posted by
someone claiming to be Tom
on
Thu Oct 26 13:35 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
Have you checked out the new Volvo S40? I didn't drive it, but I saw it in the showroom. I like the looks. It is the only new Volvo that fits my budget, but my first impression of the car was that it doesn't seem like a typical volvo. It's kinda small (not boxy) and cheap (the door handles feel like cheap plastic). The other thing I noticed when I sat in the drivers seat is that the front cabin felt a little tight (the windshield seemed like it was a couple of inches away from my face).
Would you buy a used, low milage S70 or a new S40?
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Chris Woolley
on
Fri Oct 27 07:33 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
As an owner of an earlier S40, and having driven numerous new faulty S40's whilst mine has been in for repair (one loan cars bonnet catch opened whilst on the motorway). I can say with total conviction that you should avoid the S/V40 at all costs.
When I purchased the car I was well aware of the Mitusbishi/Volvo Nedcar plant being used to build the car and thought, rather foolishly, that Mitsubishi's involvement would result in a reliable car. When the S40 first came out, the launch was delayed whilst Volvo (and I think TWR) sorted out problems on the production line - this was supposed to cure the first batch of cars numerous squeeks and rattles - it clearly didn't help anything else . I do know of other S40's here in the UK with exactly the same faults - I was even offered another one, as a replacement for my own which had the same front suspension failure
My own car has had one fault or another every day for the last 12 months. It may be better in the US where road surfaces are infinately better, but it is quite simply unable to cope with British Roads; at the moment I am awaiting yet another repair to my failed rear suspension. This is added to a new steering rack, ball joints, bushes, switch gear, seized brakes, water hoses, and the list goes on. It also blows bulbs like they're going out of fashion.
The latest Phase II S/V40's have a new front suspension layout, revised motors, and a whole host of changes - but they remain built in the historically bad factory in Holland.
Feel free to make you own mind up, but don't say you haven't been warned.
Cheers
Chris
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Gordon
on
Fri Oct 27 06:38 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
I have driven several hundred miles in S40's which were loaner cars while my XC has been in for service. I think it is a little disappointing. The engine responsiveness is very nice, and handling is good. I feel, however, that the engine is quite unrefined - not smooth at all, especially at idle. One loaner, in particular, was very harsh, but others have been disappointing as well. Given the choice, I would go for a used S70 instead of a new S40.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Stan, formerly Stan Rogacki
on
Fri Oct 27 05:30 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
Tom,
I borowed one from my dealer a few weeks ago, while they performed 60k service on my 850.
It was a rocket, in comparison to my non-turbo 850. Handling was skittish.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Edvig
on
Fri Oct 27 02:34 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
The S40 is a good 25k car, not a 30k car. At least its not as mainstream as the Passat, Accord or the Camary are. Buy a BMW or Audi or Lexus if your going to spend 30k.
Edvig
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Pete
on
Fri Oct 27 03:54 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
IMO, I'd rather have an unusual car than a mainstream one for the same price. In the area where I live I have only seen 4 other x40s (not bad for a metropolitan area of 2 million), I know there's more out there though. I got a pretty good deal on my S40, well equipped, not even coming close to the inflated 30K figure. Living here in Yuppieville I see WAAAAAY to many 3 series b-mers, A4s, and the like. As a married guy w/ out any kids who cares about things like rear legroom. I want to drive my S40 for a while and play (performance upgrades, etc.) before I upgrade to say S60, V70, or comparable. My 2 cents.
Pete.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Kosmas Moutis
on
Thu Oct 26 16:01 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
I wasn't paying attention.
Koz.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Kosmas Moutis
on
Thu Oct 26 15:56 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
I had the same dillema this past spring (used V70 vs. new V40). I too felt cramped in the v40, and that was the main reason I bought a used V70. I'm glad I did. So what if it's not new, I got a lot more car for my money, lots of warranty left, and plenty of room to stretch out in. If you think it's tight in the show room, you'll be cursing it on your first long road trip. Don't get me wrong, it's a nice car, but for me at 6'3" 220lbs it's just too small. My wife on the other hand, at 5'2", can't wait till those first S40's start coming off their two year leases....
Koz.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Kosmas Moutis
on
Thu Oct 26 15:50 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
I had the same dillema this past spring (used V70 vs. new V40). I too felt cramped in the v40, and that was the main reason I bought a used V70. I'm glad I did. So what if it's not new, I got a lot more car for my money, lots of warranty left, and plenty of room to stretch out in. If you think it's tight in the show room, you'll be cursing it on your first long road trip. Don't get me wrong, it's a nice car, but for me at 6'3" 220lbs it's just too small. My wife on the other hand, at 5'2", can't wait till those first S40's start coming off their two year leases....
Koz.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Uncle Olaf
on
Thu Oct 26 15:00 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
I'd suggest that you visit your local library and look at the April "New Car" issue of Consumer Reports. They also tested the S40 in the January '00 issue.
I would buy neither a used, low milage S70 or a new S40. I've had a couple of SV40 service loaner cars, the first had a bunch of trim parts loose on the floor, the second was screwed together OK. I was unimpressed by the rear seat room. Otherwise they were OK. I wouldn't consider buying one mostly because it's only available with an automatic.
For SV40 money, I'd look at the Toyota Camry, which is available with a V6 and 5-speed and has done better than the S70 in European crash tests, the VW Passat or the base Saab 9-3.
In the used car department, I'd also look at the BMW 323i, the Audi A4 or the Mercedes C-class, if you want a car with an automatic.
FWIW, if I had to replace my Volvo tomorrow, I'd order an '01 Mercedes C240 6-speed.
-Uncle Olaf
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Vince
on
Thu Oct 26 14:42 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
The S/V 40 IS cheap. It's basically a Mitsubishi with a Volvo drivetrain and not much more. It's also way overpriced for what it really is, NOT a "real Volvo" IMHO. If the car really sold for the advertized price of $22-$23K US dollars loaded, it'd be a good deal BUT loaded the car costs about $30K US and for a tad more money, you can get a "REAL Volvo" like the new S60 (which is still NOT a FORD infuenced product BTW).
My advise is to not buy an S/V40 but rather buy either the S60, V70 or a used S70/V70 instead (2000 demos?).
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Michael
on
Sat Oct 28 05:37 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
Just bought a brand new 2001 model V 40 and traded in our 10 year old 240DL wagon; my wife and I were considering the V70 as well, as it is here (in Canada) only about $ 6000 more (list price); the V70 handled ok, but the engine had to be worked hard to deliver--even with the five speed; we really liked the handling and the pick-up of the V40, especially in comparison to the 240! Some people have said that it feels cramped; to us the V70 felt too large and boxy, too much like our old car; we need a wagon for the dogs, so an S70 was not an option. Safety was a big factor in the decision: I have not seen as many airbags in a car this side of $ 35k (Canadian $, about 1/3 less in US$) before; also impressed by belt-pretensioner, and whip-lash protection. Overall, I find the car to be extremely well equipped; everything I could wish for; in Canada, even the winter package is included in the base price.
Our experience: so far so good: the only things I have noticed is the radio stations fading in and out a bit (and we don't live in a mountainous area) and the engine being a bit rough at idle.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Miguel
on
Sat Oct 28 10:58 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
I just got my brand new 2001 S40 T4 (with all the gadgets you can think of) a 40K USD here in Mexico, but I can assure you than in comparison with the Audi A4, BMW series 3 and Mercedes kompressor is a much safer and faster car.
The one that we have here is the 200hp turbo version (235Km/hr)and I'm impresed the way you can take curves at a very high speed (when I took the drive test, the sales representative forced me to take a very risky curve at 140km/hr and i feel nothing but safety). I used to drive a 1996 Intrepid ES and I think I will never go for american cars again.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Arno Griffioen
on
Thu Oct 26 21:28 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
> The S/V 40 IS cheap. It's basically a Mitsubishi with a Volvo
> drivetrain and not much more.
Have you ever driven the Mitsubishi Carisma with which the S/V40's share the floor-pan (and nothing else BTW)?
If you had then you would not make this statement. They look different, drive (very) different, feel different, etc.
The only model where there's more overlap are the '1.8i' S/V40's sold here in europe which use the Mitsubishi direct-injection extreme lean-burn gasoline engine (GDI) capable of running up to 30% more fuel efficient than ordinary engines. Very important with european fuel prices.
These are very, very different cars. Yes they have the same floor-pan with shared dimensions and mounting-holes, but pretty much everything else bolted on/in/whatever is diferent between the Mitsu and the Volvo including all bodywork. Credit has to go to the production engineers who found ways to build these different cars on the same production-lines. Nearly all maintenance parts from the S40 will not work/fit on the Carisma and vice-versa.
The influence is actually turning out to be the other way around as the latest version of the Carisma is now using the suspension from the S/V40's (used to have their own type) to get the ride better as it was waaay to mushy and weak on the mitsu. Same goes for the brake setup, which was inferior (to put it mildly) on the Carisma.
As to not being a 'real volvo'.. The S40 was the first car to get a 4-star rating on the Euro-NCAP crash tests and was the clear winner in this class (medium to large family cars). The then current model S70 actually did worse..
I don't want to sound like a zealot, but I hate it when people simply dismiss the S/V40's as being 'just a mitsu and not a Volvo' without having experienced the so-called 'same' mitsu.
This is not, and I repeat, not one of those Ford/Mazda or Rover/Honda combo models where only the badges are different (I don't know if you get 'em in the US, but for instance the Mazda 121 and the Ford Fiesta are identical and so are the Honda Accord and Rover 600)
Yes it's smaller than the S/V70's and yes the model-range (what model-range?) in the US for the S40 sucks (C'mon Volvo.. At least bring manuals and the 2.0 and T4), but if you don't want or need the 'oceans of space' feeling from an S60/V70/S80 then it may be a viable alternative.
Price-policies may still make it un-interesting compared to the competition, but that's an (IMHO) concious decision made by Volvo-NA.
Again, sorry for the long rant..
Bye, Arno.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be WatsonMD
on
Thu Oct 26 13:46 CST 2000 [ RELATED]
|
|
I test drove an automatic S40 at Darrel Waltrip Volvo in Nashville, TN. First impression - decent car for the $$$. Then I noticed small things.
1. Cheap!!! Your right, the handles, the doors, the carpet, the ect.....looks and feels cheap!!! But, hey you are not sinking $40K into a new Volvo. They are basically marketing this car to those who want Volvo safety/name but don't want to sink the cash.
2. Power or lack there of. The four cylinder is quick but lacks that added umph when needed at speed. It will definately down shift under the lightest of inclines or loads. I didn't feel I had the power to get away from a bad situation if I needed to.
3. Small!!! I am 6'3" and I was cramped. Why was I going to sink this kind of dosh into a car that felt like a Dodge Neon inside. Passengers are shoulder to shoulder with 8-10 inches between.
My money?? I would opt for the recently used S70. I know that some dealer are letting go of the 2000 S70s with very low miles (loaner cars) or even brand new for $29K.
Best of Luck
Andrew T. Watson
|
|
|
|
|
