Junkyard Find: 1970 Volvo 164

Murilee Martin
by Murilee Martin

In North America, the Volvo Brick family first appeared with the 140 in the 1968 model year, and the sensibly square Swedes remained on sale here through the last of the S90s and V90s (formerly known as the 960) in 1998. I’ve managed to find junkyard examples of all of these cars, including such oddities as the 262C and 780 Bertone Coupes, but the Volvo 164 has been a tough one; prior to today’s Junkyard Find, I had documented just a single 164. On a recent trip to a snow-coated yard between Denver and Cheyenne, I found another: this scorched and punctured ’70.

Volvo had built luxury sedans before, if you consider a late-1930s taxicab to be a luxury sedan, but the 164 was the first of the type to be sold on our shores.

The 164 was based on the 140, with 3-liter a straight-six engine made by adding two cylinders to the B20 four-banger. This one made 145 horsepower, which was 10 fewer than the 4.1-liter six that went into 1970 Chevrolets.

The 164 got a longer nose than the 140, adorned by this British-style grille.

The 164’s interior was much plusher than that of its 140 cousin, but the one in this car was destroyed by fire.

At first, I thought that the fire started when something electrical shorted out behind the dash, as often happens.

But then I noticed that all the glass had been smashed intentionally and that the fender badges had been erased via bullets. I think this Volvo was sitting in a field somewhere in rural Colorado (or southeastern Wyoming, or western Kansas) when bored yahoos killed a case of Four Loko and then destroyed the car with firearms and gasoline.

This is a shame, because this car was fully loaded with the optional leather upholstery and Borg-Warner automatic transmission.

The build tag tells us that the body color is Stålblå Metallic and the upholstery is was Beige läder.

From the rear, the 140 connection is more obvious. In fact, a 1993 244 looks very much like this car from a rear quarter view. Why change what works?

Even if this car hadn’t been vandalized so cruelly, it probably wouldn’t have been worth a serious restoration. A near-perfect ’71 sold for $9,500 a few years back, but you’d have spent at least that much on upholstery and bodywork to get an intact-but-worn 164 to look that nice. Most Volvo fanatics would prefer to apply their hard-earned kroner to an Amazon coupe or 1800E.

The 164 was available here from the 1969 through 1975 model years, which means that— very briefly— American Volvo shoppers saw 164s and 240s side-by-side in showrooms.

A civilized car built for an uncivilized world.

[Images courtesy of the author]

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
2 of 29 comments
  • Johnster Johnster on Mar 15, 2022

    I think the restyled "nose" of the 164 was intended to suggest the radiator grill of the MB and I remember the 164 often being compared to the Mercedes-Benz 250 and 280. The 164 wasn't quite in the same league as the 250 and 280, but they also didn't cost as much.

  • Gconan Gconan on Mar 21, 2022

    By any chance do you recall the name of the yard you found the 164? Thanks

  • Bob Funny how Oldsmobile was offering a GPS system to help if you were lost, yet GM as a company was very lost. Not really sure that they are not still lost. They make hideous looking trucks, Cadillac is a crappy Chevy pretending to be fancy. To be honest, I would never step in a GM show room now or ever. Boring, cheap ugly and bad resale why bother. I get enough of GM when i rent on trips from airports. I have to say, does anybody at GM ever drive what everyone else drives? Do they ever then look at what crap they put out in style fit and finish? Come on, for real, do they? Cadillac updated slogan should be " sub standard of the 3rd world", or " almost as good as Tata motors". Enough said.
  • Sam Jacobs I want a sedan. When a buy a car or even rent one, I don’t want to ride up high. I don’t want a 5-door. I want a trunk to keep my stuff out of sight. It’s quieter, cars handle better, I don’t need to be at the same height as a truck. I have a 2022 Subaru Legacy Touring XT, best car ever, equipped as a luxury sedan, so quick and quiet. I don’t understand automakers’ decisions to take away sedans or simply stop updating them — giving up the competition. The Camry and Accord should not be our only choices. Impala and Fusion were beautiful when they were axed.
  • Spamvw I think you need to remember WHY the big 2 and 1/2 got out of the car business. Without going political, the CAFE standards signed into law meant unless you had a higher gas mileage fleet, you couldn't meet the standards.The Irony is that, the law made sedans so small with low roof lines, that normal people migrated to SUV's and Trucks. Now we get worse mileage than before.
  • TheEndlessEnigma Somehow, Toyota, Honda, Hyundai/Kia and Mazda are able to build sedans in North America AND turn a profit on those sedans at the same time.
  • Tane94 There definitely is demand for sedans and history will condemn Ford, GM and Stellantis for abandoning the segment. Hyundai/Kia/Genesis and Honda, Toyota, Nissan continue to invest in their sedans and redesign the models.
Next