|
|
|
Going to drive a very nice 98 V70 GLT AWD. Looks well taken care of. Has all records - which I haven't checked out yet.
I've heard some bad things about the AWD. Like having to replace the drive system at 125K etc.
What do you guys know? Any thoughts, opinions are greatly appreciated!
Jim
--
90 244DL 278k
|
|
-
|
|
|
I love my Volvo's but my AWD is an Audi Quattro. The Quattro system has proven itself to be virtually bullet-proof. And, I don't know any Audi owners that have reported the horror stories we keep hearing about the Volvo's. And the Audi is fun!!!!! I have never been passed by a Volvo on bad roads, ever.
As with a Volvo you need to pay attention to model type issue/shortcomings. Start here http://forums.fourtitude.com/zeromain?id=61
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be VolvosTwo
on
Thu Mar 1 15:54 CST 2007 [ RELATED]
|
|
I may agree with you on the Audi AWD sustem. I have read & heard that Audi makes the best functioning AWD around. Unfortunately the Audi and sister VW have pretty bad reliability records. Quite a bit worse than the Volvo. I had a Passat wagon and after 2-1/2 years virtually everything electrical went bad, including the coil-pacs. If they had the reliability of a Volvo (be it only average) and something near the longevity, I might be a VW/Audi nut.
|
|
-
|
|
|
The VW's are worse from a reliability standpoint (I also own one of those). The coilpack issue was a VW only problem that was sorted out with both recall and a new supplier quite a while ago, I think in 02. I believe that the supplier was Marconi, source of the Volvo ETM issue!
I am driving a 2000 that just turned 100K. It has not had any of the issues my 97 had,only the standard wheel bearings and heads up display fade. 96-99 were bad news except the 96 A6. In general they really turned a corner for the better in 2002. I have owned and put 200K plus on a 93 and 94.
When the weather is bad, out comes the snowmobile. Otherwise, we really enjoy cruising around in our Volvo's.
BTW, tire wear and size is a concernn/consideration with Quattro's. They come with a full sized spare. Like all AWD systems, you need to keep tire size and wear equal to avoid making the AWD system "overwork".
|
|
-
|
|
|
...for unreliability @ 10 years according to the April Consumer Reports.
Volvo isn't much better. I try to keep my cars for 10 years so this is somewhat important to me.
-BTC
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be VolvosTwo
on
Fri Mar 2 01:28 CST 2007 [ RELATED]
|
|
I will admit that my two VW's with all the problems were a 1996 and 1999 (both Passats). Also, for a car to be 6 to 10 years old for the chart, that makes it a 1996-2000 model. That is certainly right for the Volvo as those are approximately the worst years, apparently as with the Audi's. However, articles in CR and others seem to say that Volvos have turned the corner better in the last 5 years. The chart seems to indicate that with 4 to 5 years old cars. But, I really do not mean to rag on Audi's & Volvo's. I like them both and feel they handle, ride and generally perform much better than most anything else out there. We have owned 3 VW's and 6 Volvo's in the past 20 years and performance is why we have owned them, not reliability.
|
|
-
|
|
|
...buys a Toyota Camry.
Unfortunately, the Camry is "the one car that lasts longer than you actually want it to".
(C/D once actually said this about the Volvo 240DL!)
I think a 328iT wagon or 535xiT would be *nicer* than my 10-year old Volvo. But not $40,000-$60,000 *nicer*. Plus there's the financial "black hole" for repairs after the warranty is gone. At least Honda and Toyota don't break much and you can do a lot of the routine maintenance stuff yourself.
-BTC
'98 V70 T5 5-speed, 171k mi, Bilstein HD, front IPD stabilizer bar, Volvo strut tower brace and skidplate, XC grill, C70 jewel E-Codes, V-1, Lidatek, Mobil-1 since new.
"Being offended by things is the world's big hobby at the moment. It's almost taken over from wearing goatee beards."-Douglas Noel Adams (1952-2001)
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be VolvosTwo
on
Fri Mar 2 05:26 CST 2007 [ RELATED]
|
|
Obviously I am not completely rational!! Actually, mixed in with those VWs and Volvos was a ...gulp... Honda Odyssey mini-van. Bought it when our daughter was born, and had it for three years. Very good car. Extremely boring. By the way, it has its share of problems. We had the power seat go out, a couple of lights, a sliding door malfunction, and a few dash rattles. They are also notorious for transmission failures, though ours was ok. Got rid of it 6 months ago for a 2002 V70. Back to two Volvos now.
By the way, CR has several times said the BMW 5 series is perhaps the best car in the work. Better be good for the $.
|
|
-
|
|
|
We actually have 3 right now, my wife's Oddy, my wife's OLD Oddy that my musician kid uses to haul stuff around, and my kid's '06 Accord (ONLY in America!) We did have the transmission fail on the old Oddy. Honda was very good about replacing it once it did fail. Once you get under the skin of the cars, a lot of stuff is pretty flimsy. Of course, they must know what they're doing, since the cars don't break too much.
-BTC
'98 V70 T5 5-speed, 171k mi, Bilstein HD, front IPD stabilizer bar, Volvo strut tower brace and skidplate, XC grill, C70 jewel E-Codes, V-1, Lidatek, Mobil-1 since new.
"Being offended by things is the world's big hobby at the moment. It's almost taken over from wearing goatee beards."-Douglas Noel Adams (1952-2001)
|
|
-
|
|
|
I think that you hit the nail on the head about Honda. They do know where to put quality in and to take cost out. So, the sheet metal is as thin as foil, the axles are not as beefy as a lawn mower etc. But they run. But, I have owned Japanese cars and had problems with them too.
That said, look at Audi and Volvo sales and realize that those of us that buy these cars see something more in them than reliabilty graphs or a consumers reports portrays. We love these damned things in spite of the problems! 3 Volvo's, 5 Audis, 6 VW's and lot's of suffering later, you'll never see me out cruising in an Avalon!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be VolvosTwo
on
Wed Feb 28 13:54 CST 2007 [ RELATED]
|
|
It is and is not as bad as you have heard. If not properly maintained, then definetly and expensive problem. But I have seen a number of them w/o any problem for 150,000 miles and more. Keep all tires inflated the same religiously, and never mix tire brands, size, or condition. Have bevel gear fluid changed as soon as you get it. You will find out then what condition it is in. If bad, get a used one from Erie Volvo on the internet. Will cost one-quarter of a new one and then you can keep up the care from then on. Budget $1500 for the replacement just in case.
I have a 1999 S70-AWD with 103,000 miles. Bevel gear still good as new. A mechanic in Denver has one with 185,000 miles with no problem.
That all said, if you can afford it buy a 2002 or newer you won't have a problem, unless it was abused. NOTE: all AWDs really should be taken care of the same way, even newer ones, as mentioned in the first paragraph. They still can be ruined, but the 1998-2000 Volvos are more sensitive.
|
|
-
|
|
|
One minor correction. The AWD in US cars changed with the 2003 model year. The 2002's were still the early viscous style. The only likely reason that the 2001 and 2002 AWD's seem a little less troubled is probably that the supplied spare is now pretty close to the right size. Nothing else really changed.
--
Mike Sullivan '07 XC70, '95 855T (100k), '95 855 NA (148k). Past Volvo's: '85 744 (256k), '86 245 (165k), '86 245 (195k), '88 745 (208k), '91 745 (196k), '93 965 (147k) , '98 V70XC (98k).
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be VolvosTwo
on
Wed Feb 28 14:26 CST 2007 [ RELATED]
|
|
How certain are you about the change starting in 2003? I thought they changed with the 2001 body (and other) revisions. But I am not completely sure.
I will say one thing. Our other Volvo (thus "VolvosTwo") is a 2002 V70 (not an AWD), and a number of items seem more trouble-free. I have had a 1993 940, 1995 850, 1999 V70, and a 1999 S70 NA. We currently have the 1999 S70-AWD and 2002 V70. The 2002 has been more trouble-free in almost all ways. Of course it is newer, but things that failed in the others with less miles have not failed in more miles on the 2002.
|
|
-
|
|
|
It is a pain in the wallett.
You really only need FWD in your area. Unless you have a ski cabin at the top of a hill.
Klaus
--
1975 164 w/174,800mi (Sold) 1995 850T w/91,000mi, 1998 V70R w/129,000mi
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Mr. Norm
on
Wed Feb 28 03:09 CST 2007 [ RELATED]
|
|
In general, yes, the early AWD was a lot of trouble. I would avoid this car if I wuz you.
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
