V50 - high mileage petrol

[cjw001uk]

Hi Guys,

I've been looking for a V50 for a while and the ones in my price range seem to be either old with relatively low mileage (60-70k) or new(er) with high mileage (>100k)

Assuming they both have full service history which would be the better bet ? I've been warned of going for high mileage petrols in general but not sure if that applies to Volvos.

I dont want a diesel as i'll only be doing 8-10k town miles and dont want any expensive bills for DPF (and dont have time to go down the motorway in 3rd gear every other Sunday to clear it out!)

cheers

Chris

[cjw001uk]

forgot to say - by old i mean 04/05 and by new i mean up to 08

[Daim]

Hmm, well, what kind of power to fuel ration are you looking at?

Lots of power, fuel economy doesn't matter? T5
No power, fuel economy is important? 1.6l
A bit of power, fuel economy isn't that important? 1.8l
A fair bit of power, fuel economy is not really important? 2.4i
A good bit of power, a good economy (for the power)? 2.0l

If you look for a 2.0l, you'll want at least a 2007 model, as the engine was introduced in 2007.

[volvo145]

A young high mileage motor normally means its been used for long journeys but not always.That means very little wear and tear on the components.
I would not hesitate in buying one over a low mileage one that has been used for going to the shops.
Do your homework and you should be ok.

[Daim]

Yeah, I agree with above. High mileage, young age results in a better wear than low mileage, high age. Thrus, if the car is say 2 years old (say) then it will have done the high mileage under "Volvo eyes" as the 2 years warranty can be lost if serviced elsewhere, so it would probably have been serviced all the time by Volvo.

[v50inred]

I am a big fan of high miles, full main dealer history with a printout ex lease vehicles.

Always have been, my V50 had over 100k when bought and drove pretty much as new.

The only way you could tell the mileage was wear on the steering wheel leather and a little of the gearknob.

Managed to put marks on the carpet myself due to driving in work boots!

The V50 has some issues as all cars do but for the money I would go high mileage diesel every time.

The reports I have heard about the petrol model is that the fuel economy is not good.

I would have no issues buying an 08/09 2.0d with up to 120k on it with lots of history.

Don't worry too much about the DPF as the one fitted to the V50 uses Eloys fluid so is less likely to need a blast up the road every week or so, think more HGV with Urea than those that have specific regen periods when extra diesel is injected.

Though my 08 has no DPF, I think it may be because it is only a lowly "S" model and is actually an earlier model as the seats are the older plainer trim. Hoping to have some dark grey leather this time next week though!

[ian7675]

I have a T5 on 111k now. The engine is still going strong but I've replaced a few suspension parts. This car will last for years yet...I hope. Oh and it gets over 30mpg but I do like to use that turbo.

[cjw001uk]

hmm thanks for the replies guys i've gone back and looked at the ex fleet diesels in my area.
one i've found which does stand out is a 59 plate SE 2.0D with Full volvo service history but it has a done a whopping 135k, this is roughly the same price as the 57 plate 1.8L S models with 80k i was looking at.. do you think its worth a look? from the pictures it looks like new, but 40k/year is a heck of a lot of miles.

[v50inred]

That is nothing for a well maintained V50 diesel. The 2.0d is in the Ford Galaxy and Addison Lee is a Private Hire company in London with a fleet of nearly 4000 of them, all doing hard work for three years and sold off with between 100k and 150k over that time.

When sold they usually get sold to private hire drivers and are straight back to work.

That 40k a year is almost certainly largely on motorways or dual carriageways.

A 57 plate petrol car is not going to be half as nice to own as a 59 plate diesel.

I was at an auction last year and had a poke around an ex private hire V50 with 280k on it.

Was part of the lots from "We buy any car" there wasn't really that many signs that it had done such a huge mileage, it sounded ok when it went through but the body was a little rough, lots of scuffs and dents.

But with a bit of work I think even that would have main a reasonable daily driver.

I would go for the 59 plate no questions.

[scoobysn7x]

I have a 2005 S40 T5 with 72k or there abouts when I got it and my other choice was a 2005 S40 T5 with 108K mile on the clock and the price difference was £600 now to me I was happy to pay the extra £800 (negotiated a bit so it was only about £400) to get the lower mileage car that was a much nicer, so I would say judge each car on its merits and also be aware of wear and tear items, a lot of the suspension parts on these cars go around 60-70k so it stands to reason they will need doing again about 120-140k, in fact my car cost the garage nearly £700 to put through the MOT with various suspension bits.

Personally I always more keen on service history and number of owners rather than mileage, having said that I would prefer a lower mileage car over a higher mileage car, I would personally have a 2007 low mileage over a 2009 high mileage (providing the 2007 is a post facelift), and personally I would prefer a non company car again personal choice, again just as I have a few mates/relatives with company cars and I've seen how they drive them, especially my brother he hammers his, he got a new mondeo diesel in Dec and he hammers it from cold and didn't bother running it in/taking it easy for the first few thousand miles, fair enough wear and tear parts are replace as needed, discs, pads etc but the rest of the car must be pretty fubarr'd.