Skuzzy

I have the job of looking for a milage whore for my parents to use. Depending on who drives more that day, my mom or dad will use the car. About 700 miles a week will be put on this car. My parents want something cheap (sub 4k) and the current options are as follows:

92 Volvo 740 Turbo Wagon, 110k Miles. All maint records, very clean and well taken care of. 3kish

2 Buicks with the 3800 engine. Both clean, 120k or so miles - 2500ish.

Mazda 626 95, 4 cyl, 130k miles, lots of maint just dont, little body damage, 2000.

Your opinions?

rai

IMO I don't like turbos for high mileage. I'd rather get a Volvo 240 those cars can take a lot of miles (200K +++)

Of course a honda accord or civic is better than a mazda or Buick (IMO).

If it were me I'd get a newer car with less miles. All the cars you list have over 100K miles.

RiceBurnerTX

With that many mile, I bet you could find an Accord or Camry still running well for around the same money. That's what I'd be looking for. Just my $.02 though. Vovlos do run well, but I'd have concerns over the Turbo as well. Our Buick crapped out right around that 120k mark, so I'd steer clear of them, but that could just be my experience.

Good luck

Skuzzy

Well, they arent looking to plop down money on a car to keep - and imports are very hard to find in my area (SE Okla), the volvo is an extremely rare find.

I know a couple family members with 3800s with well over 150k miles, but there are anomolys.

Thanks for the input.

no_really

A Buick any day, that 3800 will be running when only the cockroaches are left, as long as you take care of it. For $2500, you can't go wrong. I've had a few Buicks with over 100,000 miles, and they were the best non-sports cars I've ever owned, build and reliability-wise.

I would second the "no turbo" suggestion. Turbos are hard on an engine. Higher combustion pressures, more moving parts, more complicated systems, all bound to fail faster than a non-turbo, and more costly to repair. I've done it, and lived to regret it.