Should I buy a X-country or v70?............................Opinions, please.

I am thinking about guy an cross country but I've seen very few people complain
about the 4 wheel drive going out. Is this a reoccuring event?

I am considering that or a regular v70 turbo. I live in Minnesota so having 4WD
is a good thing here but I don't want to repair the 4WD after 70K miles. Thanx.

 

This reminds me of my Dad's old mantra - "just more to go wrong!!" He was
among the last to give up on straight six engines with three-speed manual
transmissions and vacuum wipers. If one followed that logic, you would buy
the most basic Volvo available and bemoan not being able to get wind-up
windows.

If I lived in Minnesota, I'd get the all-wheel drive.

 

Have a '01 XC70 and love it. No problems.

 

I think there was a potential problem with the old style viscous coupling
breaking or wearing out some sort of gear in the middle of the system... The
Haldex is suppose to be far better anyways... and it's on all the newer
Volvo's, VW uses Haldex as well if I am not mistaken, as do some other
companies.

 

In what model year did they start using Haldex?

 

2002 S60 AWD - 4 Dr 2.4T Turbo AWD Sedan

2002 V70 AWD - 4 Dr Turbo AWD Wagon

2002 XC70 - 4 Dr Turbo AWD Wagon

2003 XC90 AWD* - 4 Dr Turbo SUV

2004 S80 AWD - 4 Dr Turbo AWD Sedan

2004 V50 AWD - 4 Dr T5 Turbo AWD Wagon (called a 2005 model)

The electronically controlled AWD system was developed in cooperation
with Haldex. Power is distributed automatically to the wheels via a wet
multiplate clutch. As a result, Volvo promises rapid engagement and
disengagement times. The migration from viscous coupling to electronic
coupling was driven by compatibility with Volvo's Dynamic Stability
Traction Control (DSTC) system which was standard in S60 AWD T5, V70 AWD
T5 and V50 AWD T5 models in 2002 and optional on the other AWD models.

*In my research I was shocked to find they make a FWD XC90 4dr 2.5T A.
It saves about US$ 2,000 from the equivalent AWD model. I don't know if
I have ever seen one, but it is in the books. The XC70 has always been
an AWD model.

 

I remember reading about the FWD 5-cylinder XC90 when they came out
originally, the magazine article suspected very few people would cheap out
and go for the FWD only model - I mean you're buying a car that retails for
over 50 grand (CND$).... why cheap out over a couple grand more...
considering the dealer might not even stock a non AWD model and might make
you pay full sticker anyways if they ordered one in.

 

I think that you'll find that Volvo first started using Haldex in the XC70
Turbo AWD Wagon in the 2003 models. In Sept. 2002, I was going to buy a
2002 AWD XC70, then I found out that the 2003 models would use Haldex
(instead of viscous coupling). After posting in this NG and getting
opinions, I waited and bought the 2003 XC70 AWD Turbo Wagon.

Sandy

 

P.S. It's a great vehicle. Considered the V70, but decided on the XC70 and
am very happy. I recommend it.
Sandy

 

I have a 98 v70xc in usa and a 97 ford escort 1.8 wagon in sweden.
opposites expected, huh?
Everytime I drtive the ford in Sweden in the winter I wish I had the
volvo awd and ABS there.
That is, except when I must buy gasoline at $1.55USD per liter (at
todays exchange rate)!

My has 76,000 US miles and has done quite well. (I am careful to
differentiate because Sweden has miles also but there one swedish mile
is 10 kilometers.)

I think the XC is a good choice if you need to go through snow or bad
ground.
khamilton

 

Thanks for the correction. The same goes for the V70. The Haldex
system was introduced to both the V70 AWD and the XC70 in 2003 models.
However, it was first tested in the 2001 XC in the US. In 2001 Haldex
reported, "For demonstration purposes, a Volvo V70 XC was rebuilt with a
Haldex Limited Slip Coupling. This car has traveled all around the US,
from the desert in Arizona to the cold winter in northern Michigan"

 

Thanx for the great info you guys. I would have never known about the 2003
Haldex system. I'll make sure I narrow my search to 2003 and newer models. I
might just go buy a brand new one.

 

Curious.... I don't think I'd *ever* have cause to use that last
sentence...especially when speaking of cars....

 

Are you saying that because you don't buy new cars or that you always buy new
cars? I say it because a car a year or two old can save me thousands of
dollars.

 

uh...yea...like at least 10% - 20%
of any sticker price.....

 

and someone else thousands of headaches. Everyone has a reason for
selling a car. Mine is that it has 175,000 miles on it and someone else
deserves to own it. On newer cars, it is usually because the owner was
disappointed. I doubt if many Volvo owners say, I have so much money
that I want sell this car that I love so I can waste money on first year
depreciation every year. With that kind of outlook they may as well buy
a Jaguar and have a car they want to dump every year.

 

You can save that much by getting a free trip to Europe from Volvo and
buying through European Delivery. Then you get the trip and a new car
and still save all that money.

 

My preference is to buy cars with a minimum of 80K miles on the odometer,
better yet 100K or more. At 50K it is hard to tell what kind of treatment
the car has had and how it is holdong up. At 100K it is hard to hide. By the
time a car is that old, any design defects are well known.

Of course, DIY labor is the key to making that work. Good cars with 100K
miles are plentiful in wrecking yards throughout my ownership, drastically
reducing the cost if I have to replace major components. The previous owner
will often sell a car just before it is due (or when it is slightly overdue)
for a timing belt change, or when it needs drive axles or some other
trigger. As long as the trigger was major for them and minor for me, I make
out like a bandit.

Two rules I have regretted when I let my emotions get in the way: never buy
a car with any trace of rust in the radiator or varnish on the cam when you
keep in the oil filler cap. Either is a very bad sign.

Mike

Have in the family: '85 Volvo 765T (233K miles), '93 Honda Accord (215K
miles), '94 Acura Integra (130K miles - my son just bought it) and 2002
Toyota Prius (40K miles - we bought it new)

 

When I read that I had no idea what I was trying to say! I meant, "when I
find a good car, *similar donor* cars are plentiful in wrecking yards..."

Sheesh. Maybe I'm getting too old to make sense.

Mike

 

Other persons headache

This is really true, especially for Volvo's, normal line Benz, BMW, Audi etc
cars... these aren't "hot" item cars that their rich owners get rid of after
a year (Nissan 350Z, Ford Tbird, VW NewBeetle)... you get rid of a car after
a year if you hate it - case in point, my dad dislikes his 2003 Golf CL, and
would rather a Mazda 3, the $3000+ he'd lose is stopping him from switching
over, as the Golf has now been repaired under warranty for its numerous
small problems. But it was in the dealer a lot this past year.

If someone got rid of something I could potentially afford soon, like a
2004.5/2005 Volvo S40i with only a few options (climate package, 16" alloys,
and stereo upgrade) I would really question WHY... it'd be tempting for me
to buy one (as then I would not have to save up as hard to get my car) but
with a car like that I would expect to want it for at least 4-8 years
myself, so I would wonder why someone had to get rid of it after 1-2 years.