Any Advice?
 

Hello all, new member here.
Until a few years ago I was a committed Volvo driver - 340, 240 saloon, 240 estate, 850, V70 then another v70 across three decades. Then I moved over to vw Transporter as we needed a van - shame Volvo don't make vans!

Anyway, that's a bit of background. New situation is my son wants a v cheap/ scrap car to work on and learn about mechanics, and will want a road-worthy car for driving once he passes his test.
Yesterday we hit a compromise car that ticks both boxes, having looked over a friend's car - a Volvo 240, preferably estate (so he can camp in the back - I used to do that lots when I was younger).
They look easier to work on than lots of newer cars (easier, certainly not easy for me, I know next to nothing about mechanics), lots of room around the engine etc. plus they look to be a decent investment. We both love them.

But then I looked at MPG on-line, and it seems people are getting around 20mpg?! I'm sure I used to get around 30 mpg from my 240 (I think it was a GLE) auto on average.
Sooo - two questions.

Am I right thinking they'd be good for him to learn about mechanics on?;
and what is a realistically achievable average mpg in a 240, and specifically, which one should we be looking for to get most mpg?

Any advice very much appreciated.
Chris

Hi 'Chris152'

A 24X will make an excellent car for your lad on which to 'learn the ropes'.

MPG will vary with many factors, not least driving style. Back in the day, our '75 244DL 2.1 Auto could only manage 22 overall. Extremes were from 16-18 around town to 24-25 on a run. Our similar spec '81 car was was about 10% better overall and topped 30 when driving in Sweden. My '84 245GLT, 2.3 MOD car was much more economical, regularly returning high twenties.

So it is impossible to say, really. One possibility might be to look for (or convert to) a car running on LPG, but he would need to do a lot of miles to recover the up-front costs.

Having said that, is fuel consumption that important? At 3000 MPY, the difference between 20 and 30MPG is 50 gallons or about £300 at today's prices. Balancing that, he will have the benefit of a solid, reliable, comfortable and safe car that will very likely appreciate in value and cost less to insure than his mate's Corsa!

I would say go for it!

Regards, John.

I agree a Volvo 240 would be good for a young guy to learn about the really simple mechanics of what goes on, but a 240 specifically, no. The 740 or 940 have the same engine and gearbox etc, and are readily more available (more elbow space under the bonnet too) and not subject to the massive increase in price. Also, much more room in the boot for camping in the back (can fit Ikea double mattress for extra comfort, I camped in the back of mine for 2 weeks touring Germany)

As for learning mechanics, with the redblock engines (240, 740, 940) you'll top out pretty quickly to be honest. I bought a 940 which was going to be scrapped to fix up - took me about 2 weeks, although I have a lot of experience. So your son is gonna know the ins-and-outs of the car in maybe a year or two. Plus, they don't make cars like that anymore.

I'd say, yeah, go for it, but don't expect the puzzle to last that long.

Example 740

As for MPH - I get 16mpg in my 850 T5, 18 in my 960 and 20 in my 940, all automatics. Got a friend who has a new Mercedes diesel bluetec, advertised at 75-80mpg combined or something, he gets about 38 in reality, so MPG is a load of crap anyway.

240/740/940 has plenty space and capacity for an electric motor conversion and a large battery pack in the future as well

As for LPG conversion, i wouldn't bother. Oil companies are phasing out supply.

Hi Chris

Sadly I am no longer a 240 owner, but...

Agree with all said about learning mechanics and ease of work and also availability and simplicity of 740/940

However, 740 and 940 are marginally more complex, less sought after, and personally I'd argue less interesting - consider how long the 240 was in production for! I would also suggest that a 240 will hold its value better than the later cars - for now anyway

Fuel consumption: I had a 1991 manual 2.3 and on a long journeys regularly managed nearly 40 mpg. As others have said, mpg is massively dependent on driving style and skill. It is also true that if your son's mileage isn't huge whether his car does 30 mpg or 40 mpg isn't hugely important. I guess what is true is the nature of the journeys he is going to do and where you live (Vale of Glams I see...). Being quite a hefty car, a 240 is never going to be good around town, whereas on more open roads using top gear and the engines natural and easy torque, the MPG will be proportionately better

Good luck with it. Nick

The 240 is a good choice (I have the ’88 2Ltr Estate) couldn’t be easier to service as it is free of complications like computers- micro switches- engine management systems that have to plugged in or done by the garage: ~ parts are reasonable & most things can be repaired at home. As mentioned in other posts you will have an appreciating asset if that is what you want. Fuel costs are all relative but if serviced correctly and driven wisely then you go with style at reasonable costs! Buy the best you can- sooner than later- I have had mine for about three years now and prices have moved up in a short space of time. All told a recommended vehicle that should tick most if not all the boxes you require, Good Luck. Bob

Similar advice to what the others have said but whether you go for a 240, 740 or 940, get one with fuel injection, preferably L-Jetronic, LH-Jetronic or Motronic as they will be more fuel efficient and generally less troublesome than carbs or K-Jetronic although most K-Jets are very reliable too.

No fancy computers are needed to sort out problems on them either!

Also don't be tempted by the so called "economy versions" with the smaller engines, they aren't suited to the heavy bodyshell and will reward you with poor performance, heavy fuel consumption and increased/premature engine wear.

Get the 2.3 in whichever model you go for and you get reasonable performance (lively if it's the high pressure turbo but a youngster may struggle to insure a turbo) and economy. The 7/9xx ranges are both just starting to come up in value as well (unlike the 24x which started climibing some time back) so there's a good chance you could buy a "fixer-upper" for a few hundred quid, sort out its little foibles all the while your lad will be learning and end up with a car that is worth more than it owes you and is still going up. :thumbs_up:

The volvo 240 used to do between 25 and 28 mpg average however you drove unless the journeys were very long then you might make 30 mpg .
I wouldn't worry too much about that , i havent examined a 240 for 15 years , i would think there could be rust problems these days unless you are lucky ..

Thanks so much for all the replies - loads to start thinking about there. I think it has to be a 240, something about the style of them that we both like - even if the 7s and 9s might have plusses that we'd lose out on.

Insurance is a real issue these days, so I think turbo will be out of the question and we'll be looking for something that's cheaper, but hopefully not underpowered (and fuel injection comment taken on board). Getting my head around how insurance works is beyond me, though.

Trying to get decent mpg will be a good challenge for him - tuning as well as possible, driving carefully. And I think if we can find the right car, loss of some money on petrol (he won't be doing anything like high mileage) might be offset by the overall investment in a beautiful car that's going to appreciate with both work and time.

I know he's trawling the net as we write, and he's following this thread - we really appreciate your comments and, once we find the right car, will be back to bother you with endless questions, no doubt! :rolleyes:

Insurance is a law unto itself with no rhyme or reason to the average man in the street.

Good luck with whatever you choose anyway! :thumbs_up:

Good luck in your quest.

Rust is important including as you mention investment, appreciation, re-sale value. Later 240s have better anti rust protection. Other people will be able to advise about that and about where to look for rust. You mention the estate....light rust below the tailgate behind the rear bumper indicates rust out of sight and not cheap to fix.

If he learns mechanics on a 240, that will impart good fundamental skills. The design is old now. Does he want to learn newer design mechanics instead?

Few garages know the wrinkles of working on 240s now.

There's a lot of helpful knowledge in this forum. But some threads go on for ever before hopefully reaching a result. Sometimes the right people aren't around. Sometimes methodical people with knowledge make wrong assumptions. :(

Some spares can take time to obtain.

The k jet by the way has an inlet manifold designed to stand a mug of tea or coffee on, and a reputation for reliability, and avoids the diagnosis problems of jetronic.

My jetronic estate works for me.

Brakes issues can be elusive. :( Start by following the very specific 240 bleeding instructions.

Before doing anything significant to a 240, search this forum, and ASK. :)

Good luck.

How about the 'A' reg estate currently advertised in these forums. They don't come much cheaper, and it would appear to have considerable potential. Sort the MOT and improve as you go along. No connection with the seller, but the fact he's a forum member must be preferable to buying an unknown car off the 'net. Given what good examples make nowadays, you could do a lot worse.

Regards, John.

Agreed.



.

The K-Jetronic inlet manifold has many uses! :tounge_smile:

As for diagnosis, the K-jet Vs the later L-jet, LH-Jet etc is very much swings and roundabouts. Some faults are easier to diagnose on the K-Jetronic and others are easier on the L or LH-Jetronic if you can use a multimeter and know what to look for and where. Some faults get a bit more involved such as ECUs but they seem to be forming a failure pattern lately.

As you put it, your Jetronic (K or L/LH?) estate works for you - each to their own, both will give valuable knowledge to anyoen starting out "in the game" and if the young lad does choose to go into automotive engineering, anything he lerns on either will rpovide good grounding for leanring about the modern stuff.

After all, the primary basic function of a 4-stroke engine is suck, squeeze, bang, blow. It's the various systems around the engine that facilitate that, whether it's the cam timing, crankshaft motion, ignition or exhaust system. They all work together to make the engine run and once you get your head round that and how one can effect another, you've pretty much got it sussed, whether it's carb, injection, petrol diesel or whatever else.

That's a very simplistic way of describing it but if you break down each system into smaller, manageable parts to learn, you can understand it all. :thumbs_up:

This one John?

https://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?t=302553

Yes, 'L.S.', that's the one. J.

I read that and my head started spinning, but I like the 'suck, squeeze, bang, blow' bit, I followed that! I can see we need to do some reading...

I saw the DL advertised on here but we've spoken about it and it's pretty clear that we need to get something we can sit in and drive home and hopefully, having watched this evening's Car SOS (Rover P6) has solid bodywork. I'd rather we spend the extra and get something that's up and going properly so he can work to improve things rather than rebuild, if we can get it at the right price. That said, the market's not exactly flooded with them at the moment, so we'll have to see what comes up - though he's clear it needs to be petrol and manual (I loved my auto, but clearly he knows better:rolleyes:).

It's all quite complex when you come to this new - I've just been reading the Wikipedia entry on the 240, too many variables and I've found your thoughts far more helpful in trying to narrow things down.

Thanks all.
C

Hi.
If you need any help with insurance at all then please feel free to drop me a line.
Regards,
Dan.

Have you seen this one?

https://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?t=302227

It ticks many of your boxes as far as i can tell but it is auto.

However on the year it was made, i'm fairly sure it will have the ZF 4-speed (with overdrive 4th and Torque Converter Lock-up) so economy and performance will be good, especially with the B230E under the bonnet.

It seems to be in relatively good order throughout with a few bits needing some TLC/fettling to improve it but still with plenty of scope for a young enthusiast to "make it his".

I noted your comments that your lad said it had to be manual but has he ever driven an auto? Come to that, has he driven a manual? The clutches tend to be pretty heavy in the 240 models and compared to the modern stuff that he's likely to learn to drive in, might be incredibly heavy.
I had my first auto when i was 18 and after that, first choice was always an auto. Long time ago now, to give you a rough idea it was a 12 year old 144DL auto so i've had a long association with automatics.

In a market that isn't over-run with 240s of any description, i'd say don't knock it until you've tried it! If he really doesn't like/can't get on with the auto box, you could always find the parts neessary to convert to manual if you have a good base car.

I agree absolutely with 'L.S.' regarding autos. Opinions differ, often fiercely (!), but I personally feel that these cars really suit automatic tranmission.

Like 'L.S.', I've had both in my time, but much prefer autos - I also had a 145DL Auto from 1972 when it was 12 years old, followed by 2's, 7's and a 9 series car, and currently a V70 - all autos! My one regret was that the 3 series cars were not available with a 'conventional' automatic - only a CVT on the basic 1.4 models. Would have loved one on the 1.7 GLE and 2.0 litre GL versions that I once owned.

Having said that, if it has to be a manual try and get one fitted with an overdrive - I've had two, a 145DL and a 245GLT. In my view they were nicer to drive than those without - quieter and more refined at speed, and 10 - 12% more more economical overall when driven like for like.

Regards, John.

I agree the plain 4-speed seems lacking, but the M46 and M47 are pretty much the same regarding economy etc?
I did once long ago convert an M47 to a M46 just because I'd experience of an overdrive box on other cars and loved the slick clutchless change. I haven't bothered with my subsequent cars - the 5-speed seems pretty good - but I've kept the old 4+OD together with the prop shaft just in case. The 5-speeds don't have the longevity of the earlier box, and start to get noisy after about 200,000 miles.
The overdrive box did about 450,000 miles when I scrapped the car, but still seemed faultless and good for another few.

LS - I should have put 'estate' in the list of requirements - camping and all that. I'd seen that saloon advertised and like it - in fact, we both really like the saloons, but an estate is perfect (he surfs and that space in the back would be ideal for boards and stuff) and the idea is that the car's a keeper.

That said, looking on the net, I remembered how much I like the two-door coupe versions! Were they just for the US market? Anyway, that's not on our radar.

Also, I'd not thought about getting an auto and in time converting to manual- is that a complex job? If we're looking for an auto with overdrive, what dates of manufacture should we be considering?

I've put a wanted ad out on FB, we'll see if anything turns up...

ps Dan - I tried to pm you about insurance but I can't as I don't yet have enough posts. Maybe you can pm me and I'll be able to reply? Thanks.

If memory serves it was about 1986-88 when the ZF 4HP22 started finding its way into the cars, Jaguar had been using it as had others from about 86 on so there's a likelihood the 240 did too, i had an 87/E reg 740GLE with it in, it's possible they were fitted earlier but that is my earliest knowledge of them.

It's a fairly long job to convert to manual, simply in terms of spanner twirling time. Not especially complicated, just labour intensive and you'll need some good trolley jacks and axle stands.

Ideally you'd want a spares car to remove the manual box from and all items of trim, gear lever, pedal box, the list is fairly long and some parts are best bought new such as the spigot bearing. I've done several in my time but no Volvos, that said the principle is the same so i can give you plenty of pointers, if anyone else has also done it they can hopefully fill in any blanks i might leave.

Summing up what you've said so far, it sounds very much like you're looking for a late 245GLE/GLT, go for as late a car as you can find as you're more likely to get fuel injection which gives the improved power and economy.

I'd say avoid one with a cat (unless it's unavoidable, i.e. J reg or newer) as it saps power, economy and can be costly if the cat is either stolen or expires.

That's really helpful - thank you! I definitely need simple pointers to work with at the moment.

As an indicator of the level we're (I'm) thinking at here, in my mind the conversion to manual would involve the gearbox. I'd not thought of pedals, housing etc! But that would be down the road and one for the boy to sort out in time.

Both of my O/D cars were 4-speeders, Clifford, as were - apart from my two 3-series cars - my other manual Volvos, hence the comparison. Of the two, I preferred the 'button on the gear-stick' of the 245 to the 'stalk on the column' of the 145, but that was just personal preference.

Having also had Austin Maxis back in the day, I take your point regarding 5-speeders (effectively overdrive) being more relaxed and economical to drive than straight 4-speeders generally are.

Regards, John.

That's where the 4 speed autos come into their own, 4th is an overdrive ratio so makes a big difference. :thumbs_up:

Browsing the net and looking at details of various cars, I realised I couldn't recall all the advice you've given, so I've gone back through and pulled out what I think is most important info for us at the moment. Accepting that some of these are clearly swings and roundabouts, we need to consider:

L, LH Jetronic and Motronic - improved power and economy over carbs and K Jetronic (question - how will I know what injection system is in any car - is it by date?);
Avoid smaller engines (ie 2.0) as they are underpowered, less mpg and wear out - go for 2.3;
Later 240s have better rust protection (any idea what date this started?), and avoid significant signs of rust below tailgate and behind rear bumper, this can be a sign of expensive rust further down;
If manual, try to get overdrive for better ride and economy; 5-speed better still as no overdrive to go wrong (I think I read that elsewhere) but they can get noisy after 200 000 miles (question - do some autos have OD? I see that's what's written above);
Avoid post-1991 (J-reg) as the cat saps power and economy and can be expensive to replace;
245GLE/GLT looks a good match to our needs (tho the 'T' could be expensive for insurance for him).

With those pointers in mind we have something like a target car in mind, and can work back from that according to what comes up for sale. Any corrections very welcome!
Thanks.

The "T" in GLT stands for either "touring" or "toys", not a turbo. Mechanically they are just fuel-injected machines.The standard goodies are: electric windows all round - GL models have electrics at the front, GLE all round; leather interior, though velour was an option; electric mirrors, also fitted to GLE and early GL models; a sliding steel sun-roof on the saloons and a few earlier estates; and the Virgo alloy wheels. The suspension was firmed up but that's not a visually obvious difference. Obviously some of the bits can be retro-fitted to lower spec cars.

K-Jtronic engines have a large intake manifold/plenum chamber that you can use as a tool store/cup holder and was fitted on cars up to (IIRC) a G-prefix.

Manual gear-box is a matter of preference - I had an M47 that ran to 235000 without any sign of trouble, and an overdrive box whose wiring I "modified" to give me 8 forward ratios.

240SE estates were predominantly 2.0litre cars but I didn't find mine particularly underpowered as we came back from Clitheroe to Asgard with two large rolls of carpet on the roof at the legal speed limits and the Thelwall Viaduct is not the place to be holding up the traffic.

The late estates, with the deeper tailgate window are aluminium so don't rot out at the base; all estates have fragile tailgate wiring looms but there are plenty of guides on the forum to the bodging/proper rectification/replacement of same.

I don't think that can be true. All the models I have had have had steel tailgates, including 90, 91, 92 and 93.
If they were aluminium they'd be much lighter, and would need different struts and probably catch/lock.

It's true though I think that the later design are less prone to rust - may be because of better window seal,or perhaps just being younger so haven't started yet. :)

Only the 700/900 had alloy tailgates .. 240 had many galvanised parts after 1986 . all models had extensive wax spraying in the members and doors etc

I trust your lad appreciates just how lucky he is to have a dad who takes such a keen interest in his welfare!

Regards, John.

As Loki pointed out, the "T" in GLT is not for a turbo. It's Grand Luxury Tourer/Touring depending on your viewpoint as some argue "Touring" only applies to estate models.
The "E" in GLE historically for Volvo was used to denote fuel injection (from the German word einspritzt = injection, dates back to the Bosch injection on the 164GLE) but with the more widespread adoption of fuel injection has generally come to mean "Executive" .

To give a more universal idea of the comparison between a GLT and GLE mechanically, they're usually very similar with the GLT having a slightly lower ratio back axle (normally!) to give slightly livelier acceleration.
Other manufacturers examples of the relationship between GLT and GLE are roughly speaking :

Ford GT = GLT, Ghia = GLE
Vauxhall SRi = GLT, CDi = GLE

I picked those as they're mainstream models to illustrate the basic differences, Loki has gone in details of trim etc so i won't repeat all that.

As for the injection systems, i believe Motronic came in (officially) around 1996 although some refer to the LH system as Motronic. Any 240 you buy with electronic injection will be either L or LH Jetronic. Most are likely to be K-Jetronic (mechanical injection) which is generally a reliable system and has no ECU to go wrong.

I'm not sure when the improved rustproofing started on the 240, i know it started as a result of cheap Russian steel that was on the market in the mid 70s so many early (pre 1980) 240s have now succumbed to Tin-wormski. That's one of the reasons i suggested go for as late a model as possible.

Any 4-speed auto is overdrive, the 3rd ratio (whether it's denoted as "3" or "D") will be the same as 4th in a manual car, 1:1 ratio.
On the ZF box, the forward speeds (if memory serves) are denoted as 1, 2, 3, D and on the AW7x transmissions, 1, 2, D with a button on the side of the gear lever. This is an "overdrive defeat" button, after selecting "D", press this button and it should bring an orange upwards poiniting arrow on the instrument cluster. Automatic shifts are restricted to the first 3 gears. Press the button again to release the defeat and it should (above 45-50 on a light ish throttle) shift into overdrive/top gear.
The defeat is handy for overtaking when you don't want/need full kickdown for overtaking. For example, you're on a dual carriageway/motorway at 70mph, slight incline and a lorry in front of you and limited time to get past - kickdown would be too much but you still need a bit extra on a part-throttle overtake. Squeeze the loud pedal, hit the defeat button and it drops into 3rd, accelerating better than it would in overdrive and as you reach the sped you want, hit the defeat button again and as soon as the box senses the normal circumstances to engage 4th (O/D) it changes up.

Similar can be done on the ZF box but you need to move the lever to 3 and then back to D.

I've got a '92 240 Estate for sale if you're interested? It was great as my first car, lots of work done by myself to learn the ropes but he can still put his stamp on it. It's in the Sales section, drop me a PM if you're after any other information.

Cheers

Alex

Thanks for the replies all.

Loki - thanks for that correction - I was just assuming what the T stood for, things are never so simple! Toys are good things but on the down side, they tend to go wrong (my 850 was a T5 which I loved, but had all kinds of bits that the kids, when small, could fiddle with and started going wrong, which is why I got rid of it in the end. I'm sure we all look back at cars we had which now would have been worth hanging on to!).

LS - those comparisons are really helpful, and I'll try to avoid anything that might suffer from tin-wormski. :regular_smile: On transmission, things are becoming slightly clearer as I'm reading all the replies.

John and Alex - budget is a low as possible for maximum return. Hmmm. But definitely something we can drive home - when the plan was to get something needing lots of work (very cheap) for him to learn on and another modern car to drive, condition on the project didn't matter, but now we've found one car that he can learn to work on and also drive, I'd rather put the money into something that's together already and just could be improved. When I've bought in the past, I've always looked for fsh and lower mileage and it's more or less worked for me.
As for budget, I saw this which is slightly over but if it was an estate, I'd try to negotiate: https://www.facebook.com/marketplace...4181496489371/
And I really appreciate your last comment, John - I'm pretty sure the answer's yes, he does. And he'll be reading this soon, so the answer's yes, he'd better. :-)

OK, reality of what's out there kicking in. Given what's been said about the smaller engines, is a 5-speed manual 1990 2.0L GL, 12 months MoT, 185000 miles, price about half the one I linked to above, a bad idea? I'm sure lots of variables could affect the car, but all things being equal?

Can't comment on pricing as I can't see the FB advert[I don't do "social"media] It's the mid eighties since I had a 245-and then it was an auto-but would imagine it's much like my V70[140] in that it's no ball of fire,never going to win a "traffic light GP" but is more than capable of holding its own in modern traffic.This may or may not be a good thing but it might teach him how to read the road ahead/anticipation for any overtakes rather than relying on sheer grunt to pass slower moving traffic.If the price seems reasonable to you and as it has a full "ticket" it can't hurt to have a look/test drive can it?

The two litre was introduced to get below a tax threshold in, I think, Italy, Chris.

As 'L.S,' said, it will do the business, but has to work harder to do it, which tends to hurt economy. Unless your lad is looking to carry heavy loads and / or haul a heavy trailer, it will probably serve him very well. Why not take an extended test drive and see how he gets on with it?

If the rest of the car is sound, it may not be an unreasonable compromise to accept the smaller engine. It is much better to buy a good car with a smaller engine than a poor one with the larger one, and It may also help with his insurance, too. From your description at, I assume, c£1500, it doesn't sound a bad buy at all.

Is there perhaps a knowledgeable forum member in your area who might be prepared to look at it with you in exchange for some beer tokens, to give you greater confidence?

Regards, John.

We'll definitely take it for a test drive if we can (I have to take out a day's insurance as mine counts as a commercial vehicle, so the insurance doesn't cover driving someone else's car) and take it from there. But it does seem like it may be a shame not to wait for the right car - I'm sure the 15% less engine capacity could make quite a difference over nearly 200 000 miles. And now another 2L one (Torslanda) has come on the radar - being patient vs not missing a good thing's not an easy balance...

ps - looking to the future, is it a much more complex job to replace a 2L engine with a 2.3L engine than to replace a 2L with a 2L? Does everything fit both engines or do you end up having to replace all kinds of other bits?

I certainly wouldn’t get hung up regarding the 2.0 Ltr. The cars are more than capable in today’s traffic- you have to accept that these are from a different era and cannot compete with modern lightweight cars produced today. You will drive a classic for all the reasons already noted so the advantages out way the minor engine size- none are designed to be fast cars- none of them are! Just drive it with consideration in every aspect. Service it properly & the 2 Litre will take you to the moon and back.
Good Luck.
Bob.

(You will soon find out why people stop and say "I had one- best car I ever owned")

As long as you replace more or less like for like e.g. B200E for B230E you shouldn't have any problems. The grief comes when you start going from n/asp to turbo and the more involved ignition/fuel ECUs and pipework they need, not to mention different exhaust systems on the turbos.

For a simple capacity increase, few if any problems and the argument would exist that you bought it from a scrapyard as a 2.0 engine and fitted it, while you know one end of a spanner from the other you weren't aware (or even looking) for capacity details. You could even say it was in the car when you got it and had no reason to doubt it...... :tounge_smile:


In many ways i agree but let's not forget that even when new, the 2.0 240s weren't exactly a ball of fire and contemporary 1.6s (and sometimes smaller) would easily outperform them because they were so underpowered!
That will reflect even more harshly in todays world. The extra 300cc makes a huge difference so going for the B230 from the off would be the only way i'd consider it. That said i'e always knwon high performance cars and learned to drive in a straight-6, 2.4 EFi in the early 80s. Took my test in an MG Metro but that's another story!

I now have a B280E powered 760GLE and that is a world apart from the B230E 740GLEs i've previously had. In terms of performance and economy it's still no match for my other car which is a 2.7 V6 but they're totally different animals. They do however share a 90 degree V6 architecture, a 4-speed auto box (overdrive 4th obviosuly) and a similar kerb-weight of just under 1500kg.
However, no estate version of that car exists, the closest estate i have found in terms of size, equipment, performance, comfort, quality etc is the 760GLE estate.
For that i'm willing to compromise on the performance/economy.