....I bit down hard on my lower lip and went with the FWD. This meant giving up on more space, RWD (which I prefer) and the much nicer buildout the last 960/90's looked to be. I also gave up on puckered door panels and a problematic test bed for the 6cyl engine that went into the S80. Nice car, but....

The FWD, though smaller, is a nice implementation. The Porsche-designed 5cyl engine is a hoot (especially with a big nozzle turbo). And the 1998, though originally a bit troublesome, is probably OK as most of the problems and depreciation will have been paid for by previous owners. But there are some notoriously intractable problems - ABS module at 60K, sometimes the evaporator (even moreso in 850s). Overall no worse than most Eurocars, and better than VW/Audi in terms of reliability. FWIW, the 70-class is a more pleasant ride than the taut suspension in the 850.
--


David
1998 S70 T5SE // misc mods (mostly lighting) // red calipers
1992 940 GLE // Hella Micro DE foglights and 170K

Consumer Reports has both the 1997 960 and the 1998 S90 on it's famous "Used Cars to Avoid" list.

The FWD S70 is not on the "Avoid" list, but it's not on their "Reliable Used Cars" list, either.

-Punxsutawney Phil

'98 V70T5M, 121k mi., iPd stabilizer bars, Volvo strut tower brace and skidplate, Valentine-1, Mobil-1 always, e-code headlight lenses, Dunlop SP5000s

12/99 I bought a 1997 960. I also tested a 1998 S70. The choice was the 960 hands down. The power to the rear wheels and the handling was superior. I drove it for almost 70,000 miles with no problems. I just sold it and 6 weeks ago bought a S80 T6. I thought the 960 had power, the T6 is fantastic. I loved my 960. It was a great ride. You can't go wrong with one.

Bruce
'02 T6 17K
'97 960 90K
'86 740 256K