posted by
someone claiming to be Bill Krug
on
Sun Apr 1 05:41 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I just put a little money down on a '95 850 T5R with 117k miles. The car just got a new rear seal, cam belt replaced at 70k. I drove it and it felt tight, turbo spooled up well.
I there any preventive maintenance I should consider doing to this car? Does anyone think I should cut my losses and run? Does anybody put synthetic oil in their (automatic) transmission?
Thank you
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be brad
on
Sun Apr 1 17:31 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
they are gorgeous cars i love mine holds up well , look around for a better price. mine beautifl 12.900 72k miles unless that one is yellow it is to much money.. 25k made total only 500 were yellow.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be mosel
on
Wed Apr 4 08:06 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Hey brad. I think 2500 T-5R's were made, not 25000. That's what my magazine says. As far as only 500, I've heard conflicting reports from many sources, including my dealership. I believe 1000 came into the US in '95, only in black and yellow (again, from a Car and Driver road test May 1995). I've heard 460 in yellow, but that's not "for sure," said the guy at the dealer. I've ALSO heard conflicting reports on the wagon. I've read 10% in the wagon, but I've met a guy who has a yellow wagon who says only 10 yellow wagons were brought into North America!!! Of course, that's the guy with the yellow wagon telling me that, so who knows, right? Either way, these cars are rare in either color, but the yellow is so desirable because it was the special "R" color for that year. Good to hear you got such a deal on yours!!!
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be mosel
on
Sun Apr 1 11:03 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Don't have much maintanance advice - get it checked out by a good shop, or at least lemon busters. My advice is more price related. I've seen 95 T-5R's with asking prices of $17-20K before (usually for low mileage examples, ie 40K miles), but when people need to get rid of them, they really can't get rid of them. So I see tons of people dumping 'em for as low as $13K. I bought mine in absolutely perfect condition (except for needing new tires) for $13,900. No dings. No dents. Perfect leather. Perfect mechanicals. That was with 76K miles. So with 117K miles, bargain for $11-12K tops. Or pay the extra grand and get one with 40K less miles on the ticker. If you want help, email me, and I can try to tell you where I found those 80K mile examples for around $13,000 to $14,000. Keep in mind the T-5R wagons are worth a tad more, especially in yellow, with the 17" rims (hopefully not curbed too badly yet). Also if you are planning to do the ECU and exhaust mods from IPD, and your example already has it, then this will save you about 2 grand. In closing, remember that Volvo Turbos tend to be driven "hard." Harder than the non-turbo variants. Take that as you will, and good luck.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Sin
on
Sun Apr 1 07:09 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Has the car received all its scheduled maintenance? If so there really isn't all that much except for the ATF, which you already addressed. I also recommend having the brake fluid flushed. This should be a pretty cheap job at the shop. My only concern is the rather high mileage. It is not by far one of the highest I've seen, but it is definetly on the high side.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Black Adder
on
Tue Apr 3 12:57 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
OK, all you guys (except Bill) are full of crap. 117K for that car is not "high" and turbos are not driven harder just because they are turbos. Geez, guys! What gives? A car from '95 is technically 6-7 years old depending on when it was purchased...which could have definitely been sometime in late '94. So, at 20K per year (decent annual average in many parts of the country) that would put a 6-year-old car at 120K. Nothing wrong with that at all. Sure, NADA and Kelley books are going to hit you with a mileage deduct but what the heck!..those books are published to protect dealer profits (especially the Kelley Blue Book).
As for turbos being driven harder?!?!? Come on. What kind of crap is that? As a F&I Manager and former vehicle sales person I can tell you "turbo" is not a dirty word. Hasn't been for years. Old turbos from the mid-80s and before were usually not intercooled and therefore were easier to damage from wear and tear as well as "coking" and other improper treatment. Modern turbos are fine...more than fine. If you see a tad bit of oil on the bottom of a turbo from an 850 don't be alarmed. Totally normal unless obviously excessive.
The one thing you will want to check on at 117K is the ball joints and tie rod ends...and the oil return line seal. I have 152K on my T-5R and definitely know of which I speak. Trust me.
Take this prospective car to a Volvo dealership (no one else) and pay $125 for a thorough inspection. It's worth it. Trust me.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be mosel
on
Wed Apr 4 07:58 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I'm just posting what my mechanic (a trusted and quality Volvo-only mechanic for over 20 years in Austin) said about 850 turbo's. He said they are "driven harder, and he wouldn't buy one." I don't know what that means specifically, I love mine, and it was obviously taken care of. But don't shoot the messenger. I thought Volvo owners were supposed to be mature and mentally stable. Who gave YOU a set of keys? What, you don't think we read your opinion unless you call our two cents "full or crap?" I read all advice with an open mind, and I'm guessing Bill probably does as well. Maybe you should go post your angry and childish postings on a Civic or Integra board. Otherwise, learn some manners before you embarass yourself.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Black Adder
on
Wed Apr 4 08:47 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
Hmmm, funny. Right back at ya. You never made it clear that your "mechanic" made the comment about turbos being driven harder. So, you are responsible as the "messenger" for not communicating properly.
Also, accountability is very important on this board. I am merely keeping you accountable for spreading inaccurate and uneducated information. Your flippant comment has done a tremendous disservice to people on this board.
You're mechanic has made a sweeping generalization that I'm sure you must have taken out of context...OR...he's actually clueless as proven by his lack of knowledge about modern turbos.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be mosel
on
Wed Apr 4 09:32 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
You are right - I did not clearly state that my mechanic made that statement. But I have now. Still doesn't excuse you from calling us all "full of crap." If members of the board feel disserviced by my comment, then I apologize; I shall try to be more encompassing and specific in the future. As far as my mechanic being "clueless," and his opinion being based upon innacurate and uneducated information, who are you to judge? The statement is "Turbo variants are driven harder." The statement was not that "Turbo variants are driven harder, and thus cannot handle the load, resulting in coking problems, inclusive of all modern turbocharges up until the year 1995." Have you personally conducted an experiment consisting of a control group, a group of non turbo 850s, and a group of turbo 850s? I would venture to GUESS that Turbo cars are driven much harder than stock 850s, since turbo drivers tend to appreciate performance a little more than the next guy, but I could be very wrong. I've not conducted that experiment. But they are also built to better handle the boost. I am not a mechanic, I am a student, and you sold used cars. Therefore neither one of us are experts in the field... Well, I am now held accountable. I would like to suggest we take this conversation off the brickboard and move it to personal email communication, as I feel we will probably not be providing any new technical information of good use to its members from here on out concerning this topic. They know the statement, and they know how you feel about it. Anything further is likely to be merely a pissing match. Respond on the board as you may, but I will no longer dignify it with a response.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Black Adder
on
Wed Apr 4 10:26 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I stand by my words. Your comment was "full of crap". I can prove it by interviewing every Volvo mechanic I have ever known. Also, you again are making assumptions by saying that I called "all" of you full of crap. I was very specifc to whom I directed my comment...I was not general. Pay attention.
You CANNOT make a general sweeping statement that turbo cars are driven any harder than any other vehicle. That is a ludicrous, ridiculous and irresponsible statement that CANNOT be factually proven. Therefore, it is my educated opinion that I can back up with the "opinion" of other professionals that your comment is "full of crap". I realize that you were repeating the words of your so-called mechanic, however, as they pertain to this board, the responsibility falls on your shoulders. Deal with it.
Next, how dare you assume that I merely "sold used cars". Yes, I have been in the automotive industry during my career but never "sold used cars". Thanks for making more factually devoid comments.
You haven proven yourself to be incredibly sophomoric and assumptive thus PROVING my point that you throw out uneducated and unverified comments on a whim. This degrades your credibility to the lowest of levels. Therefore, THANK YOU for making it so easy to prove my original point...that your comments are "full of crap". You do a tremendous disservice to this board by haphazardly throwing out broad and unprovable statements.
Also, thank you for choosing to not reply this post. It allows me to have the last word.
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Alex
on
Wed Apr 4 10:35 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
You both are arguing about something that is unimportant and doesn't matter.
Next subject......
|
|
-
posted by
someone claiming to be Black Adder
on
Wed Apr 4 10:54 CST 2001 [ RELATED]
|
|
I agree. But I had to hold him accountable so as to not poison the board with bad info.
|
|
|
|
|
