Volvo Recommendations

Hi,

I currently drive a 1987 Volvo 240 with 203,000kms. Reliable as all
hell.

I need to get a second car and have been tossing up between another
Volvo 240, or going a bit more modern with a 1997-1999 Volvo. My only
requirements are that it has to be a stationwagon and (hopefully) as
reliable as the 240. Any recommendations?

Also, are any of the Volvos in the 1997-99 era rebadged versions of any
other cars?

Han.

 

The most reliable used Volvo wagons are:

VOLVO 240 '91 & '92
VOLVO 940 '94 & '95
VOLVO 850 '95 - '97
VOLVO V40 '01 - '02
VOLVO V70 '99-00

I would recommend either the 850 or V70 unless you can get a low mileage
240. My personal experience is that the 850s are at least as good at
high mileages as the 240s were.

 

if you like the 240....try and find, and drive
one of the 1992, or so 240 wagons...we had
one and it was great, nice leather, some
options, good stero, tow package, and it was
a 240......i guess i would be looking to drive
the latest 240 wagons made...i am guessing
it was 92, 93, or 94...

 

V90 or 965 from the late 90s... For some reason rated as one of the least
reliable Volvo's, but I can't see how... No one seems to complain about them
on here, the Volvo dealer (maybe no one takes them to the dealer because
indy shops are cheaper... our dealer mechanics are great, so we stick with
them) we take our 960 to say they don't get in any aside from routine
service, and the odd age related component replacement (that's all our 1993
has had... pretty much any 12 year old car would have had the same parts
changed as ours... A/C seals, worn out shocks, exhaust, few lightbulbs...
steering rack leaked, could be a problem in any car, or might last longer...
every Volvo apparantly needs a new rad at around 10 years, we got 11.5 out
of ours).

I asked 3-4 Volvo mechanics: 850 or 960 - and they said the 960 is the
better designed car, especially for the expensive A/C system... They said
the 960's tend to have small leaks that are reasonable to fix (we've
experienced this), but the 850's have their components in different
locations and they tend to have failures on the big ticket items, like the
evaporator (and who DOESN'T like a car with A/C??)... Plus you are used to
the RWD (classic style) layout and stying... Another good thing, at least
around here - 960 never held their value... most owners seem to be running
them for a long time, and doing proper maintenance because of this (i've
never seen a 960/S/V90 in bad shape... even the old ones) - if you do find
one it'll be worth less then a comparable 240 or 850, at least around here.

 

Are all these cars mentioned in the posts 100% Volvos (ie: not
rebadged)?

Cheers,

Han.

 

My wife actually likes the V40 as it is easier to park and would
actually fit in my small garage. Are there any common problems to be
wary of with this car? What is the optimal mileage to buy this car at?

I'd be looking at an automatic stationwagon. Engine power doesn't
concern me.

Cheers,

Han.

 

The 240's are very good, they didn't change much from the mid 80's on. If
you want something a bit more updated feeling you could look into a 740 or
940, perhaps a turbo if you'd like a bit more zip.

 

Yes everything mentioned is.

 

The V40 and XC90 are rebadged, but the others have a true Volvo pedigree.

The V40 was originally developed jointly with Mitsubishi and was a
variant of the Mitsubishi Carisma. The current model, the V50, is based
on Ford's C1 platform, derived from the current Focus, which also
underpins the next Focus, the Focus C-MAX and the Mazda 3. Volvo calls
it P1 (for Premium).

The XC90 SUV was the first joint Volvo-Ford undertaking and was released
in 2003 model year. Ford took control in 1998. The v8 version is
strongly Ford influenced.

 

yes it's smaller but I'd say the rear wheel drive Volvos are easier
parkers as they have much better turning circles.

M.

 

The only "rebadge" is the old style S40... Mitsubishi Charisma... But they
probably worked together on it or something. Who cares as long as it's a
good car.

 

The XC90 was pretty much developed all the way by Volvo tho, wasn't it?

Honestly, from anyone in the industry i've talked to - Ford has only
improved Volvo, and Volvo has helped Ford in even more ways. I was in a
Mazda dealer just yesterday, and the salesperson was just going on and on
about how the Mazda 3 is such a good car because it has a Volvo suspension
systems and chassis and I believe the brakes. I wouldn't be concerned about
a "Ford" Volvo.