C70 - which one?!

[v_forty]

Asking for a friend, who's considering a C70. Keener on petrol rather than diesel, and even a T5 if the price and condition was right. Budget of £2-3k, and would cover fairly high mileages (12-15k a year?).

Big thing they can't decide on is an earlier model (what they would call a true Volvo!) or one of the later post-2005 models. Anyone had experience of both, with advice on build quality and reliability?

Thanks all

[biggbn]

Have not had experience of both but original is a wonderful car with any if the 5 pot petrol motors . Quite juicy, not bad on a run, but this us surely offset by the price of entry, stylishness and build quality . I can think of few better cars to munch miles in, superb seats, driving position bang on, wonderful stereo...can't remember why I sold mine damnit!!

[Baxlin]

Assuming they want a drop-top, do they prefer ragtop or folding hardtop? Wouldn’t that help steer them towards pre or post 2005/6?

Regarding the “real” Volvo tag, both carry Volvo badges fitted by Volvo at a Volvo factory. So as the old adage goes ‘if it walks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and looks like a duck, it probably is a duck’.

But as mine is a post-06 car, I would say that, wouldn’t I......

[Sotosound]

The original V70 is a great car but with the 2.0 engine - which is what we had - feels a bit underpowered and under-suspended for its weight. There's plenty of scuttle shake as well. Plus, due to the soft top, it's quite noisy. It alway sounds as though the side windows have been left open. On top of that, it's very thirsty.

Having said that, however, on a lovely bright spring day, it's perfect for dropping the top and cruising around the countryside at gentle speeds.

Treat it as a sports car and you'll be disappointed. Treat it as a grand tourer and you'll be delighted.

Also, as per above, it's a hugely luxurious car and, with dark grey paint and light grey leather, it also looks brilliant.

Had we been able to justify owning a third car then we'd still have ours.

Flawed but lovely.

I never got to try the newer shape one but a late D4 is probably lovely, and with some of the two-tone colour schemes it can also be striking in appearance. That, however, would blow your budget by a lot.

The shape does, however, look a bit uncomfortable from some angles since it's based upon a Ford Focus floorpan instead of a sawn-off S70.

The new model would deliver better fuel economy and, personally, a later 5-cylinder 2.0 litre diesel would be my first choice because it's such a lovely engine in all ways. The D5 would follow close behind that. I personally wouldn't go for petrol. The Volvo 5-pot diesels are all lovely engines and a far, far cry from a London taxi or Transit van.

Mark 1's are quite cheap to buy but are also getting old and tired, and well-preserved vehicles with good colour schemes, including a good leather colour, don't come on sale that often. Late last year, we traded our well-cared-for C70 back into the original dealer and the C70 sold very quickly in winter.

Mark 2's are more readily available and you'll probably get an early D5 for your money. Avoid the 2.0D with the Ford PSA diesel, but that D5 is a lovely sounding engine with plenty of grunt.

Ask your friend to try both shapes if they can. Also, ask them not to write off the diesel unless they've tried the D5 and don't like it. I'd also recommend going for an automatic. It really suits the C70.

[happy diver]

Originally Posted by v_forty

Asking for a friend, who can't decide

Thanks all

I have no idea

[Austin160]

I can only advise on the earlier C70 convertible. A very pretty and comfortable car, but having said that, unfortunately I can only rate it as the worse car we have ever owned.
Despite being a low mileage, full service history model, our 2 ltr manual was ponderous, had a fuel consumption which averaged out at about 24mph, and the turning circle of a Volvo bus! Luckily, it did not seem to be blighted with the dreaded scuttle shake during our sedate driving style.
Not restricted to the Volvo marque, but try parking it in supermarket car park width spaces and getting out of it without bashing the neighbouring car when you try to open the door enough to get out.
My belief is that these cars appear to be an attractive buy, with the emphasis on ‘attractive’ and impressive looking to the onlooker. Living with them?? Sorry folks, but it claimed our record for the shortest period of ownership - thankfully.

[Bonefishblues]

They're lovely, but from several eras earlier, not just one.

I'm collecting a tintop on Saturday for a reason.

[Baxlin]

Originally Posted by Bonefishblues

They're lovely, but from several eras earlier, not just one.

I'm collecting a tintop on Saturday for a reason.

Love mine, to all intents and purposes it IS a tin top, albeit a two door coupe.

But hey - when the sun shines...........(and often when it doesn’t!)

I am a lover of convertibles though, from my first car - a 1937 Morris 8 tourer, to my current C70 (and the JZR!).

[ITSv40]

The two models are as different as chalk and cheese. The Mk1 based on the legendary P80 platform, tweeked by Tom Walkinshaw Racing and hand built is from arguably Volvo's finest period. I have owned Volvo's for 47 years and without doubt my C70 is the best build quality I have ever had. The Mk2 is based on the Ford Focus platform and Ford's cost cutting shows. My son has had two V50 T5's and the ride quality was superb, but the build quality not so - also disappointing to see so many components with FoMoCo stamped on them - he now has a Skoda Superb and it really does live up to its name.

The driving characteristics are different with a grand tourer feel about the Mk1, I like the idiosyncrasies as it makes for enjoyable weekend motoring, the Mk2 has a much more modern feel. The Mk2 is a heavy car and much heavier than a S/V50 so go for one of the larger engines.

One of the main considerations is how often is the boot going to be used? The Mk1 has a dedicated storage area for the hood, so a full boot of luggage for a weekend away doesn't interfere with the operation of the hood. The boot is a little awkward in shape, but surprising how much it holds. The Mk2 uses the boot to store the roof, so takes up most of the luggage area. - there is still room for a toothbrush tho'.

It really comes down to personal choice and practicalities.

[Baxlin]

I haven’t any experience of the MK1, so can only speak of the Mk2, but I would imagine that the dedicated space for the hood in the Mk1, which will be empty when the roof is up, reduces the size of the boot 100% of the time, like on say the MX5.

Actually more than a toothbrush can go in the boot of the Mk2 with the roof down. Yes, it is significantly less than the huge boot with the top up, but rather than the actual capacity, it is access that is the really weak spot, hence the ‘yellow button’.

We’ve had a large hold-all across the back of the boot, plus various other smaller bags under the separator, in the boot with the top down, enough for the two of us for a long weekend. I hate stuff on the back seat, much to my wife’s annoyance.....

I’ve had mine for 3 or 4 years now, and apart from having to use Mrs B’s hatchback to take stuff to the dump (what a pity!!) and for items that wouldn’t go into any saloon’s boot, I can’t recall much inconvenience caused by the boot. We’ve just accepted the top has to stay up on the few occasions we need all the boot.

But as said above, it’s a matter of choice - hard or soft top?