BrickBoard Archives
The files contained in this listing have been automatically archived from the active forums. Because the vast majority of posts are now in one place, this archive is considered legacy. You should use the SEARCH feature OR choose your topic and select date tabs within the forum you choose.
Consumer Reports[ALL/1998] posted by JH on
Tuesday, 18 March 1997, at 10:03 p.m.
Yesterday I got the April Auto Issue of Consumer Reports. Right there under Used Cars To Avoid was the 1995 Volvo 960 series. Does anyone have any idea why?
In the Profiles of 97 cars they recommend the 960.
I’m aware that there were lots of changes from 94-95 but I thought they were mostly cosmetic. I believe the new engine has less HP, Why?
We’ve owned a 1994 960 wagon for 16 months and had only minor problems.
Re: Consumer Reports[ALL/1998] posted by Shatz on
Wednesday, 19 March 1997, at 12:53 p.m.
In the summaries of used cars, CR cites the 95 960 suspension and hardware as problematic (a half-blackened circle), whatever those mean.
I'm convinced that was the first year of the major changes, not all cosmetic. One was, as I mentioned in another thread, they figured out a way to put a multiling in the SW, increasing the fuel tank, re-gearing, reduced HP to save gas etc.
Re: Consumer Reports[ALL/1998] posted by Charlie Dutton on
Friday, 11 April 1997, at 12:15 p.m.
I have a '95 960 wagon with 27K miles, and have had only a few minor problems: the shifter lock switch has been replaced twice, and at less than 2K miles there was some loud clanking in the front end. Turned out something was not torqued properly and came loose. The cosmetic molding on the outside looks a little cheap for a Volvo. Other than that, I think it's a great car! I'm really surprised that CR would not recommend it as a used car