Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





2008 Volvo XC70/V70

24

Comments

  • I cant find any reference to a third seat in the 08. Thats a deal killer for us if that's the case.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    Who would you put in a rear-facing 3rd row seat of a V70/XC70? These cramped seats are not as safe as the regular seats in a rear end collision. If you need three rows, get an XC90 or another large midsize or fullsize SUV or a large minivan.
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    I'm not sure if the 2008 has the 3rd row option, but I agree, it's great - it's a big reason why we chose the V70. It not only transforms the V70 into a 7 passenger car, but it's also great for securing groceries, shopping bags, etc. - preventing any soft-sided cargo from sliding/spilling.

    I also love watching the reactions of drivers behind us when we are stopped at a light and the kids wave and/or make faces at them. :P
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    "Who would you put in a rear-facing 3rd row seat of a V70/XC70?"

    Uh, generally kids 12 and under fit fine - and depending on the relationship, maybe the mother-in-law.

    "These cramped seats are not as safe as the regular seats in a rear end collision."

    Red meat isn't as healthy as fish. So what?

    "If you need three rows, get an XC90 or another large midsize or fullsize SUV or a large minivan."

    Actually, the V70 is perfect for someone who doesn't need/want an XC90, SUV, or minivan.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    It is widely reported that the most common collision geometries are front-to-front ("head-on") at some angle and front-to-side ("T-bone"), but front-to-rear ("rear ender") does occur. Also it is possible for a vehicle to do a 180 deg rotation ("swap ends") and make rear end contact with another vehicle or a fixed object

    The occupants of a 3-row seat in a V70/XC70 are in the rear crumple zone.

    I have worked as an automobile crash researcher and I have spent many hours in automobile salvage yards. I remember once seeing a late 1990's or early 2000's model Volvo wagon which had been rear ended hard on the left side. The hatch was pushed almost to the second row seat on the left (driver's side).

    You can say that there is risk in life, etc., and so there is, but the use of the 3rd row seat puts the occupants there at assymetrical risk compared to other occupants of the vehicle and raises ethical problems.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    I own a base model 2004 V70 NA 2.4L (5A) and my wife owns a base model 2007 FWD XC90 3.2 (6A) 5 passenger. I understand the wish for high fuel economy. I get well over 30 mpg on the interstate and the best we can get in the XC90 is in the low 20s mpg. The mileage around town is much less than I would like.

    But the XC90 is absolutely wonderful on trips. I have not tried the 3rd row seat in an XC90, but I would consider it adequate for a defensible level of crash protection. A V70 is simply too small to include a 3rd row seat.

    If I had a V70 with a third row seat and I needed to use it, I'm sure I would, but I'd be nervous the whole time and if someone would be injured in it, I'd feel that I had taken a chance that I should not have.

    As far as purchasing that option so that I would have that capability, I would not do it. If I were in a decison making position at Volvo, I would discontinue offering the 3rd row seat in the V70 because it is enabling and encouraging the user to exceed the design capability of the V70, and would expose Volvo to a product liabilty lawsuit should some tragedy occur.
  • stmssstmss Posts: 206
    I think I recall reading somewhere that it is now only a dealer installed option for 2008. I have one in my 99 from the factory. At the time there were very few 7 seaters other than mini vans. It is a good option if used as intended. I think Volvo should continue to offer it as it sets it apart from the other wagons - Saab, BMW, MB. I don't think the consumer should need to buy a mini van or SUV just because they want occasional 3 rd row seats.

    We used ours only for casual use in the early years. It hardly gets any use now as the kids are all too big.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    Your defense of this is as good a defense as can be given of getting the 3rd row seat in a V70. We all take risks. A person could well analyze the risks and benefits and decide that overall that it is a risk worth taking. For a particular person it might even be safety neutral, in total, and it enable them to consume less fuel.

    In my 07 V70 the spare tire and the battery are under the deck behind the 2nd row seat. I can imagine that the battery stays where it is, but what happens to the spare tire when the 3rd row seat is installed? Maybe a spare can no longer be carried, and one must rely on a can of sealer and a 12V air pump. Some vehicles come that way!
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    Our main criteria for a family car was that it have a 3rd row seat. We are a family of 4, so we don't need it often, but when we do need it, it is a great convenience. Our 2004 V70 didn't come from the factory with the 3rd row seat (although it was an available option). We had the dealer install it.

    Even dealer installed, it is functionally identical to the factory installed version.

    Regarding using the 3rd row, I agree that it cannot be used as a functional seat on a regular basis. When it's occupied, it leaves little to no space for cargo. So while we would never want to take a trip with the kids sitting back there (where would you put your luggage?), we appreciate having it one those occasions when we take the neighbors kids to school in the morning or take the kids and their friends to the movies.

    We had a Buick Rendezvous before, and I rememeber reading all the hoopla about 3rd row safety when the first three-row crossover SUV's started hitting the market. Basically, the consensus was that any occupant of a 3rd row seat in a "wheelbase challenged" vehicle is at higher risk for injury. This would include any vehicle smaller than an extended w/b minivan or full-size SUV.

    So, according to the safety gurus, basically anything smaller than a Chevrolet Suburban is off the list. Personally, I think risk is a part of life and to "avoid" risk is to "avoid" life. I am "at risk" every time I drive to work, fly a helicopter, or go swimming (just owning a swimming pool is "risky"). I choose to "manage risk" and allow my kids go swimming, ride their bikes in the neighborhood, climb the tree in the backyard, and sit in the 3rd row of the Volvo.

    Personally, if the 3rd row seat had not been available in the V70, we wouldn't have bought it. We could have made due with a 6-person near-lux sedan like the Toyota Avalon, or gone for the Acura MDX (which itself is 3rd row "safety challenged"), but we both really liked the V70's unique combination of utility and comfort.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 17,430
    And let's not forget, if we were truly worried about every occupant being inside the safety cage, nobody would drive motorcyles or even convertibles, for that matter, since your head may not be protected (yes, some convertibles have a popup thingy, but that may or may not protect someone of my height).

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '14 Town&Country

  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    Right.

    You reminded me of a discussion (and there were a number) I had here (in the Rendezvous forum I think) a few years ago talking about child carseats. The Reader's Digest version is that there was a report (IIHS?) that the safest position in a vehicle is the 2nd row middle (center) seat. A forum participant stated that it was unsafe to put your child in any seat other than the 2nd row center seat because of the risk of injury during a side collision.

    This discussion went around and around because, as you can imagine, one has to ask what do you do if you have more than 1 child? Do you place the kid you love the most in the middle?

    Another discussion involved purchasing a vehicle that is "5-star" crash test rated vs. a car that "only" has 3 or 4 stars. Does buying a mere "4-star" car mean you don't love your family as much as you neighbor with the "5-star" car?

    Stupid drivel if you ask me. Buy the car that fits your personal values, lifestyle, budget, etc. and then hit the road. Don't listen to people who will try to impose their values and opinions on you (why do people even do this?).

    I love the V70 because one weekend, my wife can go to the movies with our two kids and her best friend and her two kids all in one car. The next weekend, we can take a trip to Spokane and get better than 30 MPG. Then the next weekend, she can accompany me to a BMWCCA driving school and hit the skidpad, autocross, and emergency braking course in a car with basically sedan-level performance and handling.
  • stmssstmss Posts: 206
    For many families, buying a mini van or SUV just to have a 3rd row for part time use is akin to buying that pickup for the 2-3 times a year you go to home depot.

    We went to the V70 from a Plymouth mini van for a number of reasons (besides the obvious upgrade in quality, ride, performace etc).

    1. We have 3 kids and a middle row that could sit 3 was rare - even in mini vans in those days - usually it was 2 captains. Therefore - we had to put 1 kid in the 3rd row of the van all the time.
    2. The third row, despite adequate room, left only 1 foot between the glass and his head. Take a look at 3rd rows in any mid size SUV and van today - it is a bit better but not much. At least in the Volvo, the feet are at the back of the vehicle. So I don't necessarily buy the 'crumple zone' argument in all cases.
    3. We had only occasional use for 6 or 7 seater. So, it was better to take one vehicle with someone in the 3rd row than to take two vehicles. Is there less risk here - problably.

    So we were left with this - 3rd row all the time in a van, or part of the time in the Volvo. In my opinion, the risk of injury in a rear ender was higher in the van as the miles driven with someone in the rear seat was higher (by a large factor).

    BTW, the spare tire in my 99 is below the fold up 3rd row seats. But battery is under the hood.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    One of Volvo's big selling points has always been safety. We got our first Volvo in 1996 because we were at a certain point in life where we became especially safety conscious. At that time I was driving a 1989 Dodge Caravan SWB with 2.5L 5-spd manual and she was driving a 1991 Dodge Spirit 2.5L 5-spd man. (The latter was a positively terrific value in a safe, low maintenance, functional, and fuel efficient vehicle. The Spirit later became my vehicle and I drove it until the Spring of 2007 when I sold it cheap to someone who approached me about it for inexpensive daily commuting. It still ran great after 16.5 years and got 34 mpg on the interstate with the a/c on. )

    For camping and for hauling kids to various functions, the Caravan was terrific and it got excellent fuel economy when the speed limits were 55 mph (28 to 30 mpg highway). However, I became aware that this model year and trim level of Caravan was not as safe as we then wanted and so I sold it and my wife bought a base model 850 wagon (Volvo 855) for her and the newly lisenced teenage driver in our household to drive and I took the 91 Spirit. That model year the base trim Caravan did not have shoulder belts past the front seats, the 2nd and 3rd rows were low back, and I learned that it did not even have side door beams. It was classified as a truck and, like pickups, was extempt from the side door beam requirement.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    Continued

    I loved the Caravan but sold it rather than trading in or selling the Spirit because the latter had the safety features I wanted.

    The 850 wagon was very cramped compared to the Caravan, but served its travelling function acceptably well, though not as good as a minivan. It 2004 it was totalled in a guardrail smack and 720 deg rollover on a tollway when my wife was the sole occupant. A pickup two cars in front of the 850 slammed on its brakes in the middle lane to attempt to use an exit which it had almost passed. My wife swerved into the lane next to the guardrail, lost control, the 850 began fishtailing, hit and rode up on the smooth concrete guardrail with the left front corner, and rolled twice about the longitudinal axis, swapped ends and was reflected back into the middle lane. It ended up on the wheels in the center lane facing opposite to the original direction of travel beyond and now facing the car which had been in front of her.

    She was stunned but totally unhurt, not one bruise, did not even have to take an aspirin. She was unaware she had rolled, until witnesses told her so. She taken a very expensive carnival ride.

    No airbags deployed and she did not contact any other vehicles. The 850 was scraped and dented on the left side, the front, the roof at one A-pillar crushed in maybe 4 inches, and the right side was all scraped up. The hood was buckled and the radiator leaking coolant. All the windows had been up and both front ones were broken out and missing, the windshield was cracked all over but in place. If she had not been wearing her lap/shoulder belts she would have been partially or entirely ejected through a front window.

    I think the 91 Spirit would probably have done about as well in this accident as the 850, but the 89 Caravan would probably not have.

    She got a 2004 base model V70 non-turbo (no dynamic stability control in the base one on the lot) to replace the wrecked 850 and drove it four years until she decided to get a Volvo with dynamic stability control. She wanted another V70 base model, but none was available so she got a base model XC90 3.2 FWD and I got the 2004 V70 NA 2.4L 168 hp which I like a lot, though I hated to part with my Spirit. Although I do sometimes wish my 04 V70 had the manual tranny.

    However, the seats in the XC90 and the driving position make it much more comfortable for trips. I put a trailer hitch on the V70 (not cheap!) and intended for us to use an aerodynamic utility trailer for camping with our three dogs, but I couldn't decide on a trailer before we went on a trip so I got an 18 cu ft Thule roof box and it worked great. The mpg was still in the mid to upper 20's mpg depending on the speeds. An aerodynamic trailer would be much easier to load and unload and would probably have less mpg penalty, it that's possible.

    However, travelling in the XC90 (even with the base cloth seath) is much more comfortable that the 850 or the V70 (both base cloth seats) and with its 8.5 in ground clearance it handles rough potholed roads much better than a V70. I understand that the new XC70 (3.2L I6) has very comfortable seats, good ground clearance and somewhat better fuel economy that an XC90 3.2, and is AWD.
  • stmssstmss Posts: 206
    I checked my 08 brochure last night and it lists the auxillary seat as an available 'accessory' . This is the Canadian brochure. Which tells me it is either dealer installed or bought over the parts counter. It is not listed in the option or package lists. Best to confirm with your dealer.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    Go to http://www.volvocars.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/54532EF5-8A5E-4F25-8539-1C29145ACD97/0/V- - 70MY08NovPricelist.pdf and scroll down to the engine choices and further down to the fuel consumption of these choices. These mpg values are mpgUK which are to be divided by 1.2 to get mpgUS. Alternatively, divide the fuel consumption in metric units (L/100 km) value into 235 to get mpgUS.

    I wish Volvo would offer some of these more fuel efficient engines in the US. The 2.0L 4-cyl engines (diesel and gas) may be from Volkswagen. The 5-cyl engines are made by Volvo, and the 3.2L I6 is Volvo designed but manufactured at the Ford engine plant in Bridgend Wales. The smaller displacement engines are more fuel efficient aren't they? I suppose that these lower hp engines would not attract many buyers in the US. The diesels would attract buyers but right now they cannot be sold in the US presumably because they don't meet US environmental regs. Also Volvo may needs all the diesel engines they can manufacuture to satisfy the demand in Europe. I have heard that within two years Volvos with diesels will be available in the US.

    The UK fuel economy extra-urban test values may be biased high relative to the US EPA values. Of course it is possible (even likely) that the 3.2L I6 engine is tuned differently for the UK sales than the US.

    In the UK the 2008 V70 3.2 Geartronic is rated (extra urban or highway) at 36.7 mpgUK so 36.7/1.2 = 30.6 mpgUS. Starting with the metric value given 7.7 L/100km => 235/7.7 = 30.5 mpgUS highway. The urban (city) est is 18.3/1.2 or 235/15.4 = 15.3 mpgUS.

    In the US the 2008 V70 3.2 Geartronic is rated at 16 city and 24 mpg highway. What are the sources of this difference in est mpg values between the UK and the US highway? The city values are the same.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 17,430
    What are the testing procedures in the UK?
    I believe the EPA now runs at like 70 or 75 mph? maybe the UK procedures call for lower speeds?

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '14 Town&Country

  • Hi All,

    I am here searching for issues reported by current 2008 XC70 owners. I see allot of postings about price so I will provide that info.

    I leased my 08 XC70 back in October for $520 per month for 30 months with 10K miles per year. It had an MSRP of $45095. I only paid Tax, tags and $500 deposit. This was the best deal I could find in my area. My friend leased one just after me with an MSRP of 42K and some change and he is paying $700.00 per month...OUCH.

    I love the car, it is very luxurious and has some cool features like the Personal Car Communicator, and Blind Spot Warning System. The down sides have been poor gas mileage that is usually around 17-18 mpg in mixed driving but mostly highway and a problems with rattles and steering issues.

    The rattles for the most part have been toned down by the service departments efforts but are still present to a certain degree. The steering issues have remained unresolved to date after 4 repair attempts. The car makes a popping or clunking sound the subframe is flexed during turning such as leaving a parking lot. I have put in a complaint and hope the car gets replaced under the lemon law. :lemon:

    Currently we are having our first winter storm and instead of driving the in the safety of our AWD Volvo we are commuting in a Prius. Our Volvo remains in a million peices at the dealer with the front end torn apart. I am affraid of what new issues will come up once it is "thrown" back together.

    On a better note, my friend has not yet had any issues with his XC70 so it may be that I just got a bad apple. Good luck to those of you getting ready to purchase a new one. You may need it!!! :sick:
  • nibsnibs Posts: 65
    Traded my 02 XC for the 08. I find the more I drive the 08 the more I like the 3.2 engine. It is definitely strong enough for the XC and it loves higher RPMs. The handling of the 08 is considerably better than earlier models. The adaptive steering is nice in town and on the highway.

    I live in an area that has five months of nasty Winter conditions. I've installed four Goodyear Nordic tires this Winter and the XC is like a tank. It loves the snow and leaves the 4x4s in the rear view mirror.

    What would I change??? I'd like the telescoping steering to extend a little further and I'd like deeper leg room while bringing the dash closer to the driver. I'd also like the console turned a little towards the driver as I like that cockpit feel. I would also like the console and shifter raised.

    I'm waiting for swedespeed tuning products to hit the market.
  • volvogalvolvogal Posts: 2
    ...apart from those listed on Edmunds(1K cash to cust owner loyalty & 2K manufacturer to dealer)?

    Thanks!
    (new to the group and still trying to navigate my way through, thank you for your patience).
  • nibsnibs Posts: 65
    So many rattles with the 08 model compared to my 02. I thought this vehicle would be tight as drum. Most of the noise comes from the new rear hatch. Why change the things that work? I think Volvo should have went the extra mile with this new model and tried to cut the vehicle weight to make it more nimble. Fuel has been averaging 13.3 per/100 KMs. Not great by any means. I expected better. Thinking of trading it for a new 2007 model.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    What kind of driving are you doing that gives 13.3 L/100km? This is 17.7 mpgUS or 21.2 mpgUK. Based on my experience with the 3.2L inline 6-cyl in a 2007 XC90, I would think you would get 8.4 L/100km on the highway with the '08 V70 (28 mpgUS and 34 mpgUK).

    The 3.2L inline-6 ought to be a much better engine over the long haul than any of the 5-cyl ones. And the '08 V70 has a shorter turning radius than the older model. Of course the 3.2 is not going to get as good a fuel economy as the non turbo 5-cyl, but it may be about as good as the turbo ones.
  • nibsnibs Posts: 65
    I actually drive mostly highway. I average 110-120 kph or 70 mph. This XC70 is heavier than the old version and if I had my time back I would have kept my old XC. I just had it in for its first service ($200.00). The power tailgate has given out, been in twice for this now and still not working (only 10K on the car). The old saying is "don't fix that which is not broken", Volvo imo did just that. The car is heavier, thirstier and now more breakdowns. Luckily I've got warranty but then again for the price of the car I and the brand I shouldn't have to be concerned.

    Volvo should have looked to make the car they had lighter, faster and more efficient yet still comfortable. I believe that Ford ownership has done little to keep the Volvo image of reliability and quality alive. This thing creeks like an old rocking chair on a bad floor. Do yourself a favour and buy a German car. This is my last Volvo.
  • we have a 3 year old subi legacy gt limited wagon and my wife has been looking for something a bit more 'upscale' so i suggested we look at the redesigned v70 wagon. we have never been in a volvo before as i always found them too 'stodgy', and recently some have had less than stellar service histories...but since she doesn't want a german car, and we've owned many saabs over the years, thought it might be time to have an open mind and so we went to our local volvo dealer.

    on the plus side, i'd say the v70 isn't bad looking. it's no audi, but inside and out has improved a lot. the interior fit and finish are really nice, and my wife found the seats to be pretty comfy (a big problem for her--short legs/long torso). there are some nice features on the car as well (power rear liftback, some of the 'tiedown' stuff back there, etc).

    we went for a test drive in the car and she generally liked the way it drove--solid but without harshness. but here we expose one of the real weaknesses of the v70--the drivetrain. in what is meant to be this price class ($40k msrp on the car we drove) this is a decidedly mediocre drivetrain. not much power with pretty lousy fuel economy. volvo/ford need to take a pick here--either offer an engine/transmission that shines in terms of power or one that does well on fuel. by my read the v70 isn't even all that heavy, so it must be the engine itself. they need something like the vw 2.0t/dsg combo, which we have in one of our other cars and is a great combo of decent power with good efficiency.

    so the powertrain is a big negative in my book, and the other is price. i don't know how big the discounts are on this car, but to me this should be more like a $30k rather than a $40k vehicle, especially with the lack of some features (xenon, ipod interface, etc) as standard equipment.

    so i think we're going to stick with the subi for now, and maybe will look for a good used one in the $20's somewhere. we didn't get into price with the dealer so maybe the discounts are huge, which i think they need to be to move these cars.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    My wife has an 07 XC90 with the same 3.2L inline-six as in the 08 V70. This is the new Volvo-Ford short inline six or si6, max 235 hp and about 235 lb-ft torque. It is very smooth and allows actual 24-26 mpg hwy in the XC90 at 65-70 mph. I would bet that in the V70 it will give close to 30 mpg highway at 70 mph, driven carefully. I get 34 mpg hwy at 75 mph in my 04 V70 168 hp 2.4L 5A.

    The 6A tranny in the 08 V70 is probably made by Aisin in Japan and ought to be very good. Want to accelerate in the V70? Lay into the accelerator with abandon. The engine is designed to give decent mpg driven carefully and to deliver hp and torque when you want it.
  • nibsnibs Posts: 65
    Finally have the power tailgate fixed after five visits to Volvo Service. They had to replace the complete motor.

    Just when I thought my troubles had ended, the power steering fails on start up. I have to turn the car off and restart to remedy the problem. I took the XC to Volvo and they say it requires a sensor changer or something replaced. Part is on order and will take several weeks to arrive as it is not readily available.

    So here I have a new car and it has been back to the dealer six times. I'm pissed and have written to Volvo Canada. I now distrust this car and Volvo. My last, next will be Japanese.

    The fuel economy on this car is terrible. I might as well be driving a truck.
  • sorry to hear about your problems but you are unfortunately highlighting some of what my review was mentioning...possible bad reliability and bad fuel economy. the v70 is rated 16/24, pretty lousy even these days for a car with only 235 hp....and there's no way to get 30 mpg on the highway at 70 mph as someone above stated, unless you are measuring on a drive coming down out of the mountains...i think the new epa ratings are getting pretty close to real world experience now, and going 6 mpg above the highway estimate is just not going to happen.

    anyway, we're sticking with the subi for now. it isn't that fuel efficient either (19/25 epa on ours) but it is fast as heck and generally fun to drive..although not as nice inside as the v70.
  • nibsnibs Posts: 65
    Thanks. I got a call from Volvo Canada yesterday. They wondered why I was upset that my car only had two problems which are being repaired under warranty. I indicated that Volvo is supposedly a premium car, that I am very disappointed with the quality thus far. I noted my dissatisfaction with the fuel economy as well. Had I held out for the T6, I would have at least had some fun for my money.

    I doubt Volvo will do anything to ease my pissed attitude. Next car will not be a Volvo. 19/25 sounds good from where I'm sitting.
  • jim314jim314 Posts: 491
    Does your Subaru have head curtain airbags? I believe that the structural stength of the passenger compartment of the Subarus is excellent, but when I looked at Subarus many of the models didn't have the head curtain air bags. Head curtain bags are extremely protective of the occupants of a vehicle hit from the side.
  • I feel your pain. Volvo Customer Care is worthless, nothing more then lip service.

    I ended up hiring an attorney to file a lemon law claim. You have to check your state to see what qualifies as a Lemon. The attorney did not bill me for anything and I ended up settling with Volvo for a good amount of money, they fixed the car and I am keeping it until the end of the lease.

    This is a last resort but it does work. My car seems to be fine now.
This discussion has been closed.