Have Volvo vehicles improved since being bought by Ford?Rating 1 to 6. (1 - Yes, 6 - No)

[Prufrock]

This is a subject that can run and run, but Ford had been wanting to sell Volvo for some time...Ford's problems in the USA are well known as are GMs.

The Chinese cannot create a global auto industry from scratch, as their economy is awash with funds, so they will buy brands that have global reach, similiar reason Ford bought Volvo in the first place; buyers stopped buying segment E(large) cars from mainstream manufacturers (i.e Ford and Vauaxhall?Opel)so those mainstream makers buy makers of those brands people buy.

As to whether the cars are better or worse...I believe consumers are seduced into thinking cars are better because they have more gadgets - some of these aid safety=better, some do not=worse.

Innovation is not always progress.

Cars are arguably more reliable and arguably better quality. However, I do believe that whilst overall product quality is better, durability is not. Classic Volvos, up to the 960, are very durable and rarely fail if cared for. Modern Volvos will ultimately fail electronically, once they get beond their first, second and third owner they'll be recycled because they'll become uneconomic to repair because of all the onboard electronics.

This is already happening.

Which is why I love Volvos from the classic period as we are able still to buy parts new or used and therefore continue to recycle our cherished cars. I guess among the ultimate recycleable cars are the Volvo 200 and 700 series, because of their simplicity and durability (I am a biased 700 owner).

We're leading the green motoring revolution!

Hope this is useful.

Prufrock.

[woodythelampy]

Could not agree more with the above.

I was working at the Latitude festival about 3 years ago when the minister responsible for the Scrappage scheme was in a debate with the Green party. It was very interesting to see the Greens standing up for keeping old cars on the road....seems the myth that our beloved classic cars were killing the planet was soon taken apart and the "Greenest" thing you could do with a car is keep it well maintained and on the road for as long as possible. Also, spending money with local garages, body shops and small businesses had a positive effect on employment and local economies.

A very good point was that under the scrappage scheme, the mythical "Old Banger" had to be taxed, MOT-ed and fully roadworthy in order to be destroyed by the crusher. A lot of really good cars must have suffered that fate!

[Jondb]

For me Volvos were best up til they introduced the 850 a true volvo will always be a huge tank thats rear wheel drive , also they were easier to work on being in line engined on the 2, 7 and 9 series and good fun to mess about with on damp roundabouts if the mood takes you!! the 850 was a good model but lost alot of the volvoishness if thats a word! from then on the estates have become more style over function and are getting smaller so thumbs down to that!

[oman5]

With apologies to anyone who owns one, but I think the rot started when the 850 came out. (yes I know its a volvo design). a superb car to drive, but as they get into middle age where a brick volvo would be only halfway through its lifespan, I have simply seen far too many for sale as spares or repairs with major faults like gearbox failures etc. The 850 was a new type of volvo aiming at a different market sector, either it attracted the type of customer who did not look after their car (fleet vehicle? )or the build quality was worse than the older ones.
A random person in an 850 stopped outside my house and asked how I kept the body/paint on my 10 years older-with-twice-the-mileage 740 looking so good when his paint was oxidising badly with laquer peeling, etc.
all I could suggest was that Volvo did things differently when mine was made.
An 850 T5 engine in a 740 would be my ideal. those 5 pot engines are a thing of beauty.
My mate in work picked up a 2000 S40 estate for 400 quid. its a lovely machine in good nick, but would a 10 year old 940 have lost quite so much value?

[CTCNetwork]

Hi,

Originally Posted by oman5

The 850 was a new type of volvo aiming at a different market sector, either it attracted the type of customer who did not look after their car (fleet vehicle? )or the build quality was worse than the older ones.

The reason for the introduction of the 850 was to improve vehicle safety and was part of Volvos continuing development in safer cars for drivers and pedestrians. The change from RWD to FWD was enabled by transversely mounting the engine to drive the front wheels. This allowed greater strength of the passenger "safety cell" and a better crumple resistance/performance in offset frontal impacts.
So how Merc and bmw have improved their safety whilst keeping RWD is anyone's guess I think, maybe Volvo should have asked them!

Originally Posted by oman5

A random person in an 850 stopped outside my house and asked how I kept the body/paint on my 10 years older-with-twice-the-mileage 740 looking so good when his paint was oxidising badly with laquer peeling, etc.
all I could suggest was that Volvo did things differently when mine was made.

Yes indeed. 940's and 960's suffered from crinkling door cards and issue with paint (as did Merc) when all car makers changed to water based paints and eco-friendly glues. It was not restricted to just 850's but all their cars.

Des. . .

[t5_monkey]

better handling, more features.

But not as sturdy or well built.

[Mr Sam]

what was wrong with RWD


RWD volvos are great RWD fords are great, the new stuff just does not appeal to me


that said i do have a mk1 fiesta which of course was fords first fwd car

[S60Jollyman]

Originally Posted by imac

When looking for the replacement for my 850 T5, the only cars that I was considering were:-

Saab 9-3
Volvo S60
Audi A4
Jaguar X-Type

Going back 15 years, Volvo wouldn't have been in a position to compete with Jaguar!

Funny really lets break those down:

Saab = Vectra
Volvo S60 = Ford
Audi = Boring (sorry hate Audi)
Jaguar = Ford mondeo

My Brother in Law always wanted a Saab 9-3 Vector 2.2 so... he decided to buy 3 weeks later his intercooler went then his exhaust and his radiator. He argued with dealers regarding as he called it shabby build quality and he was informed that his year shape model was just a Vectra. Underneath is a mass of rust now considering its a 54plate that is bad.

I was in the same dilemna however needed reliability,comfort,economy,practicality,and of course performance. i narrowed my search down to:

Mazda 6
Honda accord Estate
Peugeot 407 Saloon
toyota Avensis

(all in my price range)

Then after many arguments with family members my wife looked at me and said if you could have any car ignore what people say what would you have .... I responded "simple really a VOLVO" so we bought an S60 D5 i was warned about paying for the name and if things go wrong the cost would be extreme but you no what guys , I have had many issues with it and have spent money on it almost monthly but when i drive it i find myself driving past windows in shops and crowds saying to myself "yes thats right this is my VOLVO"

Volvo of old or Volvo of today doesnt matter they still have the presence the feel and smile factor i paid £3000 for my D5 and spent a further £800 on it maybe if it would of been an old school Volvo i wouldnt have spent a dime but you no what the car is Great

[Prufrock]

Originally Posted by S60Jollyman

Funny really lets break those down:
Saab = Vectra
Volvo S60 = Ford
Audi = Boring (sorry hate Audi)
Jaguar = Ford mondeo
Mazda 6
Honda accord Estate
Peugeot 407 Saloon
toyota Avensis

All of the above cars share common platforms and components with other cars - Jaguar recently sold to Tata and the X type sharing the platform and other components with the v.old Mondeo, Audi from the VW parts bin, Mazda owned by Ford etc, together with Saab, Volvo, and the others. There are very few"indpendent"car makers in the world - they are either wholly owned or larger manfacturers have major shareholding in them.

Any perceived individuality or whatever terminology you care to use is subjective, there is no real product differentiation in the car market. Me too is a phrase that springs to mind: that's"me too"products.

Saab now looks like it'll come into Chinese ownership, talks are now ongoing, I wonder how the Swedes feel now?

Prufrock.

[Clan]

Originally Posted by S60Jollyman

Funny really lets break those down:

Saab = Vectra
Volvo S60 = Ford
Audi = Boring (sorry hate Audi)
Jaguar = Ford mondeo

]

he S60 isnt ford , from 2005 there was a bit of cost cutting but pure volvo in everything , a development of the 850 floorpan ...