1990 VOLVO 240 — Problems, Recalls & Safety Data
N/A
Safety Rating
26
Owner Complaints
0
Recalls
0
Service Bulletins
0
Investigations
Overview of the 1990 VOLVO 240
The 1990 VOLVO 240 has received a total of 26 safety complaints filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The most commonly reported problems involve the Vehicle Speed Control (5 complaints), Electrical Systemignitionmodule (3 complaints), and Electrical System12v24v48v Battery (2 complaints).
Recalls for the 1990 VOLVO 240
There are no recalls on file with NHTSA for the 1990 VOLVO 240. No Active Recalls
Owner Complaints for the 1990 VOLVO 240
26 complaints have been filed with NHTSA for the 1990 VOLVO 240. Below is a breakdown by vehicle component.
| Component | Complaints | Crashes | Fires | Injuries | Deaths |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vehicle Speed Control | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Electrical Systemignitionmodule | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Electrical System12v24v48v Battery | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Seats | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Electrical Systemwiring | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Electrical Systemwiringinteriorunder Dash | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Engine And Engine Coolingenginegasoline | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Exterior Lighting | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Power Trainautomatic Transmissionparkneutral Start Interlock Switch | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Seat Beltsfrontwarning Lightdevices | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Seatsfront Assemblyrecliner | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Service Brakes | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Service Brakes Electric | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Service Brakes Hydraulicfoundation Componentsdisccaliper | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Service Brakes Hydraulicfoundation Componentsmaster Cylinder | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Service Brakes Hydraulicpower Assistvacuum | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Steeringlinkagesknucklespindlearm | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tires | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Most Recent Complaints
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 1990 VOLVO 240 WAGON. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BATTERY WAS CONTINUOUSLY FAILING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A SERVICE STATION FOR INSPECTION. THE MECHANIC ADVISED THE CONTACT TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE INTO THE SERVICE BAY AREA. AS SOON AS SHE SHIFTED FROM PARK, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT APPLIED THE BRAKES BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT RESPOND. THE CONTACT MADE A HARD LEFT TURN TO AVOID CRASHING INTO THE FRONT ENTRANCE OF THE SHOP AND CRASHED INTO A WALL INSTEAD. THE BUILDING IMMEDIATELY BECAME FILLED WITH WHITE SMOKE AND A STRONG ODOR OF BURNING RUBBER. THE VEHICLE ONLY CAME TO A STOP DUE TO THE OBSTRUCTIONS BUT WAS STILL ATTEMPTING TO ACCELERATE. THE CONTACT HAD TO BE EXTRACTED FROM THE VEHICLE BY EMERGENCY RESPONDERS WITH A SLEDGE HAMMER, AND THE WALL HAD TO BE OPENED IN ORDER TO REMOVE THE CONTACT FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS STILL ATTEMPTING TO ACCELERATE WHEN THE CONTACT WAS REMOVED. HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE WAS UNABLE TO MOVE ANY FURTHER DUE TO THE OBSTRUCTION OF THE WALL. THE AMBULANCE ARRIVED TO THE SCENE BUT BECAUSE THE CONTACT WAS IN A STATE OF SHOCK, REFUSED MEDICAL TRANSPORT. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED OF THE INCIDENT. THE FAILURE WAS NEITHER DIAGNOSED NOR DUPLICATED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 129,000.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNED A 1990 VOLVO 240 WAGON. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE BATTERY WAS CONTINUOUSLY FAILING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A SERVICE STATION FOR INSPECTION. THE MECHANIC ADVISED THE CONTACT TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE INTO THE SERVICE BAY AREA. AS SOON AS SHE SHIFTED FROM PARK, THE VEHICLE SUDDENLY ACCELERATED. THE CONTACT APPLIED THE BRAKES BUT THE VEHICLE DID NOT RESPOND. THE CONTACT MADE A HARD LEFT TURN TO AVOID CRASHING INTO THE FRONT ENTRANCE OF THE SHOP AND CRASHED INTO A WALL INSTEAD. THE BUILDING IMMEDIATELY BECAME FILLED WITH WHITE SMOKE AND A STRONG ODOR OF BURNING RUBBER. THE VEHICLE ONLY CAME TO A STOP DUE TO THE OBSTRUCTIONS BUT WAS STILL ATTEMPTING TO ACCELERATE. THE CONTACT HAD TO BE EXTRACTED FROM THE VEHICLE BY EMERGENCY RESPONDERS WITH A SLEDGE HAMMER, AND THE WALL HAD TO BE OPENED IN ORDER TO REMOVE THE CONTACT FROM THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS STILL ATTEMPTING TO ACCELERATE WHEN THE CONTACT WAS REMOVED. HOWEVER, THE VEHICLE WAS UNABLE TO MOVE ANY FURTHER DUE TO THE OBSTRUCTION OF THE WALL. THE AMBULANCE ARRIVED TO THE SCENE BUT BECAUSE THE CONTACT WAS IN A STATE OF SHOCK, REFUSED MEDICAL TRANSPORT. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED OF THE INCIDENT. THE FAILURE WAS NEITHER DIAGNOSED NOR DUPLICATED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 129,000.
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1990 VOLVO 240. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN SHIFTING FROM PARK, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE AND THE BRAKES FAILED. AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE GLASS DOORS OF THE AUTO DEPARTMENT AND THROUGH THE BUILDING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE MECHANIC WAS UNABLE DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 129,000. UPDATED 01/05/14*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS INITIALLY BROUGHT IN FOR REPAIRS DUE TO THE VEHICLE CONSTANTLY SHUTTING OFF.*JS
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1990 VOLVO 240. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN SHIFTING FROM PARK, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE AND THE BRAKES FAILED. AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE GLASS DOORS OF THE AUTO DEPARTMENT AND THROUGH THE BUILDING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE MECHANIC WAS UNABLE DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 129,000. UPDATED 01/05/14*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS INITIALLY BROUGHT IN FOR REPAIRS DUE TO THE VEHICLE CONSTANTLY SHUTTING OFF.*JS
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1990 VOLVO 240. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHEN SHIFTING FROM PARK, THE VEHICLE BEGAN TO ACCELERATE AND THE BRAKES FAILED. AS A RESULT, THE VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE GLASS DOORS OF THE AUTO DEPARTMENT AND THROUGH THE BUILDING. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSIS. THE MECHANIC WAS UNABLE DIAGNOSE THE FAILURE AND THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 129,000. UPDATED 01/05/14*LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE WAS INITIALLY BROUGHT IN FOR REPAIRS DUE TO THE VEHICLE CONSTANTLY SHUTTING OFF.*JS
Safety Rating for the 1990 VOLVO 240
NHTSA has not yet tested the 1990 VOLVO 240 in its New Car Assessment Program.
Technical Service Bulletins for the 1990 VOLVO 240
No technical service bulletins have been reported for this vehicle.
NHTSA Investigations for the 1990 VOLVO 240
There are no NHTSA defect investigations on record for this vehicle.
Other Model Years of the VOLVO 240
- 1985 VOLVO 240 — 8 complaints
- 1986 VOLVO 240 — 29 complaints
- 1987 VOLVO 240 — 8 complaints
- 1988 VOLVO 240 — 12 complaints
- 1989 VOLVO 240 — 19 complaints
- 1990 VOLVO 240 (current)
- 1991 VOLVO 240 — 19 complaints
- 1992 VOLVO 240 — 29 complaints
- 1993 VOLVO 240 — 16 complaints
- 1994 VOLVO 240 — 2 complaints
Other VOLVO Models
- VOLVO XC90 — 2,131 total complaints
- VOLVO S60 — 1,655 total complaints
- VOLVO S80 — 1,320 total complaints
- VOLVO V70 — 1,177 total complaints
- VOLVO XC60 — 846 total complaints
- VOLVO S70 — 780 total complaints
- VOLVO 850 — 732 total complaints
- VOLVO S40 — 677 total complaints