posted by
someone claiming to be Yaroslav
on
Wed Apr 4 16:18 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I just logged on after being away a few days and expecting to see lengthy discussions about this month's CR. They compared the S60 to the BMW 330i, Benz C320, and Lexus IS300.
Guess who won?
The Volvo not only finished 4th in this comparison, but 8th out the 9 cars on it's overall chart (only the Saab 9-3 did worse).
I haven't driven a S60, but I think they look damn fine (except for the taillights). All I know is that when I asked the Service Manager about them, he rolled his eyes back, drooled, touched himself and said "it drives like a BMW, you've got to try one." I said "if I wanted a BMW, I would have bought a BMW."
BMW, Volvo, Mercedes etc. etc. all make fine cars. The Volvo fit my needs/priorities better, so I bought it. What a knucklehead thing for a Volvo rep to utter.
Anyway, thought I'd be the first to mention the CR article.
"...I may be goin' to hell in a bucket, but at least I'm enjoyin' the ride..." - Grateful Dead (they drive Volvo's too)
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Jonathan Knauer
on
Mon Apr 9 03:12 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Which models do they drive? Do you know? Volvos dominate they Bay Area, so it comes as no surprise.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be chuck
on
Thu Apr 5 11:34 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Anyone uses JD Power to decide which car to buy will be disappointed. You have to check where JD Power get its revenue from. You are the best person to judge the car not an article. Each publication's report has its own objective: Motor Trend for innovative design and performance. Car & Driver for track performance and styling. Do question what objective is JD!PLease.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Dennis Chan
on
Thu Apr 5 08:13 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
One other thing about Consumers Report-They do not recomend the S70, 850 or S80 due to reliability issues.
I had a 850 and now a S70-They are both great vehicles so I do not know what CR is talking about....And we can't even blame Ford since the 850 predates the Ford takeover.
What does everyone out there think? Is the "Non-Recommendation" justified or is it just alot of BS from a fairly reputatble magazine?
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be richr, formerly rready
on
Fri Apr 6 06:26 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Whenever the reliability topic comes up here, you see basically the same posts over and over again.
First, you get a lot of complaints about how magazines rank styling, performance, and ride quality. Those dont interest me - I can make up my own mind about those things.
Second, you get a number of personal experiences. This usually are fairly bipolar, with an equal number of "I've had mine for 250000 miles, and never had a problem, therefore the car is bulletproof" and "Mine was never out of the shop - they're all crap". Neither of these is very informative. Every car make has its good units and its bad units. I want to know about averages over the general population.
Third, you get some posts that tell you not to rely on complaints to the discussion board, or surveys sent to a website run by someone who had a bad experience. I fully agree that posts to the web are not a random sample of all owners, and you shouldnt base any overall conclusions on them. I personally like reading those posts, because they help me figure out what's wrong with my car.
A new argument I hadnt seen before is "Volvo makes a tradeoff between reliability and performance, and happens to favor performance." This argument specifically referred to brake rotors. This argument is similar to the one we see from time to time "If you want a reliable car, buy an Accord, and be bored silly."
More interesting to me are the quality surveys done by Consumer Reports and J.D. Power. These both show that Volvo 850/S70/V70/V80 tend to have below average reliability and durability. The posts we see regarding these magazines are
1) "Dont trust CR, they are just trying to sell magazines" What is not spelled out is how bashing Volvos will sell more magazines.
2) "Dont trust JD Power, they have their own agenda" Again, no argument why bashing Volvos will help JD Power.
3) "OK, the '98s had some problems, but they're much better now. Why cant CR see that quality has improved?" I hope that this is true. I want to buy a new V70 once I'm convinced that quality has improved. It will take a couple years before CR and JD Power can assess reliability. As for initial build quality, that hasnt seemed to improve all that much in the surveys since 1998.
As I said, I want to buy another Volvo in a couple years. I would be grateful if someone would give me some good arguments why CR and JD Power are simply lackeys for Lexus and Mercedes.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Marc
on
Fri Apr 6 02:38 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Dennis,
CR's reliability data is from from readers (owners) filling out a survey -- not some guy behind a desk! When compared to the average car - including the Fords you're willing to blame - the Volvos come out as being less reliable than average. It's not a value judgement - the cars usually test well - but a result of the data. Like any mass-produced product, some cars will be perfect, and some will be lemons; you can see that by reading any bulletin board. But where the average V70/850/S80 falls for reliability - that's where the survey results are necessary, not just one or even ten people's experiences. The number of recurring complaints here should be a hint that all isn't well in Volvoland recently.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be MittenHed
on
Thu Apr 5 18:35 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Funny thing about CR. Two of the last three cars I have bought were rated worse than average in some of the catagories. The 86 Camry was alleged to have a weak clutch. It lasted 250K miles that I know of, and taught two young ladies how to shift. The 90 245 was alleged to suffer from brake and exhaust woes. Exhausts last two years, and after the first time are free. Brake pads wear out every 50K miles on front, 100K miles on the rear. I wonder what the good ones will do?
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Yannis Alatzas
on
Thu Apr 5 12:03 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Yeah,
it does add "a lot" to the credibility of this "reputable" magazine when they do mention that the S80 cannot be recommended "due to its problems" (and we are talking the early part of the 1999 MY) but although THEIR column has TREMENDOUS ratings for the 2000 MY S80, that is not a big deal to upgrade the car or even mention "1999s had their share of problems but the ratings of the 2000 S80s have restored our confindence"....But why should they write that? Too much more ink that they have to spend. On the other hand, the S80 is ranked BY THEM higher than cars like the A6, Saab, Acura etc. but they do recommend those over the S80...go figure!
And last but not least, from the magazine that made toaster and washing machine-testing famous (and now they rate cars too), they complain that the ride of the V70/S60 is..."jiggly" or "busy" (sic)! I have TONS of people who come to our showroom mentioning that idiotic statement (obviously written by the OCTAGENARIAN tester) and all I have to do is ask them to test drive the car. They come back and ask me "what the hell are they talking about?" to which I answer by simply raising my shoulders...
Anyway...tsk, tsk, tsk....
Yannis
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Ray Niblett
on
Fri Apr 6 05:11 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
> complain that the ride of the V70/S60 is..."jiggly" or
> "busy" (sic)! I have TONS of people who come to our
I like the side shoulder. It reminds me of a Volvo 122 (a
very hansome design) and, to me, looks like this is where
Volvo cars would have evolved to if the 140 series had never
come along.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Marc
on
Fri Apr 6 02:48 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Hey Yannis,
With Volvo's track record I wouldn't use one good year to change my recommendation, would you? Oh yeah you make your living selling these don't you?
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Yannis Alatzas
on
Fri Apr 6 04:33 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
OH!!!! WOW! Ok, Mr. "Toaster-tester"....it's OK to BASH the S80 because of a FEW MONTHS of problems in its first year but it is not OK to "exhonerate" the car when the rest of 1999 and ALL of 2000 (even according to your "experts") is a VAST improvement....HUH? You guys cannot just admit that you are BIASED towards or against certain brands because afterall you make your living by...SELLING magazines, don't you? Give me a break will you?
Yannis
P.S. By the way, me pointing out the virtues of Volvo cars here does not have ANY impact on my income since this site and the people who contribute to it, is INTERNATIONAL. I have said it many times before but you guys find it as an easy target to accuse me because I happen to be involved with the brand: VOLVOs are not the PERFECT cars, but this Board MAGNIFIES the average problems that Volvos have like all other brands have, too. This is a CONCENTRATED area of Volvo problems. YOU do not deal with ALL different Volvo models on a daily basis like I do. You do not see all the Volvo owners that I meet DAILY when they come (w/ out any solicitation) and tell me (and any customer that I am trying to sell) "I love my Volvo!!!" or they turn to the potential customer and tell him/her "They are the BEST cars!" (I don't even say that!)...All you see/know is what is here and from surveys that people send because they want to get things off their chest. You know very well that people are more apt to complain than praise.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Marc
on
Fri Apr 6 06:44 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
First off, the people who test toasters don't test cars. The Auto Test staff are experts with considerable industry experience. Besides, I wouldn't belittle the "toaster testers;" they have engineering degrees, just like the engineers at Auto Test and me.
Back to Volvo: first off, the number of newsstands sales are minor, so it's hardly likely that anyone is buying the magazine because we say Volvos are unreliable. Many of our subscribers own Volvos, and the parking lots here have quite a few as well. You don't make friends telling them their cars aren't paragons of reliability.
It is necessary to seperate the test results from the reliability data. We'll only recommend purchasing a car if it tests well, and it has average reliability or better. The S80, V40, and S60 all tested fairly well; we called the S80 "the best Volvo we've tested." For years the magazine recommended the 850 and S/V70 series - but then the reliability data showed a deterioration.
The reliability data: We simply report the numbers, same as with any other car. We don't have anything to gain by saying that products are bad - it is just as valuable to know if everything is good. While you claim people are likely to complain in those surveys, people are just as likely to try and validate their purchase - so you can't condemn our reports as being just the angry venting of scorned buyers.
You say that tons of people tell you that they love their cars - aren't they (and you) more likely to validate their ownership experiences? I love mine, but it simply hasn't been as reliable as the Japanese cars I've owned. Love often covers up flaws - or logic. We deal in logic here, and obsess to extremes to make sure what we present is fair and accurate. So give me a break.
Got to run - my toast is burning.... ;)
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Brian M.
on
Sat Apr 7 01:52 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Hi Marc,
I am not sure if someone from CR has posted here before but if this is your first time, welcome.
I have monitored this board ever since we got our first S70 in 1998. As a CR subscriber I am aware that CR's reliability ratings on autos are based on survey/feedback from hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of subscribers such as myself. A reliability rating of below average mean that the chances of getting a problem car increases. This means that SOME owners of a particular model rated below average MIGHT NOT experience problems. Similarly, SOME owners of a particular model rated above average COULD experience problems. Someone saying that even Lexus owners have problems is not accurate to point out that these are the MINORITY of Lexus owners.
What is interesting is that the problems commonly posted on this board have happened to either one or both our S70s: (1) rapid flashing front directionals, (2) door lock(s) not working, (3) bubbling door panels, and (3) headlight bulbs burned out. I originally thought that these problems reflected the MINORITY of Volvo owners and would not happen to us. Guess again.
Don't get me wrong, we like our S70s. It is one of the safer (if not one of the safest) places to be in while travelling on the road. Like you, I am trying to be objective in discussing reliability. The minor problems we had have been fixed under warranty and so far so good. We regularly maintain our cars as we tend to keep them for a while. We are hoping that the newer Volvo models (including our S70s) will prove to be as 'durable' as the 240 and older models.
Cheers,
Brian M.
1998 S70GLT, 1998 S70A, 1991 Maxima SE
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Bryan Goldberg
on
Fri Apr 6 08:11 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Marc,
Thanks for a well reasoned response to the issues presented in this thread.
Although Volvo's reliability has slipped from previous levels, virtually all of the problems have been minor & easily corrected under warranty. Not that this relieves them of the responsibility for their suppliers' substandard work. I'ts just to say that reliability ratings alone do not tell the full story.
All of us would like to believe that our cars are the "best." The truth is that each of us uses a constellation of factors to decide what is best. I think that the magazines provide one important prospective when car shopping.
Ultimately though, we buy what we like.
Enjoy!
Bryan
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Ray Niblett
on
Thu Apr 5 10:29 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
A lot of it has to do with your expectations. Some think
having to replace rotors at 60K miles makes the car poorly
engineered; others appreciate that the engineers, when faced
with a comprimise of rotor life vs. braking performance,
picked braking performance. The 2nd group buys Volvos.
If someone wants to just get from point A to B then they are
probably better off with an Accord, Camry or Taurus or similar
clone.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be rready
on
Thu Apr 5 09:07 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
J.D. Power also badmouths Volvo's quality and reliability.
In their mid-term ratings, the 1998 S70/V70 is rated as "middle 40%" for mechanical reliability, and "bottom 30%" for feature and accessory reliability and for body and interior reliability.
In their long-term ratings, the 1996 850 is rated as "middle 40%" for body and interior dependability and for mechanical dependability, but "bottom 30%" for feature and accessory dependability.
New-care ratings for 2001 model Volvo's arent much better. The 2001 V70 is above average for body and interior quality, but "bottom 30%" for feature and accessory quality.
You can check out the ratings at
http://www.jdpower.com/auto/jdpa_ratings/FindJdAwards.jsp
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be mike krutolow
on
Thu Apr 5 10:26 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
In the New issue of Motor Trend, they compare the Saab Viggen, BMW 330i, Mercedes 230 (i think), Audi A4 2.7, and the s60 T5.
Bimmer comes out on top, Volvo and Mercedes tie for 2nd.
Mike
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Phil Punxsutawney
on
Thu Apr 5 08:59 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
...about recommending cars to people in the 1980s. SAABs. The street outside our house looked like suburban Stockholm at parties. I shoulda asked SAAB-Scania for commisions. Now, if anyone asks, I "suggest" a Camry or an Accord. It keeps me the few friends I have left after the SAABs!
The CR claims are pretty well confirmed by my own experience, by reading the posts here, comments in the European car mags, Swedishbricks, the Edmunds Town Hall, Kino's Volvo board and the Road and Track owner's survey. If your Volvos were built on Wednesday, with reliable electrical parts, congratulations!
I like my Volvo, and after a few drinks, I sometimes even think about buying another one. But the only person I've ever actually RECOMMENDED a Volvo to is my ex-boss, who was a sociopath. (I told him a Cross-Country would be a GREAT car for his retirement!)
-Phil Punxsutawney
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Ray Niblett
on
Thu Apr 5 05:44 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Funny abut the Service Manager and BMW comment. When I bought
my 988 S70 T5 my neighbor said the interior looks like a BMW
(must be the wood trim). Of course, a BMW is a bit spartan but
I suspect this is what he "thought" a BMW would look like. He
also probably thought it was a compliment. On the other hand,
he drives an Accord so what does he know ("Hey, nice, interior
looks like a Taurus" I should tell him).
A lot of these comparison tests assign a point value. I often
see something like 89.2 for last place and 93.2 for first.
There are lots of very good cars on the market (does anyone
really make a bad car in the S60s class?). From a consumers
perspective, you get a lot of nice choices these days.
On the S60 I did not care for the dash layout (I think there is
still some work to do here) and the toe of my foot would catch
on an under-dash body part when I let the clutch out. I had no
problems modulating the brakes, clutch pedal pressure was 1/4th
of my T5s and was very nice, engine felt very linear in power
delivery and seemed much smoother then my T5 (but did not have
that 2-stroke like "turbo hit" of my car which is probably a
good thing). It handled well but still under-steered and would
"plow" at the limit (like any FWD I suppose and good characteristics
for 99% of drivers). I would buy a V70
over an S60 due to the size requirements for my family. But I'd
also recommend anyone looking for a car in this class to go drive
an S60 and not just dismiss it based on a magazine review.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be sondagsakare
on
Thu Apr 5 05:03 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I only scanned the article: Something about the bad news is that the S60 got outpointed, but the good news is that it's a fine machine. As I recall, it was downrated for its compliant ride quality, for being FWD (weight balance) and a "slightly coarse" engine. Something about a sedan with sport qualities rather than a sports car with sedan qualities. The magazine guys are quite perceptive: the S60 is a FWD 5-cylinder, all right.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Phil Punxsutawney
on
Thu Apr 5 00:12 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Most of the major enthusiast magazines - Car and Driver, Rodent Track, Automobile - have had the S60 at or near the bottom of the list in recent comparison tests. Which either proves that Folvo dropped the ball with the S60, or that every single magazine is venal (and that BMW provides the best venality). I think I remember reading that one mag even had their BMW's motor explode, and that still didn't cost BMW a first or second place finish.
I've had an S60-LPT service loaner, and it's an OK car. Brakes are "touchy" as all the magazines have pointed out. More up-to-date than my V70T5, but I'd hope so. Not as fast. I wouldn't buy one because a wagon fits my needs better than a sedan.
-Phil Punxsutawney
|
|
|
|
|
