Good/Bad/Ugly About Volvos?

[cardiac]

I'm looking at picking up a different drive to work vehicle and the Volvo V70 series caught my eye, since I have 2 boys involved in sports and we are always hauling kids and gear around. Anyone have experience with these? What to watch out for? I found a 2003 with 96k miles on it. Loaded. New tires and brakes all the way around. 2nd owner. Pretty clean. They are asking $6,000 for it.

Do they get decent fuel mileage? Reliability? I've been a GM, Ford, Chrysler guy for 30 years, so only have read about Volvos...

Bob

 

[postmortemIA]

engine and transmission very good and lasting, might get plagued with sensor problems.

 

[Zap]

I just spent a half year driving my mom's 2010 Volvo V70. I think it came with some convenience package because it has a proximity key that you never have to take out of your pocket, but it didn't come with the upgraded wheels or anything like that (not the R-design), nor navigation.

Mileage was mediocre. It was okay for a 3.2 V6 I guess, but at the expense of performance. I'm willing to bet that it gets better mileage than any non-hybrid SUV/crossover that has similar interior volume, but coming from a sedan with a more modern turbocharged and direct injected 4 cylinder engine, it was pretty "meh" for me. If you're willing to just allow the transmission to do its mission in life - to immediately find the highest gear and hold it, acceleration be damned, then gas mileage is fine. IIRC it was rated for something like 28MPG highway, and it can do that easily if you set the cruise control. Has a huge tank (19gal?) and so highway range is really up there. I often found myself using manual mode in hilly city areas, because the retarded transmission would be in too high a gear until floored, and then kick down two gears, one at a time and with a lot of engine noise, and then you were near redline and it was time to kick back up a gear. I learned to just pop shifter to manual mode and drop it one gear so I would be in the meat of the rev range.

No real problems to speak of. Outside of maintenance, the shifter had to be taken apart and cleaned because it wasn't moving smoothly, and the dealer said some crap (maybe food/drink) had spilled into it that they needed to clean out, so it wasn't covered by warranty. It has sprayers to clean the headlights whenever you use the wiper spray, and one of the covers popped off. Dealer popped it back on at no charge (I had found the piece when returning to vehicle). Now, outside of warranty, it might be expensive to fix, because it was an expensive vehicle. I think MSRP was close to $40,000 for the 2010. IMO once an expensive vehicle, always an expensive vehicle.

Comfort is great, with nice leather and seat design/cushions. The interior color on mom's is some cream color so very light and easy to get grimy, but that would be a problem with any light colored leather. I love the stereo system in it - sounds terrific for a stock system!

Now if only Volvo sold the turbo diesel R-design here in the States... then it could have had the performance with even higher mileage. Seriously though. Supposedly the V70 is the third best selling Volvo in the world, but... not only do they NOT sell in the USA (heck Volvo kept the C30 but ditched the V70?), they don't offer the turbo diesel versions. There's the D3 2.0l and D5 2.4l. The 2.0l gets around 58MPG using the wacky European measurements, while the more powerful and larger D5 (202bhp, 310lb/ft) gets around 44MPG. Heck, not only that, but Europeans have the option of manual transmissions in these things! WTF? Imagine a V70... with mid 7s 0-60, manual transmission, stock 18" 40 series wheels/tires and getting fuel mileage like a Prius. Yeah, you can buy them in Europe like that.

 

[Dr. Detroit]

Might also want to look at Saab 9-5 Wagons - the 2.3T engine is pretty bulletproof and available with a manual trans or 5spd Auto. 4cyl turbo so good gas mileage. Avoid the V6 Turbo.

Super roomy, lots of features and cheap.

 

[Brutus04]

Recommend buy a used, maybe Certified Volvo w/low mileage. Our '98 S70 has nearly 130,000 and will easily do another 100K. Maintenance cab be pricey.

 

[phucheneh]

'03 model is way different from a '10. The latter has the same new chassis as the current-gen S80.

'03 model is essentially the same as the '03 S60, which is derived from the 99+ S80.

It's been a while since I've worked on these cars, but I know it wasn't until '04 or '05 that these cars started being fairly significantly improved. Prior to that (and after, to a still decent extent), these have all the common problems that early S80's had.

At least as far as electronics go. And suspension parts (not that bad except they always need A-arm bushings). The plus side is that you'll get a pretty good 5cyl engine and an Aisin-Warner transmission. S80 carried the I6 and a GM-made transmission. The NA models were bad, the turbo models were outright crap (too much power and weight for trans to handle). Ironically, they put the same turbo motor and trans in the much-heavier XC90; hilariousness ensued.

You'll want complete maintenence records, though, especially if it's a turbo. Lack of oil changes equals an oil burner 99% of the time.

And the ONLY positive to a 'certified' used car is a warranty- see how good it is. Dealers will pencil-whip 'certified pre-owned' paperwork without batting an eye, as it allows them to mark the car up more (and the things they should've fixed but didn't will just generate warranty income for the service department).

Let me know if you want to know a little more about what to look for with these cars. It's been a while, but I can remember a lot. I would definitely recommend an independent inspection (from a trusted source). They might charge you an hour of labor for it (75-100 bucks or so), but it's a small cost for piece of mind (or to avoid a lemon).

 

[CA19100]

Never again. That sums up my thoughts about Volvos.

My wife had a 2001 S40 sedan that we finally got rid of recently. Aside from having the Check Engine light on for about the last 8 years, it was moderately reliable. (Every time we'd pay to fix something to clear the check engine light, it would be back on within 48 hours, guaranteed. So the state emissions inspections got to be quite expensive because they involved shop work beforehand, every time.)

My issue with the Volvo wasn't so much that it broke a lot, but rather that it was so expensive to fix whenever anything did go wrong with it. At about five years old, for example, the exhaust started getting deafeningly loud. Come to find out that the flexible metal mesh coupling between the exhaust pipe and the engine had disintegrated in the acidic exhaust, and it was $900 to fix it. When that happened on my Ford a few years back, it was $5 in parts and a quarter-hour of labor.

Need the AC worked on? Can't do it at your local shop, because it has some special system that takes refrigerant at two different pressures. Back to the dealer.

And so on...

If money is no object, they're a lot of fun to drive. But if you don't like pouring money down a hole every six months, I'd look at something else.

 

[phucheneh]

'01 S40 is such a different beast. You might as well compare to a Mitsubishi.

...because up to '04, the S40 was a Mitsubishi design.

They're actually pretty reliable, if maintained. The engine is the standard Volvo 5cyl design. With one missing cylinder. Transmissions were Japanese. Chassis is Japanese.

A note on your experience- the flex pipe had a warranty of something like 10 years and 120,000 miles. It was extendeded because they knew they were bad. And even before you start hearing the noise, the exhaust leak can cause O2 sensor codes. The worst is the the 'O2 integrator' code, which basically says 'I don't like the upstream O2 readings in comparison to the downstream readings, but I'm not elaborating any further so suck it'. Even with a good graphing tool and/or scope, you might not find the problem. 99% of the time it was a bad O2 or exhaust leak. Sometimes a bad catalyst.

 

[HarryLui]

My 94 850 turbo have over 300k when I got it, probably put another 50k on it since. Original engine, different transmission, different turbo, body still looks good.

I get low to mid 20's mpg.

Rear main seal will be leaking in a few years, if it isn't leaking already. Turbo car is sensitive to regular oil change.

Timing belt/waterpump will need to be change ASAP if there is no record of it being changed recently.

Frame trap (Volvo's name for PCV system) will need to be clean, to avoid smoking issue later on.

 

[phucheneh]

My 94 850 turbo have over 300k when I got it, probably put another 50k on it since. Original engine, different transmission, different turbo, body still looks good.

I get low to mid 20's mpg.

Rear main seal will be leaking in a few years, if it isn't leaking already. Turbo car is sensitive to regular oil change.

Timing belt/waterpump will need to be change ASAP if there is no record of it being changed recently.

Frame trap (Volvo's name for PCV system) will need to be clean, to avoid smoking issue later on.

It's much easier to recommend an 850. Good car.

'Oil trap box' is what we always called it. And it's a bit beyond most engines' PCV systems. Although sensitive to clogging (3-4k conventional oil changes are a must, forget 7500 if Volvo still recs that crap), they can pull negative pressure on the crankcase of a 200k+ mile engine. And that is outright impressive.

That makes the common 'feel the puffs out of the oil cap hole' test even more appropriate on a Volvo. You should feel NOTHING. If you put a manometer on the dipstick tube, it should read somewhere in the negative. If you feel puffs of air coming out as things reciprocate, the engine either needs an oil trap box; or is just worn slap the fuck out.

That's NA engines. Turbo engines are harder to judge since they don't have the intake vacuum to rely on. But that probably explains why the PCV system on NA cars is so effective- it was designed with a turbo in mind.

If you do look at a turbo, take a flat screwdriver (iirc, or 8mm hex) with you and pull the intake boot. Or just open the airbox and look at/past the MAF with a flashlight. If it's got a light coating of oil inside, that's what I would call 'normal;' not 'excellent.' If it has heavy oil, to the point of being able to wet your hands with liquid oil, run away. One step past that is when the oil has finished permeating the rubber and is actually collecting as a gunk on the OUTSIDE of inlet hoses. The hose that is clamped to the compressor side of the turbo (charged air headed towards intake manifold) will show symptoms first.

 

[cardiac]

Thanks for all the info. It is a T5 non turbo 2003 V70 that I am looking at. 96k miles. Don't think it has had a timinig belt or water pump. Oil changes every 5k. Pads and rotors on all 4 corners recently, along with new tires this summer. Doesn't sound like it would be too bad with the proper maintenance. Phucheneh, what is the recommended interval for the timing belt? 100K? Thanks again for all the info, guys.

Bob

 

[JCH13]

They're the lowest maintenance cost luxury cars. But they are luxury cars, so maintenance and parts are somewhat higher than econo-boxes.

With good treatment, mostly OE Volvo parts, and a good independent mechanic you'll love a Volvo. Don't get dealer servicing.

 

[Anubis]

Might also want to look at Saab 9-5 Wagons - the 2.3T engine is pretty bulletproof and available with a manual trans or 5spd Auto. 4cyl turbo so good gas mileage. Avoid the V6 Turbo.

Super roomy, lots of features and cheap.

only prob with this is finding someplace to fix it when something goes wrong, I have a Saab and since they went under the # of places that will even look at the car has gotten a lot smaller.

 

[phucheneh]

Thanks for all the info. It is a T5 non turbo 2003 V70 that I am looking at. 96k miles. Don't think it has had a timinig belt or water pump. Oil changes every 5k. Pads and rotors on all 4 corners recently, along with new tires this summer. Doesn't sound like it would be too bad with the proper maintenance. Phucheneh, what is the recommended interval for the timing belt? 100K? Thanks again for all the info, guys.

Bob

105k. IIRC on top of the cam sprockets, you can kind of gently pry the plastic covers apart and see the belt. If the back side is starting to show some cracking (like you see on the sidewall of an old, degraded (dry rotted) tire, it's definitely never had a belt.

When replacing, you do tensioner/idler (one of each I think) but I highly advise against replacing the water pump. The only water pump failures I've ever seen on those engines have been because someone replaced it as maintenance with an aftermarket part. The factory ones just don't fail.

Also, 'T5' implies turbo. If the car is being advertised as/is badged as a T5 model, that's a turbo car. High pressure turbo car, at that (there are lower output turbo 5's that do not get the T5 badge). The T5 is rated at about 40hp less than the 'R' cars, but in practice, the 2WD T5's (vs AWD R's) always seemed at least as fast. Probably a combo of lighter weight and the fact that they were always autos (most R's I worked on were manuals, and I don't do any high-revving slam-shifting crap).

 

[cardiac]

My mistake. It is a non-turbo. 2.4l DOHC. I'm not a huge performance guy with my daily drivers, so that is OK with me. Thanks for the info on the timing belt..... Still debating on this one....

PS: phucheneh, if you live close to northern IN, I'll hire you to do the belt if I buy it

 

[Zap]

My wife had a 2001 S40 sedan that we finally got rid of recently. Aside from having the Check Engine light on for about the last 8 years, it was moderately reliable. (Every time we'd pay to fix something to clear the check engine light, it would be back on within 48 hours, guaranteed. So the state emissions inspections got to be quite expensive because they involved shop work beforehand, every time.)

Heh, that was mom's car before her 2010 V70, a 2001 S40 that my sister gave her. Check engine light forever, yo!

 

[xapo99]

I had a 1995 T5 which did 225k miles without anything breaking. I think I had two exhausts, a cat, tyres, brakes, battery, brakes etc etc, but no parts needed replacing. My 535D has had about £4000 worth of parts that broke on it since new.

Anyone who can compare build between a 95 and a 2010 though...??!