interior will clean up much better than the Camry’s. Swapping out the front passenger door will take care of most of the accident damage and you’ll have a decent DD for another couple hundred thousand miles.

Leave a Reply