Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Volvo S40

1161719212236

Comments

  • avolvofanavolvofan Member Posts: 358
    The AWD edition comes with the re-valved shock absorbers and larger anti-sway bar that are included in the non-AWD Sport package.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    from the Sport Package come w/ anything else such as firmer springs or bushings besides the re-valved shock absorbers and larger anti-sway bar(s)?

    From my experience, not slowing down over a speed bump will use up the FWD's std suspension's front spring travel. So by increasing the spring travel plus firmer sway bars alone should solve this problem!

    & exactly how much higher is the AWD S40/V50 over the FWD model? BMW's AWD 325xi is suppose to be about half an inch taller than the 2WD 325i.
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    Wow! Thanks! That's a ton of great info!

    I don't mind feeling dips and udualtions in the road; i like sporty rides, as my 328 has. My biggest pet peeve is wind and road noise. Engine growl is quite fine, and is if fact encouraged.

    I hope the lag isn't anything like my old saab's was. That drove me nuts.

    It's interesting that you compare it to the old s4 because that car severely tempted me as well.

    I don't expect the car to ride/handle quite as good as, perhaps, a new 330, but there are other ways i think the car is better.

    And, for the age datapoint, i'm 32.

    dave
  • beaunedocbeaunedoc Member Posts: 15
    I haven't been bothered at all by obtrusive wind noise or road noise. The T5 engine does growl on acceleration but settles in for cruising. I believe that one of the reviews, eihter in the mags of in Edmunds noted that as well. Turbo lag is minimal and only noted in first gear. I had a Saab 9000. I understand. Let me know if you decide to get the Volvo. beaunedoc
  • beaunedocbeaunedoc Member Posts: 15
    I believe that it is about 0.5 inch taller as well. beaunedoc
  • scott31scott31 Member Posts: 292
    Would you mind posting the #'s on your lease deal? Thanks!
  • beaunedocbeaunedoc Member Posts: 15
    I was fortunate to receive the Ford X plan through a friend, so I didn't have to haggle with the dealer. Your numbers will likely be different. They change frequently as the residual value of the car changes. But in Aug. I got a two year lease, less than $1500 out the door, and about $411/mo. beaunedoc
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    Drove a t5 AWD. Automatic, unfortunately.

    I like the interior design on the car a lot. I also like the t-tec seating surface. Generally, i liked the layout and the controls a great deal.

    Pulling out of the dealer, i was put off by the extremely low amount of power right off idle. I'd definitely need to get used to that. Underway, the lag was improved but not gone. It doesn't feel quite as quick as my bimmer, even though it has considerably more torque and HP.

    This may be because of the automatic.

    I took the car through some fast turns, and it had plenty of grip, and held the corners very well, not too much body roll. However, it definitely felt like A FWD car. Not bad, just not quite as "sporty" as i like. A caveat here is that i really like the RWD "feel" and was hoping AWD might deliver it but also, perhaps, not need snow tires quite as much as my RWD car does. On the other hand, it swallowed up bumps and broken pavement quite well.

    On the highway the open sunroof didn't lead to much wind noise ( good ) but i still felt that the power wasn't quite there. On reason, i suppose is the automatic again. It seemed to have 1/2 the revs my bimmer has at the same speed, and it took awhile to kick down. I was all alone on the exit ramp and nailed the brakes and it stopped quickly, with perhaps a bit more body movement than i am used to.

    After, i went through the car again, and i really like the interior design and scandanavian sensibility. I don't need leather and wood, i need functionality. It also has great environmental cred. And the seats are really fantastic.

    So, i don't know. If it were a bit sportier it'd be a sure thing. As is, i think i'll want to test a manual FWD with the sport package, perhaps, and wait to see the new 3-series. Perhaps the advance package with the 17's would have helped.

    dave
  • beaunedocbeaunedoc Member Posts: 15
    I did a 600+ mile road trip this past weekend and really thought about the S40. First gear acceleration isn't what I had with my S4 but I never expected it to be with the decreased HP and one less cylinder. On the highway passing acceleration is fine. The car was very comfortable and feels like it is made of granite..no squeaks or rattles or groans. I really recommend that you drive a 6 speed. beaunedoc
  • ricemanriceman Member Posts: 5
    Hopefully some useful adds to the S40 discussion- I drove both the T5 and 168hp version this Sat, both automatics (I drive often in Boston traffic), also have driven all the up-scales (TS, TSX, G35x, ES330) no Germans as I had a 2000 Passat and it was a reliability nightmare (made in Mexico, I know, but regardless). I now have a '03 Accord EX Coupe being replaced soon, it has 30K, flawless reliability, and gets 33mpg hwy with the 4 cyl. The S40 has some nice driving attributes- rock solid, moderate body roll, minimal torque steer. However, the T5 tubo-lag is huge and the 168 hp should not be considered, way too sluggish. The growl of the T5 is also annoying until you reach cruise speed and it quiets down. I run a sales territory and frequently spend 4-5+ hour days in the saddle, much of it highway. The Edmunds and Car & Driver testers missed one crucial flaw for the highway driver that uses both door and center armrests: the S40's armrests are useless- the door armrest is too high and not cut back far enough, the center armrest is about 4" long and doesn't extend, using it puts the hard edge square into your forearm. There is also not near enough storage in the S40- the door bins won't even fit a roadmap, the glove box won't fit a flashlight, and the trunk opening is a weird shape that makes loading larger items tricky. I really wanted to like this car because of the safety element and was willing to overlook the so-so reliabilty of Volvo, but it has too many ergonomic flaws. As the TS and G35x are pricey and get lousy gas mileage (on premium), the best value I've seen is the Mazda 6s V6 5-Door loaded for about 23K ('04 models). And the tried/true Accord EX Sedan, though somewhat bland and not terribly pretty, is one of the best bests in a family car with a touch of performance.
  • anonymouspostsanonymousposts Member Posts: 3,802
    If you like your Accord coupe so much why are you replacing it? Do you need a sedan for work?
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,891
    just FYI, but the TL (i'm assuming this is the car you are referring to because I don't know what a TS is) gets better highway mileage according to the EPA than the Mazda (and they both get same city rating). Yes, its premium gas, but its also much more powerful.

    Wow! 4-5 hours a day and you only have 30k miles on a 1.5-2 year old car? I only spend 2 hours a day in mine and average 25k a year. You sure you want to change cars so soon? And, if so, I don't think you want a volvo just for the depreciation aspect.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • harlequin1971harlequin1971 Member Posts: 278
    Might be your solution riceman.

    V6 Hybrid, 255 hp - 38 mpg - Honda Ergonomics.

    When this puppy comes out, the world goes "gulp!"

    As for me, I still haven't been able to drive an S40 - but they sure do look pretty.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    "...no Germans as I had a 2000 Passat and it was a reliability nightmare (made in Mexico, I know, but regardless)."

    Mexico does not build Passat. China does, but only w/ extended wheelbase. Your unreliable Passat must be made in Germany -- pathetic!

    "However, the T5 tubo-lag is huge and the 168 hp should not be considered, way too sluggish. The growl of the T5 is also annoying until you reach cruise speed and it quiets down."

    Gosh, no turbo has a very short lag, maybe supercharged Kompressors do. & the T5 growls too much? the 168hp 2.4i's much worse!

    "...the door armrest is too high and not cut back far enough..."

    I don't know how you drive, but this high door armrest is the only one high enough for me, 'cause I need to relax by resting my elbow on it while holding on to the 9-o'clock-position steering-wheel spoke AND turn signal lever all at the same time.

    "There is also not near enough storage in the S40- the door bins won't even fit a roadmap..."

    Again, pathetic! Volvo proudly claimed that the sacrificed door-pocket space is due to the extra side protection. But the American "SUV T-bone" crash test shows that the Saab 9-3 took the top honor, the TL/Accord, ES330/Camry & Galant still getting the "good" rating, while the Saab 9-5 & the Focus-II-based new S40 only got the "acceptable" rating, which is still better than the bigger-brother Mondeo-based Jaguar X-Type's mediocre rating.

    The S40's passive safety does excel when comes to driver's leg protection -- better than S60's.

    I still think the new S40 T-5 is really cool 'cause the optional DSTC stability control is awesome when comes to accidence avoidance, & it doesn't really intrude into your aggressive performance driving like others' systems do.

    The Mazda6's wide rear window is rare these days. & to me, that's what really helps me to avoid accidents by not missing any passing/lane-change opportunity!
  • ricemanriceman Member Posts: 5
    Yep- I often haul around samples and bought the Accord coupe becuase I loved the looks, should've got the sedan. I have a 13 yr old daughter that grew almost 4 inches in 1 1/2 yrs, has a hard timne getting in/out of the back. I don't do the 4-5 hour stint daily, only when out seeing customers but they are long days covering sometimes 400 miles. BTW, purchased the Mazda 6s hatch today, volcano red, $22,999 we'll see how it goes. Someone responded the Passat was made in China- were you joking or just mistaken- it's manufactured in Mexico.
  • ricemanriceman Member Posts: 5
    Sorry, was the TL- my typing when tired leaves much to be desired! I really liked the TL- great interior & ergonomics but I think Acura needs to work on relieving some torque steer- 270 hp to the front is too much with their current setup. And while the drive is certainly nicer than the Mazda, $32K vs $23K, even if the mileage is the same (which I doubt, given the nature of most of us to slam the pedal with 270hp on tap) $9K sure buys a lot of gas (beer, pretzels, and dinners for the wife, too!) If Volvo put a silky V6 in the S40 and fixed some of the interior quirks, it probably would be the nicest of the bunch- but as of now I think it lags behind.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    like the Skoda Superb twin, but ours don't get the long wheelbase. You sure yours was made in Mexico & not Germany?

    The old S40 was made in Holland, & the new S40 was made in Belgium.

    Our Mazda6 & the TL were made in U.S.A., while the Mazda "S40"(Mazda3) & the TSX were made in Japan. Most 4-cyl Accord sedans sold in California were assembled in Japan with American parts.

    The world's 1st production Ford "S40"(Focus II) sedan coming out in November is made in Taiwan, but we won't get it:
    creakid1 "Ford Focus 2005 release date" Oct 21, 2004 3:49pm

    http://tw.f2.page.bid.yahoo.com/tw/auction/b16418126

    Only the 1st-year Canadian-market Mercury Tracer hatch -- a Mazda 323 twin -- back in the '80's was made in Taiwan & took the top quality honor of all Ford-badged products around the world.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,891
    sorry, but I totally disagree. You are trying to make the Volvo into something its not. Volvo does not have a V6 in its stable. I've always been a fan of inline engines and I'm glad Volvo sticks with it. without quirks, the Volvo would be buried in a sea of similar autos from other manufacturers.

    Its quite a range of autos you've assembled. Comparing the Mazda to the TL is an amazing stretch. How about comparing the Hyundai Accel to the Mazda6 just to cover the other end of the equation? ;)

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    while the TL costs more than the TSX. Both the 6 & the TL are a tad more cramped than the Accord/Camry but roomier than the TSX, & are available w/ V6(read rather heavy nose for a FWD sport sedan).

    The Mazda3 & Focus II also cost less than the TSX, while the S40, even in the 2.4i form, costs several thousands dollars more than a similarly equipped TSX.

    But the Mazda3, Focus II & S40 are basically the same car. Ditto the Caddilac Cimarron & the Chevy Cavalier.

    Watch out! There will be Lincoln, Mercury & Ford versions of the Mazda6 pretty soon.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    By the same stretch TL is same as Accord.
    The only thing that is truly the same in S40, Mazda 3 and Focus II is some (not even all) of the framework sheet metal parts.
  • rroyce10rroyce10 Member Posts: 9,332
    ... **Its quite a range of autos you've assembled. Comparing the Mazda to the TL is an amazing stretch. How about comparing the Hyundai Accel to the Mazda6 just to cover the other end of the equation? ;)** ...... l..o..l...

                     great point ......... ;)

                              Terry.
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    I myself am comparing a kia to a ferarri, and i am tending toward the kia based on the pounds-per-dollar critera.
  • harlequin1971harlequin1971 Member Posts: 278
    I have to think the Kia has a better warranty and better reliability stats through Consumer Reports as well...looks like the winner to me!

    As for disparate comparisons...I think it is valid to shop a car that might equate to the top of your budget, and compare it with a favorite that is well within your budget.

    The Mazda 6 is a heck of a car...but I think it is hard to compare the 6, or car's like it, to the Volvo S40. But maybe I am wrong. Thinking that the S40 is just a fancy 3 or Focus is definately a far cry from reality.

    Sharing platforms doesn't equal same car.
  • cotmccotmc Member Posts: 1,081
    I also compared the S40 to the Mazda 6. I took a Mazda 6s hatch (5-door) on an extended test drive. I was pleasantly surprised by its handling, steering, and road manners. It definitely doesn't have the low-end torque of the Accord or Altima V6's, but the numbers already reflect that.

    On the down side, I thought the 6s allowed a little too much road/tire noise into the cabin when cruising on the interstate. I was also turned off by some of the interior, particularly the cheap plastic boombox-like center panel for the audio and climate controls. I had read the V6 was developed by Ford, which may explain the subpar fuel economy when compared to other Japanese V6's? Overall, I still considered it a top consideration due to its fine drive and its sharp exterior.

    Instead, I leased the S40 2.4i. My payments are just a hair above $250/month -- which is why I am not driving the T5. Since I will turn it in at lease end, there'll be no worries about resale value! This car only includes the premium package. Although I thought the T-Tec seats offered a great value as the "standard" seats, my wife and I both came to the conclusion that the leather seats seemed to have a little more padding. The other features, such as the dual climate control, moonroof, power seat, etc., were also welcomed.

    After several months, I'm still pleased with it. It's not easy to replace my beloved BMW, but my S40 is one solid little car that handles well and provides excellent steering feel for a FWD vehicle. In this respect, I definitely like it more than the last gen Audi A4 FWD I previously owned. When the auto stick is placed into "manual" mode, the transmission is extremely quick at responding to my downshifts; not so much on the upshifts (which doesn't matter as much to me). I respectfully disagree with anyone's opinion that the 2.4i is terribly "sluggish". Yes, it is very noisy when revved up, but I don't think it is much slower than the Mazda 6s or the TSX in real world driving. And while highway cruising, the engine noise is nominal, at worst.

    I agree with creakid -- the armrest in the door is perfectly placed for me. Storage is not quite adequate. The glove box is narrow, but it is also deep. The space behind the floating center console works great for my sunglasses.

    After 5 months, I haven't had a single defect, concern, rattle, or squeek.

    By the way, another agreement with creakid: Although the smaller VW's shipped to the US are built in Mexico, I have read from several sources that the Passats arrived from Germany.
  • jrct9454jrct9454 Member Posts: 2,363
    ...are built in Mexico. All Passats for the North American market come from Europe.

    Jettas [except the wagon], and New Beetles are built in Puebla. Golfs are built in Brazil.

    The China Passat reference is strictly for the Asian, and most particularly, the Chinese market. Until recently, that car was based on the 10-year old previous-gen Passat design.

    Now, back to the S40.....
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    called the Santana, which is the exactly name used in Germany & is not called the Passat sedan. This old design VW is still in production & seen as typical taxi cabs there, also has been face lifted with a high trunk lid called the Santana 2000, like how the Volvo 740 was face lifted into the 940.

    The unique extra-long-wheelbase Passat built in China I was talking about is the current Audi A6/A4-derived version. It has extra long rear doors(shown in red):
    http://www.autoindex.org/maker.plt?no=2085
     

    By the way, China also builds the current A6/A4 as well as the current BMW 3 & 5 series:

    http://www.autoindex.org/maker.plt?no=2155

    http://www.autoindex.org/maker.plt?no=2469

    Since some of you "Volvo snobs" don't believe in comparing the expensive-&-high-depreciation S40 to the lower price Mazda3/Focus II/Jetta, the much-roomier-but-closer-in-price Passat is your direct competitor.
  • cotmccotmc Member Posts: 1,081
    Do you really consider the Passat as the "direct competitor"? I don't see many comparisons between the two. Compared to the S40, the Passat doesn't provide sporty handling (except for the W8). Its suspension and rim/tire set seem to be intended for cruising; not for cornering. The Passat takes roominess and comfort to a higher level, while the S40 has a firmer, tighter suspension with steering feel almost like my '99 Miata. The rear seat of the S40 doesn't provide enough room for adults or older teenagers.

    I personally don't discount the Mazda3 as a competitor to the S40, but the 3 isn't for me. I'm getting up in years, and the 3 has a distinct "youthful" appearance to it. When I look at the 3 sedan from the side, I see Saturn Ion. The interior lacks the upscale look and feel required to compete against the higher priced S40. This isn't intended to be a knock against the 3. I just know there is a large subset of car shoppers who would consider the S40, but not the 3. (Likewise, there will be many buyers who consider the 3 but not the S40, mostly due to price and/or image.)

    I think we discussed this many months ago, and I still believe the TSX and the Audi 1.8T (soon to be 2.0T?) FWD cars are the closest direct competition. The MB C230K and the Saab 9-3 Linear might be next in line. I don't think it is a far stretch to also add several others into the mix, such as the Saab 9-2X, Mazda 6, the Accord Coupe, and maybe a Subaru, Jetta 1.8T, or IS300?

    By the way, if you skimp on the options, the S40 is not necessarily that expensive. One dealer was recently advertising base models for around $21.5K. The premium package adds almost all the equipment included on the TSX, for about another $2K. Next, it is an argument as to whether the 2.4i performance comes close to that of the TSX. I say "yes", it comes close, as I didn't find the TSX all that quick until the rpms were halfway to the tall redline. But if not, then add the additional cost for the 2.5T upgrade. Considering you get free maintenance for 3yrs, along with some outstanding safety engineering (consider all the factors and tests -- not just one NHTSA side-impact test), I think this car can still be a good value.
  • fitguyfitguy Member Posts: 220
    Thanks for seeing the rationale of driving cars up the scale of category and price and comparing them to the leaders in your 'comfort zone' of cost. (I am formerly riceman- Edmunds made me change the name as they felt it derogitory- I was NOT trying to offend anyone!) There are sometimes alternatives that fit your needs/budget; other times you must move up to the next category. As far as the S40 goes, it wasn't enough car to justify the extra dough for me; Volvo fans will always defend their position and that's fine- come talk to me at 75K miles when you've been ripped off for expensive repairs. Volvo's are prone to electrical gremlins, so are BMW's ( my friend has a '04 5-Series that went in for it's 5th warranty repair Tue.- electrical system related, of course). You can talk luxury-car marque all day, but to some that is irrelevant, especially since in Metro areas creeps just steal or damage them on a regular basis anyway. As for the chucklehead with the Kia-Ferrari comment- you've probably never even driven a Ferrari, and since Kia is the car of the ignorant, you should probably get one. The 6K I saved by getting a Mazda will be my down payment on my Harley V-Rod this spring- who's laughing now?
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,891
    i'm here to talk to you right now with 96K happy miles on my Volvo. What would you like to know? Oh, wait, I haven't been ripped off for any expensive repairs. Do you still want to talk or would you rather wait for someone who fits the pigeonhole you've created?

    I can say that my Volvo has been in the shop far fewer times than all those poor Mazda 626 (4 cyl. automatic combo) drivers with failed transmissions.

    Of course, you'll probably say "that was the 626, this is the mazda 6." In which case, let me say now, in response to that, the electrical gremlins you speak of was also the last gen of volvos (the one that I own and have no problems with) and not this current gen.

    Hey, look, you saved money, that's great. good for you. Enjoy it. Some folks want to step up from the economy class, that's all. Should they be bashed for spending more? Of course not.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • cotmccotmc Member Posts: 1,081
    Careful! If you truly don't wish to offend anyone, then you shouldn't type comments such as:

    "...and since Kia is the car of the ignorant, you should probably get one. ..."

    I have never driven a Kia, but I understand a few of their models have received reasonable reviews from automotive critics who are not so "ignorant".

    Who's laughing now? 6K savings is indeed nice, but everything is relative. No doubt, premium vehicles require more financial sacrifice. It's all a matter of priorities. Extending your final argument one step further, there are many other new car owners who just saved 14K (instead of 6K) by purchasing a Kia. Next, they paid cash (in full) and saved an additional 6K by purchasing a Honda instead of a Harley. No loan payments, and maybe an additional $2K into their bank accounts. I think I can hear them laughing now.

    In any case, it's time to move on. Hope you enjoy your 6. It's a good car.
  • harlequin1971harlequin1971 Member Posts: 278
    let me start by saying I am a CCB (Chronic Car Buyer) and let go of a fully operational BMW318ti to downsize my potential risk by getting a new Hyundai Elantra (GT Hatch 5-spd) with a healthy warranty as I planned to go back for a master's degree.

    Well, it didn't happen. And now I am thinking that I would like to change cars. The biggest reason is that I get only "average" mileage from my GT. While many are seeing 32+ mpg, I am lucky to top 27mpg on a tank and likely to be averaging around 25.5 or so. Now that is a good mix of city and stop-n-go highway driving...but come on, my old Honda Civic HX was always good for 35mpg min and 40mpg or so on mostly highway trips. If I am going to net only 25 mpg, I should at least have some power to get around all them pesky SUVs. :)

    So, I am looking at a wide range of cars, from purely practical replacements in frugality (Civic HX, Jetta TDI) to replacements in upgraded luxury and power (Accord V6 Hybrid, S40 T5, 9-2X Aero, Legacy GT, Audi A3 and more) to extreme replacements (Mustang Convert, Pontiac Solstice, used Mercedes SLK, used Saab 9-3 Convert, etc)...

    You could say that I am all over the map and you would be right. In the end, the better choice for me will have to be the best mix of performance, economy, safety and image that I am happy with.

    That likely rules out the Civic, but might keep the Jetta in...might rule out the SLK, but keep the Solstice in...

    My perfect choice would be a S40 T5 at around $20k...no brainer for sure...but that ain't reality...so I have to think real hard about the opportunity costs of overspending my car budget for the "image" rides on my list.

    As it is, the Mazda 6 is a sweet car.

    But it will never be confused with an S40 by the average person on the street.

    Both have an instant image reaction. Volvo's styling and brand image carry some weight...as does Mazda's...Volvo is more upscale.

    In the end, YOU have to like what you drive. If that is the 6, good for you, you saved money and are still satisfied. For some, the opposite would be true...by "settling" for a 6, they would always regret not stepping up to the S40 for a few more bucks a month.

    I tend to regret more than I am satisfied, so I always am looking for ways to satisfy my champagne tastes on a beer budget.

    I think the S40 looks svelte and classy. Youthful but elegant. Solid, but sporting. I asked one lady who was driving a new one what she thought of her car and she laughed at me,
    "I don't like it, it has no guts and is too small."

    I was like, huh? Then she finished, "it is a loaner, I can't wait to get my S60 back."

    Oh well...to each their own. I am sure the S60 is nice, but a few sheckels out of my reach...anything that gets north of $25k is not likely to happen without a considerable stretch.

    Maybe I should just dump and get a Mini Cooper?
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    "Do you really consider the Passat as the "direct competitor"? I don't see many comparisons between the two. Compared to the S40, the Passat doesn't provide sporty handling (except for the W8). Its suspension and rim/tire set seem to be intended for cruising; not for cornering. The Passat takes roominess and comfort to a higher level, while the S40 has a firmer, tighter suspension with steering feel almost like my '99 Miata. The rear seat of the S40 doesn't provide enough room for adults or older teenagers...I think we discussed this many months ago, and I still believe the TSX and the Audi 1.8T (soon to be 2.0T?) FWD cars are the closest direct competition."

    Even the std S40 T-5 got a relatively softly-tuned suspension. Have you driven an S40 w/ std suspension?

    The current Passat is available w/ sport suspension in Europe. The next Passat coming out next year got transversely-mounted-engine FWD w/ front struts & rear Control Blade 4-link suspension. This is the closest design next to the S40 in the price category. The S40 & the Mondeo-based Jaguar X-type's lack of rear seat room is a waste design done intentionally to protect the more expensive S60 & S-Type, respectively.

    The TSX's lack of AWD option & the Audi's very different design make them not similar to the S40.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    "The only thing that is truly the same in S40, Mazda 3 and Focus II is some (not even all) of the framework sheet metal parts."

    & that's enough to cover 62% parts sharing w/ the Focus II? Remember, all the superficial visible parts are already disguised to look like different cars, so you can imagine how much inside are still the same. The excellent multi-adjustable manual passenger seat from the traditional Volvo’s can’t be adopted in this new S40, 'cause even the seat frames have to share w/ the Focus II/Mazda3.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    "Thinking that the S40 is just a fancy 3 or Focus is definately a far cry from reality.

    Sharing platforms doesn't equal same car."

    Then what does? The engine? The S40/V50 1.8 should be a Mazda developed Duratec 4-cyl, while the Volvo’s 2.5 5-cyl turbo…
    creakid1 "Ford Focus 2005 release date" Nov 1, 2004 3:08am
    Now, it's way more than 62% of parts sharing.

    If you compare a loaded Mazda 3S 2.3 w/ a stripped S40 2.4I w/ sport suspension, then you might wonder what’s the big difference b/t them. In fact, you might find the Mazda version more refined due to the way the engine revs.

    Some people believe that the Volvo 740 & 940 are not the same car. & they believe the 850 may be superior to the 740, but still inferior to the 940. LOL! If you check out the wagon versions of the 740 & 940, then you will believe they're as close as b/t the Bora(Jetta) wagon & the Golf wagon in Europe -- which is no difference!

    http://www.myfocus.com.tw/event/presale/flash.htm
    See any resemblence from this silouette?

    Wagon:
    http://www.cars.com/go/features/autoshows/imageDetailPopUp.jsp?im- - - - - - - - - g=ford_focus_wagon_side_mfr_430.jpg&autoshow=Paris&autosh- - - - - - owyear=2004&title=Ford%20of%20Europe%20Focus%20Wagon&sour- - - - - - ce=manufacturer%20photo&captionfile=ford_focus_wagon_side_mfr- - - - - - _430-caption.jsp

    http://www.cars.com/go/features/autoshows/imageDetailPopUp.jsp?im- g=ford_focus_wagon_rearangle_mfr_430.jpg&autoshow=Paris&a- utoshowyear=2004&title=Ford of Europe Focus Wagon&source=manufacturer photo&captionfile=ford_focus_wagon_rearangle_mfr_430-caption.- jsp

    When the suspension & steering are from the Focus II, these C-1 cars are pretty similar dynamically, despite slightly different tuning variation. Just choose b/t the std model or the sport model.

    Once again, unless you crash the car real hard, the Volvo version’s unique 4-stage steel firmness won’t show. & w/ the sophisticated Focus-tuned un-intrusive ESP/DSTC stability control, drivers are not likely to turn it off. So you are 7 to 8 times to less likely to crash than cars w/o the stability control anyway:
     creakid1 "Mazda3 Sedan" Oct 12, 2003 5:05pm

    & w/ the N.A-market S40/V50 lacks the charcoal filter, this Volvo is only about as luxurious as the Focus II, which has Blue Tooth, swivel headlights…

    I got to tell ya, after the FWD S40 T-5 w/ std suspension “failed” my speed-bump test recently, I know it’s not up there w/ the premium Germans like the std 325i & C-class, both of which got a less-than-$30k starting price.
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    Just a couple of corrections,

    The 740 and 940 are essentially the same car, the 940 was just a bit bigger.

    The new S40 DOES have the charcoal filter.

    The Mazda lacks the Volvo's stronger chassis.
    There are also warranty differences, free maintenance, free loaners, a better dealer body etc w/ Volvo
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    All right! What a relieve! I can't stand a car w/o charcoal filter or DSTC/ESP stability control. I don't want leather, & even willing to sacrifice the moonroof in order to sit high. & that alone should save me more than enough $ for these 2 "little things" I've been asking for. ;-)

    You sure the filter is not just the electrostatic ionizer pollen filter, right?

    The scary thing is that, eventhough the A4 & Passat are basically the same car w/ different wheelbase, the A4 got charcoal filter while the Passat doesn't!
  • cotmccotmc Member Posts: 1,081
    "Even the std S40 T-5 got a relatively softly-tuned suspension. Have you driven an S40 w/ std suspension?"

    Yes. In fact, I drive one almost every day now. I've owned a variety of upscale German sport sedans, including the E46 3-series with sport suspension. This standard S40's cornering, handling, and steering do not disappoint.

    If the Passat 2.8 had been readily available in the US with a sport suspension, I would have given it more consideration. I haven't driven one in a few years, but I seem to remember its suspension being softer than, say, a Mazda 6, but firmer than a Camry LE.

    "The S40 & the Mondeo-based Jaguar X-type's lack of rear seat room is a waste design done intentionally to protect the more expensive S60 & S-Type, respectively."

    Not true for Volvo. I had sales brochures for both the S40 and S60. I closely compared their interior dimensions. The S40's rear seat was listed as having more leg room and more head room than the S60's rear seat. Have you ever tried to sit in the back seat of an S60?

    "The TSX's lack of AWD option & the Audi's very different design make them not similar to the S40."

    I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I don't think most potential customers will see enough of a design differential to preclude cross-shopping the S40 with the A4 1.8T. If I hadn't recently owned an A4, I definitely would have cross-shopped it. As for the TSX, I think it will be a strong competitor here in the south, where most S40's sold will be FWD models.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    “"The S40 & the Mondeo-based Jaguar X-type's lack of rear seat room is a waste design done intentionally to protect the more expensive S60 & S-Type, respectively."

    Not true for Volvo. I had sales brochures for both the S40 and S60. I closely compared their interior dimensions. The S40's rear seat was listed as having more leg room and more head room than the S60's rear seat. Have you ever tried to sit in the back seat of an S60?”

    Yes, it seems that the S60 got a tad more leg room on one side, but less on the other side. I forgot was it right or left. Still, that's a sign of trying not to steal too much sales from the S60.

    Because, in order for the N.A.-spec S40 to match the Mazda3's more decent passenger-side rear leg room, you have to get the T-5 premium so you can tilt up the front passenger seat's thigh support. The Mazda3 can easily achieve this leg room w/o the front-seat cushion tilt's help. & the Focus II is probably even roomier still, while all 3 of these C-1 cars share the same wheelbase!

    I've seen the current Mondeo in foreign countries, & had a chance to ride in one. You're not gonna believe this same platform as the Jaguar X-Type, but w/ just slightly longer wheelbase, can provide so much leg room that my 5'11" frame fits in the front passenger seat even w/ the seat moved all the way forward -- just like the good old honest Volvo 240! & the Jag X-Type's rear leg room is a joke.

    Also, I highly suspect that I will need the slightly longer springs & firmer shocks/swaybars on the AWD, as the FWD's std suspension runs out of the front-spring travel too easily if I don't slow down a lot over the speed bumps. That's why I find the S40's std tuning too soft for its Focus-like not-so-long front springs.
  • klbrmbklbrmb Member Posts: 41
    I am looking into purchasing the new S40. I know Volvo has had some reliability issues in past models but has anyone heard how the current years are?

    Thanks.
  • avolvofanavolvofan Member Posts: 358
    Yes, the filter is an activated charcoal filter.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/?long_term_test/long_term_test_story- - .php?id=51471

    "In fact, our only gripes were the lack of an off-clutch rest in the narrow footwell..."

    This is most likely a right-hand-drive UK model, so...
  • fitguyfitguy Member Posts: 220
    I certainly wasn't "bashing" anyone for spending more- what anyone does with their hard-earned money is their business. The point is simple: there is a car that drives better, has more power, and should be more reliable than the S40 for less money. Period. Volvo's are great cars; I wouldn't have considered one otherwise. If you have 96K troublefree miles that is awesome and I'm happy for you- however, you are outside the norm of Volvo owners. A good friend has owned 9 Volvo's spanning many years, several neighbors have them, and they simply are not as reliable as Japanese cars. Yet they love them and would own nothing else. And to say repairs on a Volvo aren't expensive is rediculous- they gouge customers on parts pricing just like the German manufacturers. Stepping up from the economy class?- if we were talking the S60, yes, that's a step up. I don't feel the S40 is "Entry Level Luxury" at all; it's meant to draw people that would buy a Pasaat, TSX, or top-end Honda/Toyota and it certainly will draw some- does the Volvo nameplate have more prestige- probably, but there are a lot of buyers who could care less, me included.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    "Stepping up from the economy class?- if we were talking the S60, yes, that's a step up. I don't feel the S40 is "Entry Level Luxury" at all;"

    S60? I'm not sure, at least the wagon - XC70 - rides like pain in the butt, literally. I doubt the S60 is really a comfier car than the new S40 T5, except the adjustment range of the std manual front passenger seat.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    so what should I get?

    S40 T-5? TSX? 325i?

    They all have advantage over Mazda3's road noise, but how about the relatively abrupt ride? The S40 sport & TSX also have a similar problem, & the TSX also got an un-informative steering that never changes the weight to show the amount of tire grip.

    If I'm spending more $, then I expect no compromise -- better ride AND handling. & only the lack of front-overhang nose-heaviness found in some RWD cars can achieve this.

    That leaves the 325i sedan(non-sport), but costly to own/repair.

    But I have one more minimum requirement I'm unwilling to compromise & none of the above cars got -- a wide rear-glass visibility for lane-change/passing ease & safety. Not having this feature is even more annoying than wide-turning circle & bulky exterior size! The C-class & S-Type got it, but the C-class's steering lacks road feel & forget about the Jag...

    You know what? The stripped non-sport automatic RX-8 w/ the mid-mount-light-weight rotary & the wrap-around rear glass is the solution, if you're willing to sacrifice fuel economy -- not a bad price to pay for a reliable Japanese car!

    That is, if I'm willing to give up stick for a car that handles like a dream even over bumpy curves & still rides like a limo! I don't think the S40 T5 non-sport can match.

    & huge discount's available, too! Only the low door armrest bothers me. ;-) But I'll stuff something there to raise it.

    S40 T5 vs RX-8 -- both cost more than the Mazda3, use more fuel & got more cramped back seat(leg room only, as the RX-8 trumps in rear head room for a notchback).
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    is stupid once you upgrade the FWD vehicle into AWD. So if you're getting an AWD car, then you might as well start from a short-front-overhang RWD car like the G35, 3-series & C-class. AWD Audi's layout of longitudinal-mounted engine over the front axle is especially stupid. No wonder it can only provide either ride or handling, but not both!
  • benjaminsbenjamins Member Posts: 56
    "S60? I'm not sure, at least the wagon - XC70 - rides like pain in the butt, literally. I doubt the S60 is really a comfier car than the new S40 T5, except the adjustment range of the std manual front passenger seat."

    Not only the range of the seat adjustment, but the seat shape and size, and also the quality of the leather covering the seats.

    Creak, I don't know what Volvos you are riding in or what type of tire pressure or worn shocks or suspension components they have had, but it is unfair to say that the XC70 rides like a pain in the butt. That's not true. Go to the Edmunds consumer comments on the XC70 and you'll find pretty consistent praise for the ride quality, and some of these people are coming from Mercedes and Lexus.

    I think all of the P2 cars ride well in their standard set ups. Whether it is the s60, v70, or xc70, they all ride well. The s80 is utterly superb, I may prefer it to the Mercedes E, I'd have to drive both back to back and for some time but I sure felt more bumps and motion in an E than I did in an s80 over the same roads (both 2002 models). Don't know about current E which I understand is a very comfortable riding car.

    The sports suspended Volvos, T5 and T6 with stiffer settings and low profile tires may ride rougher, and they are especially sensitive to tire pressure. Too much the car is rough, too little it is also rough but also poorly control. Right in the sweet range, then the cars ride properly. And well.

    Tire pressure makes a huge difference in quality of Volvo's ride, maybe more so than other makes.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    "The s80 is utterly superb, I may prefer it to the Mercedes E, I'd have to drive both back to back and for some time but I sure felt more bumps and motion in an E than I did in an s80 over the same roads (both 2002 models)."

    If you think the AWD S80 rides well, oh well, you're std is probably pretty low. ;-) Maybe other more expensive S80 models do better, but that rental AWD S80 I sampled recently in Chicago got a significant worse ride from the back seat than the '02 AWD 325xi.

    The previous E-class, which already rides worse than the previous 5-series(per CR), might have some harshness or firmness not found in some Volvo's, I don't know. 'cause I only rode the E-class for more than a few minutes at low speeds. But the S80 does seem like it doesn't got the ultra-long suspension travel found in the typical Mercedes'. & this isn't something relatively superficial that tire pressure alone can justify.

    My recent exciting discovery about the RX-8 is that even w/ sport suspension & 18"s running at 3psi higher than the recommended 32psi, it filters out lane-divider Bots quite well! Now, that's som'in the sporty Germans can't do! I can't wait to test drive the RX-8 auto w/ 16"s & non-sport suspension & see if it'll be a pampering fwy cruiser. If it does, then I've found the answer. Too bad the comfy base model got no DSC stability control, & forget about asking for a charcoal filter on a Mazda.

    If you get to drive a car, such as what I did w/ the Mazda6, in both 6 & 4 cylinders forms side by side on a handling course, then you'll discover that heavier engine(read nose heaviness) suffers so much in handling even the addition of the uncomfortable plus-1 wheel/tire set up can't really compensate.

    High center of gravity also hurts. Making an Echo into an xB "SUV" may still be able to handle pretty well, but rides horribly.

    The flat-stance RX-8, w/ no overhang-weight front or back, doesn't just pamper you in ride & seating comfort, there's also nothing else dynamically it can't excel. Now, we have a serious challenger to the little sporty S40 T-5 as well as the 325.
  • benjaminsbenjamins Member Posts: 56
    " Maybe other more expensive S80 models do better, but that rental AWD S80 I sampled recently in Chicago got a significant worse ride from the back seat than the '02 AWD 325xi."

    Rental car. That's one of the problems. The other problem is you only tried one s80. I remember riding in 2 s90s. One had a very comfortable, forgiving ride, barely noticing road irregularities, the other, same age and mileage rode like it had wooden tires, nastily snapped over uneven pavements, and every bump, ripple, and especially manhole cover was an unpleasant adventure. 2 Volvos of the same vintage can yield different rides depending on just how carefully maintained they are, and perhaps, when they came out of the factory.

    Here's how I'd characterize the s80. A car of harmony. There's muffled impact harshness from the tires, almost no wallow or float, excellent body control both vertical and lateral and what movements there are are fluid and slow. There are some s80s that have had suspension problems, some have bad bushings, and that can result in very annoyed, unhappy owners who test drove cars that road superbly only to have their s80s ride with poor composure.

    I think the suspension travel is pretty long on the p2 cars. I don't know if it is quite as long as Mercedes or BMWs, but there's a unique, almost zen-like quality to the Volvo, especially s80, that's not part of the German cars, which give a more on-rails type of experience, and a more heavily damped feel to the ride motions.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    Sounds really nice. I believe ya!
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 32,891
    I'm really not outside the norm of volvo owners. If you care to, try searching out and spending time on dedicated volvo owner boards like swedespeed and volvospeed. You'll find many many happy owners. Sure, you'll find problems, too, don't get me wrong. But that goes the same for EVERY manufacturer, regardless of country. Try telling an Acura or Honda owner on their 3rd transmission how their car is more reliable than a Volvo. Or try that with one of the 626 owners I mentioned earlier. If you seek out those who have had problems with a particular make or model, you'll find them.

    On to the repairs/parts issue. Let me first qualify this with a couple of details: I have worked as a mechanic through all of high school and college, plus i have owned and done all the repairs and maintenance on most major manufacturer's vehicles. The cost of the parts for most of my vehicles have been very similar across the board. NOW, as I said before, this comparison is done without dealer prices in mind. Dealers can charge whatever they want, so why go there unless absolutely necessary? Wegman's charges more than Shop Rite (both supermarkets for those who don't know) for the same goat cheese, so why would I choose to buy from Wegman's? So, anyway, I buy my parts online. Been doing so for years. My Volvo parts have cost no more than my Honda, which have cost no more than my Toyota, which have cost no more than my Mercedes, etc, etc. There is the occassional exception (like back in the day when I was able to get 4 new shocks for my Jeep for $100), but, 95% of the time, this holds true.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S

This discussion has been closed.