By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
My 1989 Volvo 240 wagon has 200,000 miles and counting. I still drive it every day. Never touched the engine or the transmission. Starts under a foot of snow. Done only routine low price repairs.
I always dreamt to get another big Volvo. Now, when I could get one of them, it's frustrating to see how unreliable they became.
Electronics ... I understand. You keep adding electronics on a car, obviously it becomes more unreliable. But why mechanics ?! My 18 yrs old gearbox still shifts like new !!! Can't they just "copy" and "paste" it ?
There is very simple answer to your question - Internet.
I believe, that Volvo today is even more reliable mechanically as it was 15-20 years ago. However, 15-20 years ago the only source of information about its reliability would be your mechanic.
Today, you know, basically, about EVERY case of failure from all around the world. It is not that the number of failures has actually increased, but the information about those failures became readily available.
There is known psychological phenomenon, when forums like this one have lean significantly to the "negative" side. The problem with the car is a strong motivation to go on line and rant about it, while uneventful ownership is not.
So, you do hear about pretty much every transmission failure here, while there are hundreds of thousand cars with the perfectly functioning transmission, but the owner have no reason to write about this.
And what would you write - 10K - no problems, 20K - no problems, etc. - boring...
I own (has owned) 4 Volvos, currently have 2 - S80 - 116K miles - transmission shifts like new - and XC90 - 38K miles - no problems at all.
I am thinking of buying another S80 in 2008 and have no slightest doubt about it.
If those people had an outlet like the internet today, everyone would be convinced that the 240 was a piece of junk.
One persons problems don't mean that an entire product is bad. Even companies with reputations for reliability have bad cars and unhappy owners. You name the car and I bet I have had a customer who had one and hated it and wouldn't get another one. Yet most people are very happy with what they drive. They just don't take the time to get online and talk about it.
One of the issue I had with the 740 was the overdrive control would fail on a regular basis. The power steering pump seized, leaving me stranded, the paint was terrible and the dash cracked in 2 places. So my experience with 1980's Volvo's is quite opposite of yours. This can happen with samples of 1 car.
The transmission in the 2003 XC90 T6 is a GM 4 speed unit. The one in both my current Volvos is a 5 speed built by Aisin in Japan. This is an excellent tranny; much better than anything built in the 80's.
My 2 cents..
perspective: in those 3 years you drove 60k miles at about 60 cents per mile, for a total cost of $36000 total. new trans was $2k. new tires $750 , two times. hmm.
best wishes with your next vehicle.
I agree with what all of you say, BUT these were zero or low price repairs. That's remarkable for a 18 years span.
Now, another thing: When I am typing this message on the left side of the screen I see a commercial saying:
"The 2006 Volvo XC90 starting at US$36,075". At today's CAN$/US$ ratio (0.89) that gives CAN$40,534. May I know why in the world the starting price in Canada is CAN$50,595 ?!?!
See the http://www.volvocanada.com/
That's 25% more expensive for Canadians, or about CAN$10,000, which is not fair at all !
Now on pricing, the exchange rate between US and Canada is changing so fast nobody can keep up. A few years ago, when the exchange was at 1.57, a lot of americans were buying their cars in Canada. Now, at 1.10, it is the opposite.
The lease on my XC is up in 1 year. At that time I will seriously look into buying my next car in the US and importing it to Canada. It is not that difficult. Maybe Volvomax can set me up wiht a good deal then.
I also saw that Volvo has a bulletin available to dealers about converting a US car to Canadian specs and vice-versa.
At $36K, the XC they refer to in the ad is a front driver, without the climate package that is standard up here. To compare this vehicle to our base XC, you probably need to add $2-$2.5K. But it is still a hell of a deal for us...
We like the FM transmitter okay. I'd prefer it to be wired as well. I've seen it wired in other Volvo's (I think the Xc70 or on one of the S cars), so I assumed it would be able to be wired for the Xc90 as well.
The one thing is, I'd prefer it be mounted in the center like the BlueTooth, so that my Wife could select songs while we're driving. Instead, it has to get mounted to the left of the driver.
As for the transmitter part, we haven't traveled too far yet, as to have any problems with station contention. There are multiple frequency choices, so I assume we'll always be able to find a clear one. For now, we're fine on 88.5
The other cool thing is that it has an input jack, so that I use my Dell Jukebox with it, if my Wife has the iPod with her.
When it comes to pricing in different countries,you have to sometimes take into account more than just currency differences.
National taxes and tarriffs can also cause price discrepancies. A Volvo in Sweden is alot more expensive than one in Canada or the US.
Cars in Europe are extremely expensives due to their tax system.
Please post it on the "Problems and Solutions" folder, because this is the only one I read.
Thanks
P.S: My 240 wagon just passed (by a large margin) the Ontario emissions test, so it's "street legal" for 2 years more. I wonder if it will reach the 20 years mark ! Anyway I can wait for your import experience. Please post it here.
Warranty vise you should be in the better shape as you have been, and Resale - why should the warranty engine replacement matter?
Where are you located in Canada ? I could be able to help you get rid of it ...
I am sincerely puzzled.
What's wrong with the dealer' installed brand new engine?
And who will know?
A new engine may raise some questions for a potential used car buyer, but it won't change the value of a car.
The only drawback I can see, and it is a small one, is that you have to brake in another new engine.
Obviously I was joking !!!
At the end I offered to buy the car from him 75% discounted because it had a new engine!! So I was in a serious conflict of interest when evaluating the 75% depreciation on his car!! I even put that face
Sorry guys,
sometimes I laugh too much ... but it's healthy you know.
Thanks to all who posted here,
Ken
The reason I say this is that I have had a number of multiple failures on a certain mechanical part with Volvo -the replacement was only 1 yr warranty - despite it being new and installed at Volvo. I found this out when I had to replace it again and had to pay. Just a caution.
The 1 year warranty applies to repairs done outside of the original vehicle warranty.
Alot of owners of the XC90 that I talk to at the Volvo service department are having problems that are making them upset. Yes, you have alot of happy owners too. Honda, Acura, or Toyota are better known for their reliablity and fewer problems.
And it seems, that my positive experience attracts the like.
I have meat quite a few very happy XC90 owners, and have found the Edmunds forum unreasonably negatively skewed.
The absolutely worst car I have had was the otherwise highly regarded Honda Accord, although it does not change my believe that Honda is a very reliable brand, and would not hesitate to buy a Honda or Acura, if they will be on my short list by other merits.
I am a strong believer that overall reliability of modern cars has improved over the years, and the average level is high enough to support the reasonably enjoyable ownership, and therefore, I do not include reliability as a decision factor for my purchases at least since 1999. The general trust into the modern QA management (which is a state of the art, if you take a close look into it) and an extended warranty removes one major headache from the already over complicated decision making process.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/road-test-volvoxc90/overview/ro- - - ad_test-volvo_xc90.htm?AFFID=I58RSS2
This one is also interesting. Click on "best used Volvos" link:
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotarians/volvo.html
Sounds like most XC90 owners are willing to risk a few more trips to the dealer than average in exchange for the car's features and safety. Seems like a decent "real world compromise" IMO.
Even CR considers XC90 as being of average reliability and the range (in defects per 100) is pretty narrow between the best and the worst.
in the big picture that is not a big deal but it is annoying! all in all, the vehicle has been great for its first 40k miles, but yes it has had a smidgin more warranty issues than our previous two volvos (wagons). electrical issues.
we've had zero drivability problems for all 3 of our volvos, 200k total miles. we'd buy another volvo, but volvo might lose us to VW or Jeep unless they step up to the diesel plate PDQ.
When I leased the XC for 39 months, it was out of the question I would buy it at lease end. Now, with only 1 year to go, I am not so sure; especially that Volvo has a good deal on financing rate and extended warranty at lease end.
As for downloading your service records, why not? I'd love to see them.
I would not mind providing some facts on my part, but, unfortunately, the only fact that I have is that I do not have any service record for almost 40K miles.
So, while they still happy with the car (which I believe is a right attitude), they kind of envy the RELIABILITY of our XC90.
Go figure...
The point that I actually argue for several years of my participation with Edmunds, is that the reliability of modern cars in general and Volvo in particular IS BETTER today, as it has been 10-15 years ago.
What was changed drastically at the same time is the average person's access to the failure data with the Internet. So, what was a "local" or even "personal" pain 10 years ago, becomes a literally world wide knowledge today.
I understand, that your specific XC90 sucks, but just as my specific Honda Accord sucked a big time too. However, it does not mean that one or other brands are not reliable in general, or are not reliable "ENOUGH", where this "enough" is my major point.
I have not find any verifiable (in a true scientific sense) information yet, and I am speaking of CR as well, which statistical approaches are rather questionable, that will prevent me from staying loyal to the Volvo brand, because of other merits - safety, style, social status, comfort/utility/versatility, ability to combine a car purchase with the Euro travel, price (comparing to BMW, Audi and M-B), just because of lower "grades" in reliability.
I consider, based on my analysis, Volvo to be reliable enough, and, once again, of being just as reliable or better than the past generation.
I could continue through the private e-mail,exchange, if you would choose so..
But for now, I would rather stop, as I have said the same things many times already.
2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 XC90 vehicles.
"In certain vehicles, the outer tie rod may deform due to heavy loads, causing the tie rod nut to loosen. Over time, the deformation may lead to a fatigue fracture of the outer tie rod. If this occurs, the driver my notice that the vehicle is difficult to maneuver, which could result in a crash."
Hopefully this notice will help others if Volvo doesn't have your mailing address.
Furthermore, I asked NTB to look up other brands for me and they came up with only 3-4 others which are all "performance" tires meaning just costing the same $$$ or more and short lasting (life of around than 20,000 miles). And these tires don't come w/ any lifetime warranty, meaning you don't get any credit if they wear out prematurely under normal driving and maintenance (keeping up w/ alignment, proper inflation, etc...) because they're all NOT made to last 30,000 - 40,000 miles like I'm used to. I think spent less than $2000 on tires for my old 1994 Jeep Grand Cherokee to drive 100,000 miles.
So, when I bought my Volvo, I have assumed that it will be more expensive to maintain than Toyota, for instance.
Now, when it comes to the tires, as I said, you have two choices - keep whining on this chat room, and keep relying on NTB(? whatever it is), or take a control, spend pretty much the same time, as you already have spent on Edmunds, and find that "right" tire for you.
As an example - I have driven my Volvo S80 for 120K miles already, and have changed tires twice (after the OEM). I buy Continental ContiContact at $72 a piece + installation, and they last 45-50K miles.
Same for my XC90, where I bought Continental CrossContact LX $127 a piece + installation, that are warranted for 65K miles to replace my stock Michelin with no warranty, but allegedly higher dry performance.
And you are absolutely wrong in your expectations about so called performance tires - they are made of rather soft compound and never last long - that is why they give the higher performance - performance is a trade off for the long life.
My experience w/ my old Jeep is same as yours w/ your S80 and further confirms that the stated expectation should be the norm, not an exception.
Again, I don't notice any "performance" out of the Pirellis. I bought the XC90 because it's an SUV and because I didn't want a performance car.
tidester, host
Item SMB77-006B-2006-01-12
Relevance 97.94%
Summary Service Manager Bulletin Pirelli Tires - Customer Service Tire Warranty All Volvo XC90 models with Pirelli Tires as original equipment. Note: Volvo Retailers who participate in the Volvo Tire Program are "Authorized Pirelli Distributor." For more information, please refer to the Volvo Tire Program Administration Manual or contact the Volvo Tire Support Center @ 1-866 -80-VOLVO.