posted by
someone claiming to be Jim Steiner
on
Wed Apr 25 03:34 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I've had my S70GLT for almost 4-years (35K miles). Although I love the car, I live in the upper-midwest and can no longer deal with the harsh ride. Has anyone investigated replacing or upgrading the suspension components to smooth out the rides?
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Jobe
on
Wed Apr 25 23:09 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I love my S70 GLT/SE except in one respect... the stiff ride. It is fine on any smooth road but the roads in NE Ohio, don't qualify as smooth. I have been able to soften the ride by changing the contact with the road. When I traded-in my 1998 S70, I had just bought new tires for the 16 inch GLT wheels. The tires were Goodyear Eagle LS and I oversized from an OE 195x60x16 to 195x65x16. Also, I chose the Eagle LS because it was rated low in speed (118 mph) and load rating (something like 1,200 lbs) for the very purpose of getting a softer and quieter ride. The tire has a larger sidewall for greater flex on road irregularities and because of the low load and speed rating, the tire did not have an nylon overlay under the tread to stiffen the carcass. (Most any tire with a 88S or 89T load/speed rating will have these qualities. Tires with speed ratings of H, V, X are really stiff.)
Also, I underinflate: front=30lbs and rear-26lbs. It worked and the ride on the '98 was much more to my liking. Yes, there's more lean on turns and on "squat" braking. I'll get fewer miles from those tires than If I inflated them according to Volvo and Goodyear specs. And, the gas mileage will be a little less. But those are prices I can live with.
When I traded for my 2000, I had the dealership transfer my 1998 wheels to the 2000, replacing the 17" wheels which are OE on the 2000 (As I recall, they were Michelin 4X, V rated, 205x50x17). Now I have a ride I can live with and it has increased my enjoyment of my Volvo substantially. I love my car.
I make no quarrel with those who want a performance ride but I'm not a performance driver and nobody I know is. I think that Volvo has missed a greater slice of the American market by insisting that ride engineering is the same for American roads as for European roads and that American drivers want the same qualities as European drivers. Not So.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Jim Steiner
on
Thu Apr 26 04:08 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Our S70 is outstanding on smooth roads. However, I also live in NE Ohio and the roads are terrible, expecially this time of year. I'm curious did your 98 S70 have "excessive" creeking and noises in the dash? I'm assuming the noise we hear are a result of the harsh ride and rough roads. BTW I've had the car into the dealership multiple times complaining about the ride. They usually tighten the suspension and tell me everything is fine. I tend to believe them, because every loaner S70 I've driven feels the same.
Did you purchase a 2000 V70 or S80? I'm considering trading in our S70 for either an S80 or Audi A6 quattro. My problem is our S70 only has 35K miles and we'll probably take a bath on trade.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Jobe
on
Fri Apr 27 14:03 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Jim: My '98 S70 had creaks and groans but they were in the doors as I flexed the body turning up into my drive from the street. Otherwise it was excellent (except for the ride). I have read most of the S70 messages in this forum and wonder at all the problems people have had with S70s. Mine was great. I only traded it for a 2000 S70 GLT/SE because I wanted more power and an automatic transmission.
I bought a 2000 S70 after the S60s were out and I could see/drive one. I wasn't impressed. I consider any Volvo beyond the 2000 to be a Ford, not a Volvo. So I chose to have my dealer find a 2000 for me last October. I'm really pleased that I did. About the ride, my wife had a '94 850 and the ride was SUPER bad. My '98 was better and the 2000 is still better. It seems that Volvo was paying some attention to the Consumers Union reports.
Wife traded her 850 for a '98 V70. It was good but then she traded again this past January for a 2001 C320. She's not entirely happy with her trade. She thinks the greater value was in the Volvo. My son has a 2000 A4. Nice car but it, like the Mercedes, carries the German over-complication and over-engineering. I like the simplicity of the Volvo.
Your S70, at 35K, has lots of warranty left. It should trade nicely but you will, of course eat most of the new car depreciation.
Earl
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Jobe
on
Wed Apr 25 23:17 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
CORRECTION:::: The tires I have are 15 inch and the OE tires on the 2000 GLT were 16 inch.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Andy
on
Wed Apr 25 04:42 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
After 33,000 miles my wife has noticed our non-turbo S70 more crashy on the dips and bumps. The shock absorbers may be getting worn.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Sin
on
Wed Apr 25 04:18 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Just be glad you don't have an 850 Turbo, or even R/T5-R.
Try running 14" rims with taller tires, and Bilstein shocks with the OE springs.
I've heard of Turbo owners complaining about harsh rides, but I think this is the first time I've heard someone with a GLT complain.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Ray Niblett
on
Wed Apr 25 04:45 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I believe GLTs and Turbos have the same suspension components
(with a sport suspension available on turbos) except for wheels
and tires. I have driven a base model 70 series (rental) and it
felt quite soft to me (a bit more body roll then I like, too) so
the base models seem different.
You are right about the 850s being much harsher -- our 95 850 GLT
ride is harsher then my 98 S70 T5.
As for the original question:
I don't think there is much you can do to soften the ride by any
real extent except by going with a different vehicle. Each year
Volvo's suspension seems to become more compliant. The S60s I
drove were very nice (but this is all very subjective since one
persons nice ride is another persons bouncy ride). I'm eager to
try a newer V70 to see how much improved those are (I hear the
ride is quite nice on the latest generation V70).
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Chris
on
Wed Apr 25 06:38 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
i did have a 99 t-5 and own a 2000 t-5 now. i do find the 2000 have a firmer ride than the 99 and with less body roll. i replaced the 99 oem with bilsteins and ipd sway bars but have not thought about modifications to the 2000. interested to know if they really have different suspension setup on different production years. one thing for sure is the 99 was assembled in sweden and the 2000 was in belgium.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Sin
on
Wed Apr 25 04:52 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Because of people that would rather sacrifice handling, shorter braking distances and slower accelerating to get soft riding, low performance or as I like to put it, "American Limo" suspensions, Volvo has really wussified and taken the edge off of the suspension of each model ever since the 850.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be VolvoFan
on
Thu Apr 26 02:27 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Sin wrote:
> Because of people that would rather sacrifice handling, shorter
> braking distances and slower accelerating to get soft riding, low
> performance or as I like to put it, "American Limo"
> suspensions, Volvo has really wussified and taken the edge off of the
> suspension of each model ever since the 850.
Edge? If by edge you mean tooth rattling, spine jarring, glass shattering vibration then yes. Who wouldn't? If however you're insinuating that an 850 will outhandle the newer product (namely the S60 T5M with 17" and Sport Chassis) I think you'll find yourself staring at a few S60 bumpers in rather deep corners.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Sin
on
Thu Apr 26 06:37 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I'm not 100% sure on this one, but I'm 99% sure the 850 Turbo can out handle the S60 T5 with 17" rims.
The 850 Turbo Sedan as tested by Car and Driver (and cosistently puts up this number) did .83g on the skid pad, bone stock.
The S60 T5 does the skip pad at about 81g, (Car and Driver and MSN.com Autos section), with the factory options including 17" rims.
And if you'd like, I can also grab slalom numbers as well.
Unless you have other numbers, the 850 out handles the S60.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Ray Niblett
on
Thu Apr 26 12:27 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I drove an S60 T5 on a closed course where the object was speed
and it handled very well. I then rode along with a pro driver
and realized how slow I was! The S60 handles very well and for
99% of us out here (who are not pro drivers) I doubt we can even
push our 850s, 70s or 60s to their max limit (I'm saying with an
850 / 70 /60 turbo model I'm the limiting factor and chances
are so are most people reading this).
By the way, the pro driver did downshift into first for a tight turn
and went for it a bit too fast and the S60 plowed straight ahead
taking out some cones. Even the pros can't always get a car
around the track without a few mistakes. After his mistake he
sheepishly says "Frankly, the engine over-powers the tires a bit
on this car." (What T5 owner does not know that :))
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be VolvoFan
on
Thu Apr 26 11:37 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Sin wrote:
> I'm not 100% sure on this one, but I'm 99% sure the 850 Turbo can out
> handle the S60 T5 with 17" rims.
> The 850 Turbo Sedan as tested by Car and Driver (and cosistently puts
> up this number) did .83g on the skid pad, bone stock.
> The S60 T5 does the skip pad at about 81g, (Car and Driver and
> MSN.com Autos section), with the factory options including 17"
> rims.
You're forgetting that Volvo added the Sport Suspension to its option list very late in production last year. Everything that's been tested so far are early VINs that don't feature this little tidbit. I will guarantee that an S60 with the Sport Chassis will run higher than 0.83 on the pad. I'm also confident that you'd be looking at high 63.x to low 64.x in the slalom.
> And if you'd like, I can also grab slalom numbers as well.
Please do. I'd like to see how the 850 fared.
> Unless you have other numbers, the 850 out handles the S60.
I'll get you numbers when an S60 T5 has been tested with the Sport Chassis. Of course, if you don't want to wait, I have one in the driveway that you may want to run against?
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Sin
on
Thu Apr 26 16:30 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I'm supposed to be impressed with a car that has the same road holding on a skid pad even though it has a wider track and 10 years of newer technology.
Forgive me if I don't start sending adulations to Volvo.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be VolvoFan
on
Fri Apr 27 02:18 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Sin wrote:
> I'm supposed to be impressed with a car that has the same road
> holding on a skid pad even though it has a wider track and 10 years
> of newer technology.
No. Wake up. You're supposed to be impressed with the fact that Volvo went from a vehicle that had road manners suitable to please 5% of the population to a vehicle that will now please at least 75% of the population. 850 Turbo, while performance focused, left the spine tingling and teeth rattling a little too much for the vast majority of the population. The S60 will do everything the 850 could but without the chiropractic and dental benefits observed in its precursors.
You seem to forget that your are the minority here.
People don't generally buy Volvos to mod them up and run illegal street races. Safety, family, environmental care and quality are all values most people who buy Volvos consider to be important. Sport and speed are not high on the priority list. The S60 is a car for the masses with excellent performance numbers AND (may I STRESS THE WORD "AND" ONCE AGAIN) ROAD MANNERS!! What many people on this board forget is that while this board acts as an extremely focused forum for many who enjoy performance and vehicular modification, it hardly acts as an accurate demographic representation of the average Volvo buyer. People generally want safety before speed and quality before handling. They want their car to start in the morning, get great fuel economy (especially in light of recent fuel price increases) and with Volvo, the sense of added protection from a company that pioneered a great many of the safety systems you now see as standard equipment in many cars. Volvo owners won't quote you 0-60 times, they won't generally run the 1/4 mile EVER in their lifetime and the concept of lateral G and slalom speeds, while interesting to some, is probably the last thing on most of their minds. I consider myself an enthusiast. I hardly fit the demographic of the average S60 T5M driver at 29 years of age. I like to go fast. I like testing the limits of a car and have done so in many controlled situations at countless driving schools and tracks. THIS IS NOT YOUR AVERAGE VOLVO DRIVER. I have to believe that what's really pissing you off is the fact that Volvo (if not most European car companies) have designed such advanced chassis' that just about anyone can look like a superstar behind the wheel in an '01 car without even trying, whereas driving your 850 Turbo (while fun) is just a little too harsh and driver intensive for the vast majority of the population to handle.
> Forgive me if I don't start sending adulations to Volvo.
Forgive me if I don't excuse ignorant tone of your reply.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Rocky
on
Fri Apr 27 12:21 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Sweet. Another Volvo apologist out there :)
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Sin
on
Fri Apr 27 04:52 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Honestly, as many 850 Turbo owners have realized, it isn't so much that the ride is harsh. It's that the dash and plastic panels throughout the car accentuate the bumps from the noises they make. Take an 850 Turbo, turn up the volume to the point where road noise cannot be heard, notice how the bumps are magically smoothened out? And if you are into sound upgrades, depending on how far you go, you will eventually want to tighten all these panels up with sound deadening material. It's more audible than actual somatosense.
Just forget it. You don't understand me, and I don't like where Volvo is going with their designs. Let's just leave it at that. I'm tired of arguing, and I don't like it when people take arguments personally.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be scott martini
on
Mon Apr 30 04:32 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I think everyone needs to remember that ride is subjective. I notice that the ride in my father's 850GLT is harsher that the ride in my 740, that doesn't mean either is bad though. As for the s60 the standard suspension in the T% is probably softer that the 850 T5 standard suspension, but the ride is similar to the 3 series BMW which it is aimed at, (though there may be more body lean) the sports suspension (at least the one found in europe) is much firmer and there have been complaints about it's ride comfort from some people, so it sounds like that is closer to the suspension that Sin would like, the North American sport suspension may still be too soft for him (I think it is close to the "normal" T5 suspension in europe. It might be interesting if Volvo brought that suspension to North America, and might help resolve the complaints of drivers who want the "ultimate" handling Volvo and are willing to sacrifice some comfort. I think the standard T5 suspension will probably please 90% of the buyers, and the North Amirican sport suspension probably 7%, the other 3% or so would probably apreciate the stiffest suspension Volvo offers in europe, which mught be why Volvo doesn't offer it here (maybe it should be made available for at least the manual transmission cars, after all they are more likely to be looking for the ultimate performance). Just my thoughts
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Charles Linden
on
Wed Apr 25 04:35 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I have had Bilsteins on 4 volvos and in all cases it made the ride stiffer and more harsh on rough roads. Just thought I would throw in my two cents
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Sin
on
Wed Apr 25 04:48 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
someone was going to say that eventually.
But from what I've heard, using the Bilsteins with the stock springs made things softer.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Ian
on
Wed Apr 25 04:54 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Nope, bilsteins make the ride harsher in almost every circumstance. In my experience (50,000 miles on stock springs and bilsteins) the ride is smoother only when driving on roads that are smooth to begin with. The shocks work great to dampen the little bumps from a pebble or piece of branch on the road. But anything larger than a worm, your gonna feel more than with the OE shocks. Stick with them if ride comfort is your priority
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Bryan Goldberg
on
Thu Apr 26 14:58 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I'm confused.
I've had Biilsteins on my car for a while. The only other upgrade is the IPD strut-tower brace. I didn't opt for bigger anti-roll bars because the roads in Michigan suck.
My experience is that the ride is MUCH better. Volvo's suspension is just not as refined as...say BMW's. I also run the tires at the optional pressure.
One thought. I heard that Bilstein makes a shock for the NA market which is less effective that the European one. My set was direct German import. Maybe?
Anyway, I'm willing to give up some smoothness for faster corners and better gas mileage.
Bryan
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Vladimir
on
Wed Apr 25 04:32 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
A 1998 S70 GLT is a low pressure turbo.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Sin
on
Wed Apr 25 04:47 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I was referring to the high pressure.
First of all, because of non-performance oriented people, Volvo really wussied out the _70 models in comparison to the 850. This wussification made even the _70 T5 suspensions almost as soft as 850 GLT suspensions.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Vladimir
on
Wed Apr 25 05:17 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I like my S70. It is soft, but it ain't Detroit soft. Still handles better than most cars out there in the same price range (mine is a $27,000 base model). Also, in real-life everyday situations what counts more than the equipment is driver's skill. I am ok in that department, so S70 suits me fine. And when I have my entire family in the car it is comfortable for them too. That is a big consideration for me and I am sure Volvo marketing research people did their homework on that also. I hate old fashioned American car handling and don't mind a harsh ride, but as I got a family my needs and values changed accordingly. If you want a race car get a race car with race car suspension. If you want a four door family sedan, S70 is great. I am not sure where is the marketing flaw you are talking about (is wussification = marketing mistake or maybe few potential buyers may be put off by softer suspension?). Anyway, the suspension is easily modified, so if you want a 4 or 5 door race car (WHY?), more power to you. Most people buy station wagons to haul families, though. That being said, I see nothing wrong with a 245 hp station wagon with stiff suspension, I probably wouldn't buy one though at this stage of my life. Instead I would by something like a Z3 that REALLY handles and hauls ass.
Just my $0.02
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Sin
on
Wed Apr 25 05:37 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
"I am sure Volvo marketing research people did their homework"
No doubt Volvo does a lot of marketing research, but they also get a lot wrong. Why did they make the 850's suspension sportier in the first place? They did so to make themselves known as a company that can produce a sport/luxury car. Was that a wrong step, or were they just doing what their marketing research told them to? I mean just take a look at all their advertising since the modern FWD models. It's all been about "reVOLVOlution" and especially with the C70 and S60, Volvo has really been trying to portray themselves as a company that makes sportier cars. And they owe that all to the 850. In particular, the 850GLT that was featured throughout the automotive journalistic world when it first came out. Odd though that they would go back on what made them known, a little more, as a company that can produce sportier cars by making suspensions on following cars more and more compliant.
"Anyway, the suspension is easily modified, so if you want a 4 or 5 door race car (WHY?)"
So why can't people who want a softer suspension go out and modify the suspension to make it softer? It goes both ways. It all boils down to which group complains louder. And with performance guys used to looking to the aftermarket to make their cars do what they want them to, they obviously didn't complain as much as those that *itch and moan when their Volvo "rides to harsh," "costs too much to maintain even though I don't take the time to learn a thing about them to save hundreds a year on maintainance, and never take the car in for service when due, and skimp every which way they can, only to have to pay a bigger bill in the end" etc.
You know why I want a 4 or 5 door race car? Because I want a car with utility, as well as performance. Short of the 9-3 Viggen wagon, Audi RS4, BMW 540iA, etc, there aren't many high performance wagons. I also like the discreet "sleeper" body/design, as well as my personal opinion that NO company makes a station wagon that looks half as good.
I agree that we both want vastly different things from our cars. It is just my opinion that Volvo is quickly wearing through its thin veil of producing "performance" cars the longer they stick with FWD, 60/40 weight distribution, soft suspensions, low performance tires (what happened to Pilot HX's, and not this XGT crap), and obvious slant towards image over substance. I will never EVER question the safety or technology in every Volvo, but when it comes to their portrayed image versus their actual product, Volvo is starting to become more image than substance. Is this a product of the Ford take over, I don't know, but I don't like where it's heading.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Vladimir
on
Wed Apr 25 06:58 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Sin wrote:
> So why can't people who want a softer suspension go out and modify
> the suspension to make it softer?
Because there are way more people in the "softer" category. It's just a matter of marketing research. If you read this forum often (and I know you do), you can tell that there are many more people with normal every-day needs of a family hauler/daily commuter here (though they may not post as often or as much as "performance" people). This is the way "normal" or "average" is defined. Most people are in the "average" category, so Volvo makes most of its offerings for that category of buyers and some smaller number of cars for performance oriented buyers. Also, you can't disagree that no matter what kind of "performance" machine any manufacturer builds, some people will still want to modify it. Look here, people are modifying their 850R's all over the place.
Again, I am not against performance offerings from Volvo, but I think they are trying to stay on target of the category of buyers that will sell the most cars. That target is a moving one, mind you. Also, you probably have something there with Ford influence, but I am not sure that that influence has surfaced yet. Look at Saab. After GM bought it, it became softer, more compliant, but it also became better selling. Volvo will do whatever it takes to be successful (especially under Ford) and that means developing a product that appeals to a wide range of buyers. I hear you that it's not pretty. I agree and am not too crazy about the look/feel of new Volvos, though I can't really lodge a real complaint about them, just personal taste and what I came to expect from a Volvo is disappearing (I like the boxy Volvo, but hate the boxy Detroit junk of the 80s). But after driving the new V70 loaner for almost a month (another story) I must confess that going back to my S70 was a step down in comfort and performance. New V70, although completely lacking in that Volvo look/feel, was much quieter, had more comfortable seats (if you can believe it), etc. Qualities of a Japanese car almost, except for the seats, of course. This a conflict with me. I hate Japanese cars' lack of personality, but value their reliability and comfort (in upper level models). Volvo is taking that route for sure with their new designs. And guess what? That is what MOST people want. If they can buy a car with a feel and reliability of "Lexus" and safety of a Volvo, they'll come in droves. Do I like it? No way! I like my boxy, not-as-comfortable S70 a lot! I like the way the doors sound when they close (the positive almost metallic sound of a 850/S70 door closing is gone from the new V70, instead doors feel like those of a Buick or should I say Taurus), the way the console is arranged, the way the hood and grille are combined, etc. Volvo is getting away from the niche market and trying for a broader market.
> Why did they make the 850's suspension sportier in the first place?
They almost went out of business doing things like that if you recall.
My thesis is that no car manufacturer owned by any of American car giants will make truly sporty (read: European) cars. They will all tend to be a "Lexus", which , BTW is tremendously popular and sells like hotcakes.
|
|
|
|
|
