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

Volvo XC90 SUV

1…7071737576…98

Comments

  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Absolutely, if you can spare $80K - get M10, change half of the suspension and all the fenders to accomodate for the bigger wheels and bigger wheel travel, jack it up 4", de-tune the engine, so you have a sizable torque and HP at low speeds,

    put some hardware on a bottom (skid plates)and you will fly over the rocks and hydroplane across the streams.

     

    XC90 does have a skid plate and it also have pretty flat "belly", so speaking to reduce a risk of damage for the vital parts.

     

    XC90 has lonGER coils and shock absorbers than typical sedan and deepER wheel wells, therefore it has a good wheel travel. I do not have comparative figures, but all the reviews I have seen say it's GOOD, at least bettER than typical sedan.

    So, it can go over biggER rocks and roots than typical sedan.

     

    Since XC90 rides on largER wheels and have biggER ground clearance it can go at least 5" dippER in water than typical sedan.

     

    That is why it's called SUV.
  • jeffreywilensjeffreywilens Member Posts: 10
    How did you happen to be able to test drive the V8 model? My local dealer in California advised they did not expect to receive a demo car until end of January with delivery of pre-ordered cars expected March-April.

     

    We have been looking at a top end Odyssey or Infiniti QX, but the Volvo V8 may freeze those plans for a few months.
  • guyfguyf Member Posts: 456
    Our friend Volvomax works for Volvo. That's why he's such a good source of reliable information.
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    Your dealer is correct.

     

    Volvo had an event for dealers where we were exposed to the V8 for the first time.
  • spiritintheskyspiritinthesky Member Posts: 207
    I find the "off-road capability" debate on the XC90 rather interesting.

     

    We have an LX470 (Lexus Landcruiser) that we are considering trading because two of our three kids now have their licenses and my wife prefers a smaller vehicle. We have been mainly looking at sedans, but we have also recently considered the XC90 V8 to retain some "utility" and all weather capability.

     

    Frankly, if we needed an "off road" capable vehicle, we would probably just keep our LX470, but we certainly wouldn't be looking at the XC90. The appeal to us on the XC90 is that it is NOT an off road oriented SUV with a body on frame construction, large (noisy) all terrain tires, high center of gravity, and all of the other things that translate into off-road prowess. The LX470 does a reasonable job of insulating the passengers from feeling like they are in a Jeep or Defender, but it is still a big truck. The XC90 V8 appeals to us because it is more of a "crossover" SUV, giving us reasonable utility when we need it and a much better car like ride when we don't. I also believe that the 4.4 liter V8 will provide a much better match for a 4,800 lb vehicle than the small displacement turbocharged engines currently available on the 2.5 and T6. I wonder if there has been any long term tests of how those engines and turbocharges hold up after 80,000+ miles?

     

    By the way, my everyday sedan is a 2002 M5. With 400 hp and 369 ft-lbs of torque, it doesn't need any "detuning" to give it pleanty of low end power. But I still wouldn't attempt to use it off road!
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Do not get me wrong, the E39 is a wonderful engine, however, the HP/torque charts that I could find on the web indicate, that E39 (M5)has about 280 lb-ft of torque and less than 100 HP at 1500 RPM, while much smaller, but differently tuned 2.5T has 235 lb-ft of torque and 75-80HP at the same RPM.

     

    As you can see, these two totally different engines are pretty close in their performance at 1500 RPM. So, E39 would need some detuning, to keep up its superiority at low speeds.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    By the way, all of you who say that only V8 is acceptable for the good off-road capability.

     

    Do you know, that one of best off-road performers, Rover Defender, has 2.5 turbocharged inter cooled engine with 111 HP at 4000 RPM and 195 lb-ft at 1800 RPM.

     

    Doesn't it sound familiar to XC90 owners?

     

    Apparently small displacement turbocharged engines are considered very suitable for the SUV
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Another examples:

    Legendary Soviet military trucks, that worked very well in off-road combat situations all around the world . (Not that I am very proud of it - I have left that country 16 years ago.):

     

    GAZ66 - 120HP V8 - most common 4x4 truck

    ZIL 131 - huge 3 axle 6x6 truck - 150 HP straight 8

    URAL 375 - the one that carried most of the missles - 6x6 - 180 HP straight 8.

     

    And by the way, I have driven all three of them.

     

    GAZ66 sucks, but on ZIL 131 and, especially on URAL 375 you can basically swim across the swamps, climb the mountains etc, etc.

     

    And thanks to all of my opponents - you made me surf the web and learn a lot of interesting information.

     

    Happy Holidays!!
  • spiritintheskyspiritinthesky Member Posts: 207
    A couple of points,

     

    The M5 and XC90 (and all other vehicles) have exactly the same hp/torque at 0 rpms = 0. Measurements at 1,500 rpm are relevent only if that is the "sweet spot" where you will be doing most of your driving. This may be the case for a low redline, automatic transmission equiped vehicle (especailly diesels, since they are geared to run at lower rpms than gas counterparts). It can also be important to SUVs in an off road situation where they are under a lot of stress going up steep grades at low speeds.

     

    In the case of the M5, with a 7,500 rpm redline, the only time most drivers will ever see 1,500 rpm on their tachometer is a quick pass through in first gear. And if quicker acceleration is desired, the manual transmission is easily strong enough to handle 3,000+ rpm clutch engagements.

     

    As for the V8 vs. smaller engines, I'm not sure if your comment was directed at me, but my point wasn't related to "off road" ability. Rather it was related to on road long term longevity. At 4,700+/- lbs, plus cargo, plus possible towing, I would not want to bet on a 2.5 liter turbocharged engine making it 120,000 miles without turbo replacments or worse. Even the 2.9 liter engine, with its (only) 4 speed transmission would be a question mark, in my mind. Perhaps, if your driving is mostly flat terrain, you never haul a boat or heavy cargo and you drive reasonably conservatively, the 2.5 and 2.9 may do just fine. But we live outside of Pittsburgh and the hills around us suggest a larger displacement V6 (3.5+ liters) or V8 for that heavy of a vehicle, especially if its being put to heavier duty use than the average family sedan. My opinion, based upon my knowledge and experience.
  • guyfguyf Member Posts: 456
    There's no question about it; The V8 and 6 speed is a better set up in general and for performance than the T6 with 4 speed.

     

    For economy and all-around "normal" driving, the 2.5T is a nice alternative.

     

    Merry Christmas to all.

     

    Guy
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Need is a subjective term. I WANT as much as I can get (within budget).
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Not related to this thread...but thought lev_berkovich would enjoy the off-roading.

     

    image

     

    image

     

    image
  • kendux1kendux1 Member Posts: 3
    Is there any significant difference between the capability of different manufacturers 4wd or AWD in snow and on the beach? I am considering an SUV such as XC90, Allroad, Highlander, and Toureg. I have a 96 Explorer and am quite disappointed at its ability to handle soft sand on our beach.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    The Snow and soft sand handling is 95% about the tires.

     

    LA area beach guards use mostly small Ford pick-up trucks (should be similar to the Explorer), but on wide profile tires to reduce the pressure to the ground. And this works just fine. Remember Bay Watch? I can attest, I have seen quite a few very impressive beach races in real life...

     

    I think, Touareg and XC90 will be better choices (given the proper tires), first because of the additional low gear box and second, because of flat torque curve, both translated to the plenty low end torque available. This is another required component for the soft sand handling.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Thanks, looks impressive.

    I have no doubts that Touareg is a very good off-roader.

    I like its style too (more than Cayenne). However, there were two factors that have ruled Touareg off my charts - it does not accomodate more than 5 people and it's gross weight is less than 6000 LBS, so I can not get some additional tax benefits available with XC90.

     

    When it comes to the off-roading - I've been forced into so much of it back in Soviet Union, that I do not crave it one single bit.

     

    You should see me going through the miles of dirty roads, "conquering" the mud puddles similar to the top picture, where mud will go above of the door sills on very basic 50HP RWD sedan with 13" all season tires (Moskvich 408), just because I HAD TO get from the point A to the point B.

     

    I've done enough forced off-roading to believe that it is more about HOW you drive than WHAT you drive.

     

    Forgive me for saying that, but I am in a total agreement with Volvomax - there is no off-road challenge that amateur driver of LR3 or Touareg will dare to take, that can not be achieved by professional test driver on XC90 (and by the way, I do not consider myself as such).
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Points are taken.

     

    The only problem is that nobody designs off-road vehicle to be driven @7500 RPM. So my point was, that 2.5T is just about as good low-end performer as E39. And the discussion is about the SUV but not about the sport sedans, where E39 is one of the best.

     

    I agree with you and all other folks, that when it comes to the cargo/trailer/boat truck-like hauling duties - the large the displacement, the easier it is for the engine (you can never defeat the laws of physic), however, I want to get back to my original statement - How much power is enough?

     

    As far as I know - Volvo uses very conservative tuning for their engines. So, if they rate a vehicle to tow 5000 lbs, they calculated a hefty safety margin into it. I trust Volvo engineers.

     

    Now, let say it will operate at 70% of its capacity. And a bigger engine will operate at 30% of its capacity. Who cares...

     

    As long as the smaller engine will last for 10 years, 150-200K miles, it will do.

     

    And as I say, I trust Volvo, and I keep trusting them, until someone will prove it otherwise.

     

    And honestly, I do not own a boat, and even if I live in pretty hilly area too, my XC90 2.5T does just fine.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    And the best thing is - you CAN have it.

     

    Actually - NEED is an objective term. It something that you can calculate given all the border conditions.

     

    WANT is pure subjective.

     

    Happy New year to all.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    My Christmas ski trip to Mammoth Lakes let me to test the snow handling capabilities of XC90 on stock Michelin 18" tires, as we went through the biggest snow storm I, probably, ever saw. And I am, originally, from the place where we have snow 7-8 month out of the year.

     

    I concur to Guy. The braking and turning could be better. However, acceleration and straight line driving was pretty impressive.

     

    On our way back we went through over 100 miles of highway covered sometime with several inches of snow. The DSTC worked superbly, handling the uneven traction conditions, allowing to maintain a higher speed than most of the vehicles without wiggling all over the road without chains.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    I too was disappointed that the Touareg did not offer 3 rows of seating. My ideal would be the Touareg with the 3.2TDI (some of that nice low-end torque) and 3 rows of seating. I think the interior is beautiful, with the XC90 coming in a close second.

     

    I guess the pictures are of people WANTING to go off-roading as apposed to HAVING to do it. I suppose after awhile you’d crave for some smooth pavement (with a few curves to spice it up).

     

    Turning circle: I thought that Volvo’s had bad (or worse than average) turning circles because of the transverse layout.

     

    I also cannot see going extreme with one of these new vehicles…especially if you’re leasing it. Unless you’re independently wealthy and can afford to buy a new one
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    A point on a turning circle:

     

    Despite of the outcry from some of the Forum contributors - XC90's turning circle radius is not bad. It's (as well as all the modern Volvo's) on a par with the best vehicles, whether FWD, RWD or AWD of the SAME PROPORTIONS (track width and wheel base) and the same wheel size. I have posted some statistics (See my posting ##1820 on S60 board)to support that.

     

    Actually, in RWD era, Volvo always had the best turning radius, and in the FWD/AWD era it is as good as any.

     

    In general, my answer will be - If you do not like 39 foot radius - buy smaller car.

     

    My comment on turning that could be better was related to the snow handling, where, since the stock Michelin has just so-so snow traction ratings, I have almost missed couple of the slow-motion left turns on icy road and had to do much more drastic manipulations with the steering wheel than it was originally intended. Same with braking - I had to brake much earlier to avoid skidding.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    I have looked some numbers for the cross-over SUVs - MDX, Touareg/Cayenne, XC90, MB-M, BMW X5.

     

    XC90 is in a middle of the very tight pack, ranging from 37.5 for the MDX to almost 40 for MB and BMW.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    "Volvo research has shown that the XC70 will be used by the most serious outdoor enthusiasts. Paradoxically, the pure SUV, the XC90, is more apt to be driven to the mall."

     

    First Drive: 2005 Volvo XC70 - Part 3: Over the Mountains

     

    Steve, Host
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Here is one of the reviews that perfectly defines the XC90 IMHO

     

    http://www.elepent.com/review.php?nr=470
  • bigeddybigeddy Member Posts: 181
    guyf: "I'm the only one on this forum (I think) who actually took his own XC90 on moderate off-road."

     

    I drive frequently in the western high desert and forest on unimproved roads with my own XC90. Significant slopes, sand, ruts, rocks, brush and snow are handled easily. It helps to have owned a couple of Jeeps which were used on many off-road trails. I haven't had reason to ford more than puddles with the XC90 but the specs say 18". For me the biggest worry is the tires which have relatively thin sidewalls and tread. I carry a full-sized spare and a repair kit when off the beaten track. And I installed Volvo's aluminum engine protector. I wish it had a hill descent mode. The XC90 is certainly not an "off-roader" but it is hard to beat in all-around versatility, comfort, safety and quality.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Nils,

    Thank you so much for sharing your first hand experience. I want to ask you for a favor.

    If time permits, can you describe in more details the strengths and the shortcomings of XC90 as far as "all-road" (I use this term on purpose)capabilities are concerned. I want for this forum to become a collective "XC90 story-telling" board rather than the boxing ring.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    "However, there were two factors that have ruled Touareg off my charts - it does not accomodate more than 5 people and it's gross weight is less than 6000 LBS, so I can not get some additional tax benefits available with XC90."

     

    I'm quite certain that the GVW of the Touareg is over 6,000 lbs in all models, certainly for the TDI. You may have been confusing that the XC90 in 5-seater form is under 6,000 lbs.

     

    In any event the 5-seat capacity limit is also a non-starter for us. Too bad, the Touareg TDI is a darn nice looking vehicle. I have spoken with one owner that has 30,000 miles in under 12 months, averaging 24 mpg and - most amazingly - the only trips to the dealer so far are for oil changes and tire rotations.
  • guyfguyf Member Posts: 456
    For those who need still more HP....

     

    http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/05la/xc90sc.htm
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Cool...think how quick I could get the kids to "Donalds".

     

    More is always better...
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    I think, that is the end of our "SUV" discussion - XC90 is moving into the "oversized sport wagon" area. Such a pity.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Funny you should mention that...

     

    I was actually thinking of you, or your online persona, when I read an article...I think from VOLVO's site (or maybe a Euro magazing) that called the XC90 a wagon.

     

    I thought lev_berkovich could give you an ear full...heh.
  • jpouchetjpouchet Member Posts: 38
    Okay XC 90 fans, I am seriously considering my first Volvo. Currently we own two Mercedes, my 98 C230 which has been excellent other than a nagging window regulator problem (latent design defect in my book as an electro-mechanical sales person) and my wife’s brand new E 320. But with the addition of a puppy, Australian Cattle Dog, our kids are older now and more active, and our outdoor life style – sailing, MTB and road cycling, golf, snow skiing, etc. – we have concluded it is time to get another SUV. Had a GMC Yukon and will NEVER go down that path again!

     

    So can you discuss some of the finer points of living with an XC90 and Volvo? My vehicle design considerations run more towards luxury than plebian. Hence I want leather, REAL wood trim, automatic 5 speed of higher, AWD, seating for five even though we will usually have 4 only, (NO third row seat required and a real pull down arm rest with cup holders would be nice) in dash CD & changer, sun roof, functional roof rack where I can add a storage box, large enough cargo area for the dog to relax, 2 inch receiver for my bike/ski rack (not on the roof thank you), and some semblance of fuel economy. By this I mean no 10-15 MPG V8 monsters. A good EPA rating for greenhouse emissions would be a comfort as well. www.fueleconomy.gov

     

    Vehicle in consideration are the X3 (I like the overall size coming from the C class and prefer the sporty ride/handling), Volvo XC 90 T5 (having driven one on a test track I can attest that this thing can fly when put to the test), VW Touareg V6 (concerned about quality, fuel economy, and despite the size the seating position is confining), and perhaps the new 06 ML 350 provided MB can get the recipe right in the fuel economy and weight area.

     

    So how is life with a Volvo? Do you get lifetime roadside assistance? How about free loaner cars while yours is in for service, warranty or not? And the repair prices for out of warranty, do they figure if you can afford to join the luxury club you should be able to mortgage the house whenever anything needs service? I hear that Volvos are known for poor quality and many trips to the dealer for service. Comments on that?

     

    The purchase is not going to be made until June/July but I am monitoring the various marquee forums to keep informed.

     

    Thank you!
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    C'mon Gomez, 600HP Volvo - it's like put a Hawaiian shirt over the Statue of Liberty. It totally ruins the image for me. There should be some car manufacturers out there prone to the hanger for more power.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    I do not want sound pathetic, but the only word that can properly define the feelings our entire family have toward our two newest cars - 2000 Volvo S80 2.9 and 2004 XC90 2.5T AWD - is love.

     

    We love their style, spacious interior, comfortable ride, most accommodating seats,superb engineering, vast array of safety gadgets.

    Both cars are very well built. My S80 with 87K miles on it holds up extremely well - the same quite, supple ride, no rattles or squeaks, paint that is looking like a new, when washed, interior with basically no sign of wear (except that the driver seat and driver side door armrest need a good cleaning). The gas mileage is about 20 - 21MPG, which is good considering the typical LA mix - heavy freeway traffic or busy streets. It goes above 25 MPG on a long highway trips. DSTC system is wonderful. I have an extended warranty till 95K for $2200, and I did not break even yet. There were a few minor common issues that were fixed under the regular warranty or under the recall (sub frame bushings), and I went through 3 or 4 headlight bulbs and couple of tail light bulbs, but I consider it normal, since lights are on all the time, which makes 87K miles comparable to many hundred thousand miles for a car with no running lights.

     

    All of the above applies to the XC90, plus

     

    - interior room is even bigger.

    - the cargo area can only be compared to the full size SUV's, much bigger than all the direct competitors - BMW X5, Acura MDX, Lexus RX, VW Touareg, etc. - should be a real treat for your dog.

    - the most sophisticated stability and traction control system in the world, including the roll-over protection system.

    - versatility of SUV with higher stance, full time AWD, extremely flexible seat folding arrangement.

     

    A few additional comments

     

    XC90 does have a standard sturdy roof rack, that can accomodate a cargo box, sun roof, in-dash CD changer, 11 or 12 cup and bottle holders,

    It does have optional 2" receiver, real wood trim, real leather.

    And a V8 version has one of the best fuel economy in class 16/21, if I am not mistaken.

     

    The service is free for the first 30K, basically first 4 services.

     

    And my independent mechanic charge me exactly the same for the routine maintenance of my Mazda MPV and S80.

    The build quality is excellent and reliability is average, but the average today is maybe better than excellent 10 years ago as the absolute reliability of all the cars has gone up considerably.

     

    I did not have any trips to the dealer outside of scheduled maintenance, all extra repairs were for the non-ecential problems that could wait till then, with exception of one, when I believed my battery has died, but dealer concluded that it was a faulty coling fan draining the battery. It has been replaced under the extended warranty, but battery has died anyway in a week or so, that is why I have concluded that sometimes even trained technicians do not know much about the cars they repair.

    So, instead of mortgaging my house, I went to the accelerated payment plan.

    The road side assistance is free (at least for one year).

     

    And my dealer does provide free loaners or free rental cars for the service, warranty and extended warranty repairs.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    heh...well I wouldn't buy one.

     

    This is for people with money to burn. A toy for the weekend.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Here is a link to the interesting tool.

    Volvo XC90 V8 has a lot of cool features not available on any other SUV

    http://www.volvoxc90.com/v8/comparison.asp?section=comparison
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Since you know everything about the XC90...do you know how long the life cycle for the XC90 is.

     

    It's now on Model Year 3 - 2003,2004,2005.

     

    When would a new/updated model appear?
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    It's a good question for Volvomax. But judging by S80, which was the base model for the line, and is due to be replaced in 2006-2007, I would say - 2010-2011.
  • jpouchetjpouchet Member Posts: 38
    WOW, thanks.

    Yes the styling of the XC 90 has really caught my eye. Currently I am in a tight race between the X3 and XC 90. I am waiting for the new 06 ML 350 to come out and then do a full comparison between the 3 before I buy. The XC 90 in 5 passenger configuration has a lot of room inside, comfortable seating, and a large cargo area that is easy to load. It would be nice to have more wood trim on the dash and door panels. The door panels seem to be something that Volvo picked up from Ford in a cost cutting effort. Still the exterior styling is quite nice.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Thanks,

    It's funny that Ford is going to be blamed for everything. Volvo always has very functional interior design with very limited or no wood.

    I think, it's a Lincoln (Ford), that have tons of wood trim.

    We like an aluminum trim for the door panels. It looks contemporary, the Swedish style, resembles the IKEA furniture.
  • anotherwagonanotherwagon Member Posts: 301
    Forgive the topic if it was covered here but I searched and didn't find anything -

      

    We are shopping for another wagon and will be replacing our LR Disco II (hopefully). We have a Ford Freestyle on order and I know they share some bits and pieces.

      

    Has anyone here cross shopped the two? Thoughts?

      

    The Freestyle LTD seems to have a lot of the same things the Volvo does w/ a bit more room, better gas mileage and takes regular fuel.

      

    Looking for some feedback before we make the final decision.

      

    Thanks to all -

    BTW- Have had several Volvos in the past. :) Many have said the Freestyle drives with the "feel" of the Volvo. We haven't driven the LTD yet (aren't any in stock) but did drive the SEL.

     

    Also, posted to XC70 but no activity there...
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    No word on an XC90 replacement yet.

    Volvo is going to be pretty busy w/ other models through 2008.
  • volvomaxvolvomax Member Posts: 5,238
    Volvo's have never been known for opulent interiors.

    Always functional and somewhat austere in keeping w/ their Swedish roots.
  • chidorochidoro Member Posts: 125
    What is the XC90's fording depth?

     

    Running through snow is one thing, running through the rain that clogs the sewers which follows is another(and the one I'm more worried about when it comes to all-terrain capabilities).
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    It's 48 cm 0r 18.9".

     

    http://apps.volvocars.us/ownersdocs/2004/2004_XC90/04xc90_06a.htm- - - #pg87

     

    VW Touareg - up to 22.8"

    Porsche Cayenne 19.7/21.9 (with different suspensions)

    New MB - up to 23.5

    I've seen figures up to 27" for 4Runner
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    Going back to one of my comments that XC90 is still an SUV with respectful capabilities.

     

    To contrast - the fording depth for S80 as well as for the XC70 is 30 cm or 11.8" - good 7" less than XC90.

     

    The numbers that I found for BMW M5 (which was fastidiously suggested as SUV) - 8", and for Acura TL - 10".
  • rodutrodut Member Posts: 343
    Lev you are completely wrong when you say:

     

    "... but the average today is maybe better than excellent 10 years ago as the absolute reliability of all the cars has gone up considerably".

     

    If you compare with your piece of c..p Russian Moskvich 408, yes I agree that the reliability went up by orders of magnitude. But that was in another world. In this world check the Item 133 (Volvo Average Reliability) and you will see that the Volvo reliability continuously fell since 1988:

     

    http://www.autooninfo.net/ReliabilityPercentranksVolvo.htm

     

    From my personal experience now, the 1989 Volvo 240 Wagon I still have in front of my house never required any kind of work at the powertrain, and was an incredible car during all these 16 years. It still drives and feels sturdy as a "brick".

     

    When your XC90 will be 16 years old (if still alive) your bank account (or some other unfortunate person's bank account) will be emptied by countless sensor replacements, fancy electronic systems repairs etc etc etc. Trust me, when you endless keep adding useless electronic controls, the reliability of the system has nowhere to go but down. That's elementary probability theory Russians certainly learn in school.

     

    What can break in the lever I have to move left or right to set the temperature in a Volvo 240 ?! Simply nothing ! You keep discussing about how your fancy XC90 climate control breaks or should be set up, like it would be rocket science. Who in the world needs all that ?!?! Volvo needs it to take your money away.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    You are right, the complexity of cars has increased, but the average reliability has increased too, because of better materials and smarter design for the vital parts, like engine, transmissions, suspension etc.

     

    And by the way - that Moskvich was simple as pie, but the life time of vital parts was miserable.

     

    And I live in US for 15 years, so I do not have first hand experience with any other cars, but the ones that are sold in US.

     

    And, lastly, I always say what I mean.
  • guyfguyf Member Posts: 456
    I'm on my 5th Volvo since our first one, a 1988 740 turbo wagon. The least reliable of the bunch was the 1988, that damn electric overdrive always failed. Also, the power steering pump seized, burning the belt that was driving the water pump also; stranding us by the side of the road. Also worth mentioning: poor paint, a cracked dash, blown shocks. We sold it in 93 at 120,000 km (75,000 miles). My experience is that each one I owned was better than the previous one.
  • lev_berkovichlev_berkovich Member Posts: 858
    FYI,

    I have owned used 1989 240 and currently have a used 1990 740. The lever, that switches the climate control, modes on both cars does not work, because some little plastic part inside of the switch has worn out. My mechanic keeps a dozen of switches assemblies that he salvage from the junk yard, because it seems to be a common problem , and the switch is not repairable.

     

    Now, speaking of theory of reliability, that I happend to study at the university in former Soviet Union.

     

    If my system has 10 times more elements (and that what the actual ratio between the new cars and cars of 10 years ago probably is), but a reliability of each component let say 100 times higher, the probability of overall system is much better.

     

    The solid state components (so called "chips", "computers") have created a revolution in industrial design and manufacturing in general, and automotive industry in particular. There are solid state switches that hundred thousand times more reliable than mechanical one, because they do not have moving parts, and they can content many redundant circuits. I was involved into the design and manufacturing of specialty textile machinery. Our machines were much more reliable because we started using programmable controllers, solid state switches, etc, where other manufacturers were using 40 years old technology with mechanical or electro-mechanical components.

     

    The result was that our machines had a life span of 3-4 time of the conventional one, and we have saturated LA market in 3 -4 year.

     

    So, I can not trust you, because of my own experience.

     

    The complexity brings a level of flexibility and convenience that was not available before.

    I have written it before, and I can repeat again, that when it comes to the climate control, I have set it to Auto mode - 72 degrees 4 years ago, and do not touch it at all ever since. It cools in the summer and heats in the winter on it's own. I can never do that with the mechanical controls.
  • rodutrodut Member Posts: 343
    I agree that 10 times more components 100 times more reliable would be better. The problem is that actually they are 10 times more components 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 times more reliable (like your specialty textile machinery is). So the overall Volvo reliability dropped year after year since 1988 like in the:

     

    http://www.autooninfo.net/ReliabilityPercentranksVolvo.htm

     

    You Lev and Guyf blame the 240. Even if I agree with some of your complaints, I say it was one of the best cars mankind ever made. The bottom line is "Love" or "Friendship" or even "Family". The 240 really became a member of many American families. Why ? It's very simple. Because most of the time during these 17 years either didn't break or it broke but I fixed it by myself. Or I just ignored the problem and was not punished because of that. Like a loving member of a family would do. For instance the Check Engine light was ON during the last 150,000Km (100,000 miles). I just ignored it and was never punished. Actually recently it went OFF, probably because the bulb burnt.

     

    Guyf it was funny to read your complaint about the cracked dash. I realized that during so many years I had a 2 mm wide crack on my dash, 20 inches away from my eyes, I completely forgot about. Like a parent who will always see his children to be the most beautiful children on Earth, and never see something wrong with them, me too I was not able to see that awfully cracked dash, highly visible for anybody else.

     

    I didn't have the other 240 problems you mentioned. I am getting close to 300,000 Kms (190,000 miles). Never touched the powertrain ! I honestly would buy a new car but I don't know which one. Reliability is the only concern for me. Actually I put a deposit on a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica, but I could back up because of reliability concerns. Not decided yet.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles