Volvo S40

wilkens11 · November 2004

I don't have either the breadth of depth of experience of qbrozen, but I also have found that parts prices are very reasonable for european makes. There are always a few dealers willing to sell parts mail order for a discount off true list. BMW air filters for $12, oil filters for $7.50, front brake pad kit for $50, a new radiator for $275. These are all original parts, bought from a dealer. For a while BMW had the lowest price for synthetic oil ($3 per quart) anywhere. People were buying cases of the stuff.

As always, you have to know where to shop.

cmnott · November 2004

I initially wanted to drive an AWD because I am sick of my 2002 S60 T5 and its horrendous torque steer ( I think I got an unusually potent T5!). So I tested a T5 FWD with T-Tec, 6spd and I think it was the basic suspension.

My choices are:

S40 AWD and a XC90 T6

G35c and a XC90 T5

Getting to the S40, I always liked the styling but in person, they look really small. Inside, though, it has generous headroom but feels very narrow compared to my S60.

Clutch and shifter work well together, although I find the S40 a little rubbery but much shorter throws than my 5spd.

This engine is much smoother than my T5. It sounds better and has less lag. Quite a bit less. With all that being said, I did find that it feels slower although on paper it shouldn't be. Now I don't know if this boils down to ratios. I go on the highway and at the top of 3rd, I am thinking where I would be in my car. Of course it would be different because my S60 has one less gear. It is confusing but it pulls very nicely on the highway and around town.

I made a left turn from a stop and mashed it and the torque steer was moderate, compared to excessive in my car. It is a big inmprovement, big enough to maybe forego the AWD option. I am happy with DSTC and think it works better in the winter than AWD...so I may rethink the AWD option.

Handling was much improved to the S60 (which has Sport Package and summer rubber) and the brakes were excellent. My only gripe with this car is the lack of space. I just feel tight in it. I think it will be something that over time I will get used to because the G35c is the same, but felt more spacious up front.

All in all, I was impressed with the car and will continue to consider it. Getting back into my S60, though, I really appreciated the extra space, refinement and comfort over the S40.

volvomax · November 2004

Don't forget the rotary engines penchant for using and losing alot of oil!

Also, you can get people into the back of the Volvo, bimmer and Acura. I don't know how prwctical the RX-8 is as an everyday sedan.

creakid1 · November 2004

for the RX-8 is still not alot of $.

"Also, you can get people into the back of the Volvo, bimmer and Acura. I don't know how prwctical the RX-8 is as an everyday sedan."

RX-8's rear-seat room is ok, but people will hate it unless they got their eyes closed. 'cause the side peripheral vision is blocked by the wide pillars, & the front high-back seats totally wiped out your forward vision -- enough to ruin your mood!

cotmc · November 2004

"With all that being said, I did find that it feels slower although on paper it shouldn't be."

My experience has been that most automobiles exhibit better acceleration after the engine has several thousand miles on it. In fact, I have been very impressed with how my wife's RX330 SUV has "opened up" after 12K-15K miles. This might partially explain why your S40 test drive seemed a little slower than your current S60.

cotmc · November 2004

I had thought you had worked out a lease on a 325i several months ago and had ordered one from the factory? Or was I reading incorrectly?

Having owned two different 3-series, including the current E46 platform (a '99 328i), I do agree they are the no-compromise solution for the small sport sedan category. (Note that I am not quite as concerned with having an extra wide rear glass window, as I am always checking my side mirror views.) I know you prefer the non-sport suspension with 16" tires, but the 325i's sport suspension (with 17" rims) still provides a reasonable degree of compliance and comfort, while providing a heavier, more solid feel. Road joints are handled very well.

Anyway, I see two concerns when comparing a well-equipped 325i to the competition -- one significant, and the other perhaps insignificant.

The primary issue is the initial cost. Cost is the reason I have an S40 right now, because I determined my new daily commute does not require a "no-compromise" performer at the additional $8K expense.
(I estimate $8K because I have a 2.4i model.)

A secondary issue is the news I have read/heard from several sources indicating that all 325i sedans with standard transmissions are assembled in South Africa instead of Germany. At least, that is true for deliveries to our region of the U.S., based on my sources last spring.

Depending on how long you plan to own your 325i, I wouldn't worry too much about ownership and repair costs. If you follow the recommended maintenance schedule, your only costs for the first 4yr/50K miles will be new tires. All other maintenance seems to be free, including wear-n-tear items, such as brakes, belts, etc. Personally, I typically performed a non-scheduled oil service between the scheduled services, because 15,000 miles (or 12 months) seems too long between oil changes. (I'm old fashioned that way!)

Regarding the S40, I wanted to get back to you one last time regarding your comments on the standard non-height-adjustable passenger seat. As an experiment, I sat in the rear seat of my S40 2.4i yesterday wearing my size-11 hiking boots. I had no trouble sliding my feet under the passenger seat! The S40 provides plenty of room under the rear half of the front seats! Trust me.

jrct9454 · November 2004

...I'll just briefly mention that no one I know in the BMW community, including BMWCCA, has anything negative to say about the South African 3ers. Quality seems to be as high as anything being produced in the German plants - since the components are mostly coming from the EU, that isn't exactly a shock.

Not much different from a Swedish-brand car being assembled in Belgium?

creakid1 · November 2004

in the S African-built 325i as well as some of the German-built coupes.

The SULEV clean-emission vehicle, which is not available in stick, only comes in German built. But you can still order a German-built stick 325i if you request. At least all 325i's sold through European delivery are German built.

creakid1 · November 2004

"I had thought you had worked out a lease on a 325i several months ago and had ordered one from the factory? Or was I reading incorrectly?"

Thanks to the high resale value not too far off from the Mini Cooper despite not being Japanese-reliable, we could barely bare with that "3-yr rental". But that's still $15k for only 30k miles of driving. So I don't get the turn to drive it much at all! Keeping each new car for only 3-yr/30k mi is costly.

Some occasional unstable idle speed happened in our 325i already, but the S40 T-5 is even worse -- it happened badly right after my most recent test drive. Anyway, we ended up getting an '04 RX-8 automatic just days ago. Since only the ones w/ sport suspension(& 18" rims) can be equipped w/ the DSC stability control, we picked a loaded one w/ Xenon & Bose stereo @ $7k off MSRP!

"(Note that I am not quite as concerned with having an extra wide rear glass window, as I am always checking my side mirror views.)"

The right-side mirror is convexed, & therefore not so accurate for judging the vehicle-speed change & the absolute distance. A wide rear glass only a few inches more to the right can include one more vehicle in your right lane near you!

"I know you prefer the non-sport suspension with 16" tires, but the 325i's sport suspension (with 17" rims) still provides a reasonable degree of compliance and comfort, while providing a heavier, more solid feel. Road joints are handled very well."

I rode in the back seat of the '02 325ci coupe, which has the lowered sport suspension std, w/ only the 16" wheels, & the ride was already uncomfortable enough!

"Regarding the S40, I wanted to get back to you one last time regarding your comments on the standard non-height-adjustable passenger seat. As an experiment, I sat in the rear seat of my S40 2.4i yesterday wearing my size-11 hiking boots. I had no trouble sliding my feet under the passenger seat! The S40 provides plenty of room under the rear half of the front seats! Trust me."

There's no doubt the Scandinavian S40 can allow snow boots to be slipped under the front seats from behind. & neither was I complaining about the rear knee room. It is when I try to stretch my legs forward(as sedans are suppose to provide?), I found both the Mazda3 & the Focus I roomier. Only the RX-8 got less rear leg room than the S40.

By the way, the new Japanese-built rotary RX-8 is not reliable per CR, at least for now, so therefore comparable to the S40 T5. ;-)

fitguy · November 2004

I guess, again, the point is: majority of owners experiences. You seem to dwell on the two major Japanese failure issues, which were bad for those involved, but again they were a minority. I put over 350,000 miles on my 3 Accords and had 2 problems: a dirty carburetor on the '81 and faulty ac condensor on the '87; 0 problems on the '03. No electrical problems, no brake problems. And they were cheap to fix- at the dealer. My experiences are NOT unusual. And I, too, worked as a mechanic for a few years just out of high school (when dinosaurs still roamed) but as life got more complex and cars got extremely complex, even folks with mechanical aptitude just don't want to deal with the hassle of trying to diagnose problems, especially electrical or computer-control system, nor do they have the neccesary testing instruments or want to purchase them. So, searching for cheaper parts on-line and fixing a car yourself is irrelevant to the majority of later-model car owners- they just want overall reliabilty and to be able to get problems that do occur fixed quickly (ask any VW owner who has waited 5 days for a repair completion while driving a crappy Enterprise rental- I've been there). I'm sure the Volvo owner boards are chock-full of happy loyalists and rightly so- they're good cars. Even the VW boards have many fans, and IMO they are not good cars, just fun to drive. But- bulletproof Volvo reliability (esp. later models) for 96K miles and an owner who does all his own service is, most definitely, "outside the norm". Anyone else care to comment on this??

calhon · November 2004

I wouldn't describe Volvos as bulletproof, but the question of what's "outside the norm" makes for an interesting discussion. The usual way of determining the "norm" is by looking at a frequency distribution; i.e., # of cars with zero problems, # with 1 problem, # with 2 problems, etc. That information is not available to the public, nor is the median; we only have averages.

Let's look at the latest J.D. Power Vehicle Dependability Study of MY2001 vehicles over 3 years. Honda had an average of 2.09 problems per vehicle, the industry average was 2.69, while Volvo had 3.46 problems per vehicle. We know that every brand has a certain number of lemons that have many problems, so most cars have less problems than the brand average.

However, we tend to focus on the relative differences (e.g., Honda is 22% better than average and Volvo is 28% worse than average) and fail to recognize that the absolute differences are small. This misconception is reinforced by the fact that we hear or read a lot more about the horror stories than the good experiences. Some owners of more reliable brands think quite erroneously that most owners of less reliable brands spend most of their time at the repair shop.

My opinion is that average reliability is actually quite good in absolute terms and most owners of "unreliable" brands are having few problems. By the way, about 60% of MY2001 Volvos were in their first model year.

guyf · November 2004

All we can read in this board is people speculating how good or bad the new S40 is. If anybody who actually own one out there could share it's experience, it would be appreciated.

Thanks.

avolvofan · November 2004

I happen to own one. In this case, it is a T5 AWD that is pretty much loaded (Audio package (without Navigation system), Premium package, Convenience package, Climate package, DSTC, Bi-Xenon headlights, Laminated Side Windows and Geartronic A/T).

Highs:
  + Small turning circle (little bit smaller than a MINI with a larger wheelbase);
  + Audio package is fantastic;
  + Ride with the re-valved shock absorbers and larger sway bars is not too firm (less harsh than a BMW 3 series with Sport package);
  + Seat cushions are firmer than those in the S60, but not too firm;
  + Low end torque of the engine is great for pulling away from stop lights;
  + The Bi-Xenons are incredible (perfect pattern and the light color is not as blue as the Xenon lights on BMW or Mercedes);

Lows:
  - The power seat adjustment is not as flexible as with the other Volvo models;
  - Wished there was a plug-and-play integration available for iPod, however, that is in process from Volvo, so I will have to be patient;

All-in-all, I think the new S40 is a definite improvement. If you are looking for a fun-to-drive car that has best in class safety features, you can't go wrong with the S40.

qbrozen · November 2004

i agree, for the most part, with calhon on this. but i do want to add something. even something like JD powers survey is not very reliable for stats. Human nature dictates that (and this is not to say its a steadfast rule, but i'd say it holds true on average) the more someone spends on a car, the more they are apt to complain about the little things. Someone who has a piece of trim coming undone in the interior of their $15K Honda Civic is not going to complain the same as someone who has the same issue on their $35K Volvo.

Before I bought my Volvo, I ran into my fair share of folks who were saying "volvo sucks," "horrible reliability," etc, etc. But the more I researched, the more I found that REAL problems were very few and far between. The "electrical gremlins" amounted to blowing out tailight bulbs on occassion (and, subsequently, fixed via a TSB). The second most common complaint I found was "sunroof trim came undone." Yet, with these small issues, owners who had these problems were up in arms and ready to lynch the next engineer they could find. On the flip side, when I research Honda models, you get owners who are more apt to say (and I'll give a direct example from my sister in regards to her Civic) "yeah, the key doesn't always turn out of the lock position and I gotta jiggle it for a while to get it unstuck AND I had to have both front brake calipers replaced at 30K miles, but its been a great car otherwise and I'd get another Honda in a heartbeat." (and she did.)

now, don't get me wrong, I don't see those as big problems either and won't condemn Honda for them. But, I am fair in my assessments and, since I don't condemn Honda for minor (and relatively inexpensive) issues like those, I also don't condemn Volvo for the few minor repairs I've had on that, as well. And, for this, I'm definitely in the minority. As far as RELIABILITY goes, I don't expect any more out of a $40K car than a $20K car.

lev_berkovich · November 2004

Thanks,Rob,
It's nice to have some soul mates here. I have done the same thing 5 years ago, when I was looking for my first "upscale" car. It was a time of S80 bushing, but just like you I have looked into the substance of complains, and did not find much.
And then, I and all my family are extremely happy drivers of S80 and, lately, XC90 (another "scape goat" for a while).

I believe that the quality of design and engineering that defines Volvo grossly overweighs some inevitable reliability issues, driven by the limited production and relative complexity and sophistication. (the more complicated components you have, the greater is a probability of the individual component to fail, plus, statistically, it takes longer to discover a potentially faulty component with a smaller production volume). Examples - engine sub-frame bushings - problem derives from the unusual engine mount. But it gives a good foot of the interior space - so, I would rather have these bushing replaced once or twice, but enjoy all this interior space. Related problem - issues with the transmission on S80 T6 - was eventually corrected, but even if the absolute number of defected units was small, the relative effect was substantial. The same number of defected transmissions on Toyota Camry, for instance, will not be even noticed, I would think.
So, even theoretically, Honda Accord should have higher reliability than Volvo. And subsequently, Acura, which shares most of the components with Honda.

ivan_99 · November 2004

I wholeheartedly agree with you.

I few years ago I owned a 99 Audi A6. The car was amazing and had all of the extras. I could probably count 10 items that I had the mechanics "fix". Fix may be a misnomer since a few items I had them adjust then re-adjust. Such as having the mechanics adjust the glove compartment latch to make it easier to open; then re-adjust it back. Since the Audi's have free maintenance it was like having my own personal mechanic at my beck & call. I was very quick to note ANY small problem and have the mechanics fix it.

I now drive an 03 Accord and I've had just as many problems such as a burnt out tail light; as I did in the A6. I've also got a burnt out interior light...funny because when I had a burnt out tail light in the A6 I worried that...maybe I was having those electrical problems that are common among European brands (the thought never crossed my mind with the Accord). I've been waiting for my headliner replacement for over 40,000 miles and have many other small items. The Accord has also been out of commission for two days on two separate occasions. I'll probably replace the burnt out tail light myself, since they forgot to do it last time I was in, and I'll probably do the interior light myself as well...so no unscheduled stops here.

If someone asked me (or polled me) regarding the Accord's reliability, in relation to the A6, I probably would say I've had less unscheduled stops. This would translate into the Accord achieving a higher reliability than the Audi, when in reality it probably is the reverse.

I'd buy a Volvo without any hesitation or reservation (XC90 V8, S40)

cherostar2 · November 2004

I travel a lot and rent a lot of different cars. The first 40 series Volvo was a V-40 in Spain with a 1.9 Turbo Diesel and a stick 5 speed. I was really quite impressed, although it was not much more of a road car than a similarly equipped Mondeo (read Contour) I had had the previous trip.
But, talk to Enterprise rental agents about their experience with S-40s. They were off the road and in the shop and very expensively so, far too often to be continued as a part of their stable.
I surely hope the new one is better. I rented an Enterprise S-40, but having been infected by the Diesel torque, the gas engined unit left me a little disappointed, especially with the mandatory automatic. I do know they have to use a different head on the US engine because our unleaded has so much more sulphur than the fuel available in Europe. There is quite a lot of discussion on the internet about that.

qbrozen · November 2004

to be fair, the last s40/v40 was more mitsubishi than volvo, so i also hope the new one will be more reliable (i'm not a big fan of mitsu build quality).

wilkens11 · November 2004

Hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving!

I drove an S40 the other day, and found the steering to be numb. There's no feedback, even in corners (15-40mph).

Everything else about the car was great. Shifting is good and the clutch felt fine. The ride (2.4i non-sport) is much better than my BMW, body control is excellent, and turn in is very good. It does feel relatively front-heavy. The buttons on the stack feel good. The seats felt comfortable.

Overall the steering seemed overboosted. Pulling out at slow speed, the steering wheel was extremely easy to turn, almost toy-like.

It was a bit of a disappointment, because I was expecting the steering / tracking to be "good enough" to be fun, but it turned out that the fun factor just wasn't there. Even going up twisty Page Mill road, the car didn't engage me.

creakid1 · November 2004

The ride (2.4i non-sport) is much better than my BMW, body control is excellent, and turn in is very good. It does feel relatively front-heavy.

BMW what? The sport-suspension 3-series coupe or sedan sport? Or the non-sport 325i/323i/328i sedan?

The S40's base suspension is supple, if too soft & weak for its limited front spring travel to crash through speed bumps. I really think Consumer Reports must have sampled the sport suspension & thus complained about the stiff ride.

I drove an S40 the other day, and found the steering to be numb. There's no feedback, even in corners (15-40mph)...Overall the steering seemed overboosted. Pulling out at slow speed, the steering wheel was extremely easy to turn, almost toy-like.

The electro-hydraulic steering in the Volvo S40 version should be the least feel-ful, followed by the Mazda3, followed by the new Focus II.

But I find the TSX even worse than the S40 due to excessive self-centering force to mask the weight change & therefore hard to sense the tire-grip change. Interestingly, CR found it communicative, but all I could feel was lots of road bumps through the steering.

It was a bit of a disappointment, because I was expecting the steering / tracking to be "good enough" to be fun, but it turned out that the fun factor just wasn't there. Even going up twisty Page Mill road, the car didn't engage me.

Good point! you gotta get a car that can provide you fun.

Go check out the now reliable(see the reliability-history chart in the CR 2005 buying guide & find out the Focus' shocking reliability improvement since the adoption of Mazda engine in some models starting late '03) Focus I ST 2.3(stick only).
creakid1 "Ford Focus vs. Mazda3" Nov 19, 2004 5:41pm
(make sure you also read post #128)

The U.S. Focus I also got rid of the excessively soft suspension & pwr steering a couple years ago. So now, the non-SVT U.S. Focus I' steering feels numb only at parking-lot speed. The Focus I, which, like the new BMW 1-series, has conventional pure-hydraulic pwr steering, & CR found it to have even more steering feel than the Mazda3, which is suppose to be less numb still than the new S40. & trust me, the steering feel of these Focus/Mazda3/S40 is not the misleading road bumps. ;-)

creakid1 "Ford Focus 2005 release date" Nov 26, 2004 2:37am
The Focus I, although now defunct around the world, is a fun-to-drift classic w/ a sharper, more communicative steering than the new Focus II, which doesn't just behave slightly like the new S40, but look like one as well!

Just check out the taillights & profile of the made-in-Taiwan Focus -- the world's 1st production Focus II sedan:

http://roadtest.u-car.com.tw/roadtest-detail.asp?rid=61

wilkens11 · November 2004

"BMW what? The sport-suspension 3-series coupe or sedan sport? Or the non-sport 325i/323i/328i sedan?"

My car is an E36 328i with the non-sport suspension, and 15" wheels. Overall the ride on my car is excellent, but abrupt impacts are not absorbed well at all. The S40 in comparison has a more liquid feel, and absorbs small abrupt impacts very well. Other than that it follows the road with the same fidelity as my car.

When I react to ride quality, I first notice road texture and other relatively high-frequency impacts, like joints in the road: anything that might cause the interior to crack or shift audibly. It's these things that the S40 does better than my car.

There are other aspects to ride, like how the car moves on the highway. Riding in a Acura TL on one stretch of highway, I noticed a oscillation, a fast up and down motion which was very uncomfortable. My car on the same stretch and same speed damps the oscillation somewhat, making it much more bearable.

wilkens11 · November 2004

What I value in steering feel is the communication from bumps or any unevenness. The steering wheel should tug and pull and even move as the car drives over anything but a perfectly flat surface. The steering wheel should constantly be alive with information, even when driving straight at moderate speeds. This is what I like so much about BMW steering. The absolute precision and connection with the surface.

I'm ignorant about other aspects of steering feel, such as feeling loss of traction.

In the S40 non-sport, I didn't feel anything at all; it was like a video game.

creakid1 · November 2004

pointed out that even going in a relatively straight line, you should be able to sense resistance from the Focus I's steering THROUGH YOUR FINGER TIPS! Not wait till your inner-ear fluid shifts in order to realize that you are changing directions, or, worse, wait till your eye sight sees the car wandering off a straight line.

The E36 has better steering feel than any E46, but the ratio's pretty slow. There's also a difference between merely feeling the existence of bumps through the steering vs excessive kick back from bumps.

creakid1 · November 2004

"Hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving!"

By the way, I did have a great Thanksgiving! 'cause, on the way to my Thanksgiving dinner, I happened to have a chance to follow a Lamborghini Gallardo up a curvy hill at about 85 mph passing all other cars. My easy-revving 2.3 that never sounded like I was revving higher than usual, my stable SVT/S170 shocks & sway bars, & my pure-hydraulic Focus steering simply made the whole experience fun & easy. & I bought this '05 Focus I ST for just over $16k(MSRP $19,520) including std leather steering wheel & shifter, ABS w/ traction control, & heated mirrors, plus optional heated cloth sport seats w/ side airbags, 500-watt MP3 6-disc changer w/ Sony speakers/subwoofer, & perimeter alarm.

jrct9454 · November 2004

...that you've now purchased a Focus and an RX8 in the last month? Or am I getting confused?

creakid1 · November 2004

while the RX-8 is for the folks.

I test drove the Focus ST on the way to buy the 2nd RX-8 but w/ 16"s & non-sport suspension this time. Both the Ford & Mazda dealers are across from each other, so I decided to compare these 2 cars in the same bumpy fwy & speed bumps.

My left brain sez the RX-8 has the best ride/handling compromise in the world, so I should take the comfy base RX-8. But strangely, I wasn't excited while thinking I was about to own this "best car in the world". & the salesman made a mistake over the phone that this stripped car is an '04 for clearance discount. It's an '05.

It was the '05 Focus ST that made me don't want to let go driving it at the end of the test drive! & this probably has never happened to me before! Despite riding less supple & has a lower handling limit w/ a heavier nose than the RX-8, I find it more fun to play around its predictable drifting nature, plus the pure-hydraulic steering(as opposed to RX-8's pure electric, but even quicker, steering) has more feel, & the more comfortable ultra-tall seating position makes the car seem like 1/3 bigger, despite having the same length.

The RX-8's high handling limit, even the base model, is too high to be explored outside the track. So I couldn't really have fun with it. Also the gas-guzzling rotary engine is so weak off the line that I kept stepping on the gas ending up speeding & still couldn't feel any push on my back. Besides, the comfy base model only comes in automatic!

The ST's Mazda-Developed 2.3 has such great instant low-end torque(more so than the VVT version used in the Mazda 3S) w/o the noisy-to-rev nature of the S40 2.4i.

After I bought the Focus ST, I did have a problem keep speeding up due to the somewhat firm suspension that just won't soften up until very high speed. 'cause the suspension & steering are so confident-inspiring anyway. But this is the best-tuned suspension softness w/in the Focus family. As the S40's sport suspension is down right uncomfortable, while the base is too soft for the not-so-long front springs so I have slow down on speed bumps. Maybe the AWD's slightly longer springs w/ the shocks & sway bars from the 2WD sport suspension is just right, but the AWD's heavy weight w/ turbo's lag is somewhat clumsy to accelerate. The Focus ST's suspension tuning is somewhat like the AWD S40! It's got the SVT/S170's shocks & sway bars but w/o the SVT/S170's lowered firmer springs!

W/ '05's improvement on noise isolation, including a better ventilation air flow, the Focus ST's noise-level cruising on the fwy is tolerable, just a tad worse than the RX-8 & S40.

carguy58 · November 2004

I still like the S40 but the price of the car and people's horror story's of last generation and current Volvo's scares me as well. I have owned a 1998 Mazda 626 as a lease and alot of people had problems with them and I really didn't have any complaints about the car. Now I have an 02 Acura CL with none of the tranny problems that other people have been having. I just had the oil kit installed in the tranny as part of a recall by Honda Motor Co.

I took a look at Volvo's raings and the S60 is fairly reliable. The 70 Series is very unreliable as is the 80 Series. I;m still a couple years away on my decesion about the S40. The XC 90's reliability hasn't been a thing of beauty either but I think will wait and see since its an all-new brand new model.

Pro's:

S40 is small and compact which I like. I do not like the Camry and the size of it. Its just too big.

Good customer Service.

Excellent Exterior styling.

Very Safe Car

Cons:

Volvo's shaky reliability history

Price

Resale Value: Do they hold their value well?

Parts: How much will they cost me?

Do any young people drive this car like say like 29 year olds?

My summary is you have chance to get the younger buyer, just don't throw it away on bad reliability.

lev_berkovich · November 2004

Guys,
Where are you getting your data? S80 2001 and up has very good reliability ratings from all the major sources.

XC90 has a good reliability record from the get go.

And what are those "horror" stories about former S40? It held on, despite it's mediocre heritage.

carguy58 · November 2004

The S80 has worse than average reliability according to Consumer Reports as does the XC 90.

lev_berkovich · November 2004

There are other sources besides Consumer Report.
MSN Auto rates S80 and XC90 very good (all green)for recent years.
JD Power rates S80 average - 3 dots, and XC90 - better than others or excellent (4-5 dots in most areas)., etc. etc.

qbrozen · November 2004

*yawn*

we still talking about this?
does anyone go back and read previous posts before posting to a discussion? Heck, we really don't have to go very far back to see this very topic. Its right on the previous page of posts, IIRC. Good grief.

I guess Thanksgiving weekend just wasn't long enough. I'm too grumpy this morning.

lev_berkovich · November 2004

Can not agree more, but I have given a pledge to myself to counter any strong negative strike against Volvo, to make this board "fair and balance".

The format of this board does not encourage people to look back. I see the same questions/remarks posted over and over again, so I do not mind to answer from time to time.

creakid1 · December 2004

creakid1, "Ford Focus vs. Mazda3" #149, 12 Dec 2004 4:47 pm

lev_berkovich · December 2004

So kudos to Volvo again, and one more proof that "platform" is just a few pieces of sheet metal and structural elements, but not a car itself, and that "shared platform" does not mean "the same car".

40phan · December 2004

Hey guys, I'm new here. I decided to join because I love my 2000 S40 so much. I am 17 years old and got it in September with 65,000 miles. I have put almost two thousand miles on it so far. It's a dark blue one. I love the color. What year do you guys have? I love the 05s, hope to get a new Volvo someday.

I've always wondered: what is the association of Ford with Volvo? I personally don't like Ford. They seem like they make shoddy products, and I have always thought as Volvo as a high quality company.

creakid1 · December 2004

you don't find in Detroit. & the reliability of the made-in-Germany Focus I didn't just out perform Volvo's but everything else as well including the all the Japanese cars sold in Germany!

The S40/V40 is based on the Euro-market Mitsubishi Carisma, while the new S40/V50 is based on the Focus II/Mazda3 platform.

& the new domestic Ford Five Hundred/Freestyle is based on the Volvo S80/V70/S60.

creakid1 · December 2004

So kudos to Volvo again, and one more proof that "platform" is just a few pieces of sheet metal and structural elements, but not a car itself, and that "shared platform" does not mean "the same car".

Just different seats for the Mazda version, the Focus II(not sold here yet) also took the top honor in that whiplash test thanks to Volvo's technology.

lev_berkovich · December 2004

Peter,

One question - did you agree or disagree with me?

Remember, I maintain a point that a floor plan does not make a car, and 3 different companies put quite a bit of the different technology in to each flavor to consider them as the different cars.

creakid1 · December 2004

the steering rack & suspension makes most of the driving experience. Since the Mazda3 got a different steering rack, only the Focus II & the S40/V50 share these pieces(& rest of the 62% parts sharing), although tuned differently to achieve some different results. But even the S40 sport rides totally different from the S40 w/ std suspension. In fact, the S40 sport rides much closer to the Mazda3 than the std S40. I haven't checked out the AWD S40/V50, which I suspect should ride in between but so far CR gave it a low rating of stiff ride.

The S40 may be quite different from the Ford & Mazda versions due to different styling, features including sound insulation, etc., & a better crash test results. But since Volvo did all the structural engineering for the the Ford & Mazda versions, this also means their crash test results are limited w/in the S40's level, rather than some Japanese's better side-protection such as found in the Honda Accord/TL.

But that whiplash test has nothing to do with the whole car but the seat alone. Just about any car w/ a Volvo-seat installed will score high.

Yes, you can say they're all different, 'cause even an S40 2.4i sport is quite different from an S40 T5 non-sport.

Rickster · December 2004

I'm very excited about the T5, but aren't sure what options to get in addition to Premium and Climate packages (which are must-haves for me). In particular, I am considering whether to add audio, sport handling and/or the bi-xenons.

Any thoughts? Thanks!

creakid1 · December 2004

Test drive it first. I can't stand its ride, even w/ just 16" tires.

The comfy base suspension is a little too soft for the not-so-long front spring travel, so you have to slow down before crossing a speed bump.

The AWD might have the best compromise by combining the shocks & sway bars from the "sport handling" suspension w/ longer & softer springs.

Rickster · December 2004

Maybe this is a stupid question, but why wouldn't I want to slow down before crossing a speed bump?

creakid1 · December 2004

but if you ever try not to or simply forgot to while driving a Peugeot or a Mercedes sedan, then you'll be amazed how the car remains unfazed while crossing it!

calhon · December 2004

"But since Volvo did all the structural engineering for the the Ford & Mazda versions, this also means their crash test results are limited w/in the S40's level, rather than some Japanese's better side-protection such as found in the Honda Accord/TL."

I'll take your word for it that Volvo did all the structural work for the PLATFORM, but I have a hard time believing that Volvo designed the entire upper body structure and subframe assemblies of either the New Focus or the Mazda3. As far as I know, the Ford division, Mazda and Volvo had and have a lot of flexibility individually w.r.t. the specifications of the main body structural elements, ancilliary structural elements and subframe assemblies implemented in any vehicle they build on the platform. That's what a platform is all about - so that even vehicles of different types and sizes can be accomodated.

One of the reasons the Mazda3's crash test results (frontal and side) are not as good as the S40's is that the structural frames differ - the S40 has different steel and additional structural elements in key areas. Note, for example, that the Mazda3 weighs 400 lbs less than a comparably-equipped S40; which by the way, also contributes to handling differences.

Finally, you suggest that the S40's safety cage is not as good as the Accord's or Acura TL for side impacts. The IIHS side impact Structure/Safety Cage rating of the Accord is "Marginal", while the S40 and TL are rated "Acceptable". However, the S40's intrusion measures are actually slightly better than the TL's.

creakid1 · December 2004

"I'll take your word for it that Volvo did all the structural work for the PLATFORM, but I have a hard time believing that Volvo designed the entire upper body structure and subframe assemblies of either the New Focus or the Mazda3. As far as I know, the Ford division, Mazda and Volvo had and have a lot of flexibility individually w.r.t. the specifications of the main body structural elements, ancilliary structural elements and subframe assemblies implemented in any vehicle they build on the platform. That's what a platform is all about - so that even vehicles of different types and sizes can be accomodated."

Yes, that's what a platform is USUALLY all about, & it's most likely true in the case of Ford Five Hundred/Freestyle riding on the Volvo S80/V70/S60 platform. But the C-1 project is a team work of Ford, Mazda & Volvo. Ford designs the steering & suspension, Mazda develops the the 4-cyl drivetrain(including the S40/V50 1.8), & Volvo is responsible for ALL of the passive safety including the structure for both the platform & the WHOLE safety cage. It's just that Volvo kept some trade secret to themselves so that the Ford & Mazda do not get to use the "4 different steel firmness" or the "additional engine-bay clearance" that can outperform the S60 in frontal crash safety.

"Finally, you suggest that the S40's safety cage is not as good as the Accord's or Acura TL for side impacts. The IIHS side impact Structure/Safety Cage rating of the Accord is "Marginal", while the S40 and TL are rated "Acceptable". However, the S40's intrusion measures are actually slightly better than the TL's."

The recent "T-boned-by-SUV" crash test only applies to cars w/ side curtain airbags. It's been discussed here earlier:

creakid1, "Volvo S40" #915, 10 Oct 2004 3:24 pm

Only the Saab 9-3, TL(Accord?), ES330(Camry?) & Galant scored "Good".

While the new S40 scored "acceptable".

http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2004/pr100304.htm

"The 2004 Saab 9-3, 2004 Acura TL, 2004 Lexus ES 330, and 2005 Mitsubishi Galant are rated good for side impact protection. The 2004 Saab 9-5, 2005 Mercedes C class, and 2005 Volvo S40 earned acceptable ratings. The 2004 Jaguar X-Type is rated marginal."

My personal opinion about safety has a lot to do w/ active safety, so after driving in the rain, I was very impressed by the fact that the S40/V50 is the only C-1 car sold in America equipped w/ the optional DSTC -- the "legendary Focus ESP" electronic stability program that hardly intrudes into your performance-handling habit, so you are unlikely to deactivate it.

http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2004/pr102804.htm

In my most recent Volvo test drive, I was feeling like a king sitting comfortably in the throne-like driving position of the S40 T-5 w/ std suspension. But as soon as I found out that the narrow rear visibility made my lane-change-to-the-right clumsy, I thought, "What the xxxx, I can't stand its inability to avoid accidents!" Too bad the similar-structure Mazda3 is nearly as bad. So I decided to get an old-design '05 Focus I ST, which has the most steering feel & has a fun-to-drift controllable oversteer built in. Too bad the ESP(AdvanceTrak) was discontinued after '03 in America.

calhon · December 2004

You may be right on the design of the safety cage. I believe I saw a statement from Volvo saying in effect that Ford Corporate agreed that the other divisions would not be allowed to appropriate Volvo's brand identity, i.e safety know-how.

I don't dispute the overall IIHS side impact ratings. I was speaking specifically to the structure/safety cage rating, which is one of three components used to generate the overall result - the other two being head protection and injury measures.

S40: http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/side/s0416.htm

Accord: http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/side/s0319.htm

TL: http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/side/s0410.htm

S40 Intrusion: http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/details/midmod_side.h- tm

TL Intrusion: http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/details/midlux_side.h- tm

creakid1 · December 2004

audia8q, "Mazda3 Sedan" #7915, 18 Dec 2004 11:04 am

It probably doesn't matter, as long as the S40 w/ base suspension got the best ride comfort.

calhon · December 2004

That's great! The S40 earned the same distinction, i.e., "Best Pick" frontal, some time ago. It has the best frontal crash test scores of the Midsize Moderately Priced Cars tested by the IIHS.

http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0414.htm

derek3927 · December 2004

Hi Everyone,

I'm considering buying the S60 T5 AWD with the 6-Speed manual transmission.

But I've had mixed reviews on this.. the firs thing i see is complaints about the gearbox: Too rubbery, linkage between 4&5&6 is poor.. etc..

Does anyone own this car? Can anyone offer any insight?

Thanx-

Derek

Rickster · December 2004

I've only driven the T5 auto, which I l-o-v-e, love.

How can anyone tell you if a shifter feels good? Go drive it yourself!

Volvo S40

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles