Volvo XC90 - Thoughts?

[y2blade]

billywhizzzzzz said:

yellowbentines said:

Jeez, glad I didn't buy one when I was looking a few years back, it seems that seating 7 is their only plus point going by comments on this thread!

Let me get this right, slow, thirsty, terrible turning circle, potential for very expensive borkage of gearboxes, DPFs, DMFs, radiators and stereos, and a 4wd system that may or may not be 4wd!

Slow? manual is 10 secs to 60 without remap
Thirsty? ours does low 30s (av over 10000 miles)
Turning circle? No worse than competitors
Gearbox? Not if you get a manual
Radiator and Stereo - 1st I've heard

Same to all of the above "corrections"

Our XC90 has been faultless, but well aware of the potential for big bills..but this was offset somewhat by what we paid for the car
The auto gearbox is the big bill on the version we have (circa £4k if it goes belly-up)...touch wood it hasn't gone YET, we did a fluid change when we got it and will do so every year.

Ours is a 2003 XC90 T6 (3litre, straight six, twin turbo) has just clicked 49k this weekend gone.
It is Used solely for towing the Horse trailer, hence the mileage.

Lovely car to travel to Horse events in, you'd never know the trailer was hitched tbh.


OP do some proper reading and go in with eyes wide open, you can/will buy a good one.

[y2blade]

Not a bad review, covers most things.
http://www.carpages.co.uk/volvo/volvo-xc90-review-...

[runboy]

I think the latest reliability survey (was it in What Car? - might have been) has the XC90 as being the poor relation in the overall Volvo stable of cars. Might mean they are still better than the likes of Range Rover/Land Rover and Merc M class though so worth taking in context.

[zetec_s6]

When I was reading owners reviews the XC90 got nearly all good reviews whereas the Disco was either the best or the worst car people had owned, I decided not to take the risk and am pleased with the decision.

I'm not aware of the car having any major problems before we got it at 60000 miles and in the following 40000 we have had the 4wd issue (£600), a wheel bearing (£250) and a faulty boost contorl valve (£350). Which doesn't seem too bad, those bills are also offset by the fact that it holds its value better than some of the alternatives.

[lyricalgangster]

I know op is not looking for a new xc90, but we bought ours brand new in October and my wife absolutely loves it; its smooth, safe, and really comfortable.

I like driving it when taking the family out, but its not a drivers car - too big, too soft but saying that with the d5 engine, imo it can fair shift!

I also happen to think its a handsome beast, we have the R design with the optional 20inch wheels and it looks pretty good, again, imo.

Go for it OP, all cars have their faults, and its just the luck of the draw...

[Bohemianesque]

lyricalgangster said:

I know op is not looking for a new xc90, but we bought ours brand new in October and my wife absolutely loves it; its smooth, safe, and really comfortable.

I like driving it when taking the family out, but its not a drivers car - too big, too soft but saying that with the d5 engine, imo it can fair shift!

I also happen to think its a handsome beast, we have the R design with the optional 20inch wheels and it looks pretty good, again, imo.

Go for it OP, all cars have their faults, and its just the luck of the draw...

Not according to maths or more correctly statistics. Some cars are a lot better than others; it's NOT the luck of the draw.

I just love the 'well I've had one and it's caused no problems' anecdotal comments of PH.

[y2blade]

Bohemianesque said:

lyricalgangster said:

I know op is not looking for a new xc90, but we bought ours brand new in October and my wife absolutely loves it; its smooth, safe, and really comfortable.

I like driving it when taking the family out, but its not a drivers car - too big, too soft but saying that with the d5 engine, imo it can fair shift!

I also happen to think its a handsome beast, we have the R design with the optional 20inch wheels and it looks pretty good, again, imo.

Go for it OP, all cars have their faults, and its just the luck of the draw...

Not according to maths or more correctly statistics. Some cars are a lot better than others; it's NOT the luck of the draw.

I just love the 'well I've had one and it's caused no problems' anecdotal comments of PH.

At least we are speaking from personal experience

Unlike many on here that are slating something they know **** all about...oh wait!!!

[zetec_s6]

Bohemianesque said:

Not according to maths or more correctly statistics. Some cars are a lot better than others; it's NOT the luck of the draw.

I just love the 'well I've had one and it's caused no problems' anecdotal comments of PH.

As opposed to the I've never owned one but have read somewhere that there's a problem with x,y,z?? Didn't a Ferrari catch fire, that doesn't mean every owner will have the same issue?

All you can do when choosing a car is consider what could go wrong, how likely it is to occur and what it'll cost to fix. Of all the issue stated above I've only experianced one of them and it cost £600, have I just been lucky?

[Bohemianesque]

y2blade said:

At least we are speaking from personal experience

Unlike many on here that are slating something they know **** all about...oh wait!!!

I've owned Peugeots that have given me no problems (statistically supposed to be poor), I've owned VWs and Audis (5 VW's and 6 Audi), supposed to be well built and reliable, some were, some were pigs (most newish). I've owned 4 Volvos (3 S60's that were pretty faultless - 1 needed a turbo) and an new S80 that had no end of problems - my brother has it now and it's just cost him £££ to have an the electronic park brake fixed - with an indie too - 5 weeks off the road). I've had two Alfas that were faultless, one being an old classic Spyder that sat outside, was used infrequently, but in 5 years never let me down and sailed through MOTs. I've had numerous Fords, and a shed full of company cars (my old employer used to throw a new car at me every 6 - 9 months)...at the ago of nearly 50, don't tell me I've no experience.

The point I'm making is that there is a reason that statistical reliability and warranty data shows that some manufactures fair better in terms of reliability. Now that maybe down to not pushing the boundaries of technology, better testing schedules, better CI processes in productions (ie better implementations of lean etc)...there are many reasons. Meta analyses of surveys show pretty consistent results. That's why I pay little attention to personal experience.

I have personal friends who believe in 'water dowsing'; from personal experience 'it works'. Funny then how all the double blind clinical trials show otherwise. I'll put my money with maths and science thanks. Now if you're talking aesthetics and enjoyment.....that's another topic. :-)

[y2blade]

Bohemianesque said:

y2blade said:

At least we are speaking from personal experience

Unlike many on here that are slating something they know **** all about...oh wait!!!

I've owned Peugeots that have given me no problems (statistically supposed to be poor), I've owned VWs and Audis (5 VW's and 6 Audi), supposed to be well built and reliable, some were, some were pigs (most newish). I've owned 4 Volvos (3 S60's that were pretty faultless - 1 needed a turbo) and an new S80 that had no end of problems - my brother has it now and it's just cost him £££ to have an the electronic park brake fixed - with an indie too - 5 weeks off the road). I've had two Alfas that were faultless, one being an old classic Spyder that sat outside, was used infrequently, but in 5 years never let me down and sailed through MOTs. I've had numerous Fords, and a shed full of company cars (my old employer used to throw a new car at me every 6 - 9 months)...at the ago of nearly 50, don't tell me I've no experience.

The point I'm making is that there is a reason that statistical reliability and warranty data shows that some manufactures fair better in terms of reliability. Now that maybe down to not pushing the boundaries of technology, better testing schedules, better CI processes in productions (ie better implementations of lean etc)...there are many reasons. Meta analyses of surveys show pretty consistent results. That's why I pay little attention to personal experience.

I have personal friends who believe in 'water dowsing'; from personal experience 'it works'. Funny then how all the double blind clinical trials show otherwise. I'll put my money with maths and science thanks. Now if you're talking aesthetics and enjoyment.....that's another topic. :-)

Fair enough
No XC90's though
tbh all cars have their faults, going in with as much info as possible and looking for the known (expensive/major) issues to have been addressed is always a good idea.

[anonymous-user]

The only one I know of surprised the owner by actually being 2WD. I quite like them but like most 4x4's they are going to be expensive to keep on the road. Personally I would be looking at Land Cruisers but like others have said do the research and you should be ok.

[y2blade]

yonex said:

The only one I know of surprised the owner by actually being 2WD. I quite like them but like most 4x4's they are going to be expensive to keep on the road. Personally I would be looking at Land Cruisers but like others have said do the research and you should be ok.

The AWD system splines on the early D5s (163bhp) were made of cheese....not an expensive fix to the uprated/newer part..but yes an amusing inconvenience if you only find out about it halfway up a snowy/icy hill.

[oola]

I had an 2005 XC90 petrol for about 4 months a few years ago. Why only for 4 months you say? Well this one owner car which had full main dealer Volvo history but within 6 weeks required a new prop shaft and a new power steering oil cooler about 3 weeks after that. The car was immaculate and it was acually ok to drive ... heavy on juice but it cruised ok. Volvol quoted £1200 for propshaft ... luckily found a used one so including fitting I think it set me back a couple of hundred quid.

When looking around the forums for the issue, I was gobsmacked at how many issues these cars have. Gearboxes, propshafts and wheel bearings (£200 per corner) are all weak spots for these. Buy with caution is all I'd say as they can be expensive to maintain!

[yellowbentines]

billywhizzzzzz said:

yellowbentines said:

Jeez, glad I didn't buy one when I was looking a few years back, it seems that seating 7 is their only plus point going by comments on this thread!

Let me get this right, slow, thirsty, terrible turning circle, potential for very expensive borkage of gearboxes, DPFs, DMFs, radiators and stereos, and a 4wd system that may or may not be 4wd!

Slow? manual is 10 secs to 60 without remap
Thirsty? ours does low 30s (av over 10000 miles)
Turning circle? No worse than competitors
Gearbox? Not if you get a manual
Radiator and Stereo - 1st I've heard

Don't shoot the messenger, I was simply summarising what the posters above me had said about the car, and it didn't make it sound like there was much going for it.

[Renn Sport]

I am not really put off the old Volvo to be honest. All of this feedback just helps me spot a good one.

Still not sure about how to test the 4wd without trying wheel spinning an auto?!?

I am going to look for a later 185bhp version and test the areas the posters have mentioned here.

Also I have found the Volvo isn't too wide and will/should fit on our small driveway.

[Deva Link]

Renn Sport said:

I am not really put off the old Volvo to be honest.

Unless you're going to look after it yourself, perhaps one critical thing would be have a trusted indie lined up.

[anonymous-user]

y2blade said:

The AWD system splines on the early D5s (163bhp) were made of cheese....not an expensive fix to the uprated/newer part..but yes an amusing inconvenience if you only find out about it halfway up a snowy/icy hill.

It was qute amusing as my D5 made it out of the office car park in the snow and he was quite stuck. Until that day there were no signs of it

[zetec_s6]

Renn Sport said:

I am not really put off the old Volvo to be honest. All of this feedback just helps me spot a good one.

Still not sure about how to test the 4wd without trying wheel spinning an auto?!?

I am going to look for a later 185bhp version and test the areas the posters have mentioned here.

Also I have found the Volvo isn't too wide and will/should fit on our small driveway.

The later models are not a problem, only 2004/2005. You can test it by getting under the car and turning the propshaft, if it turns it's broken. The car is high enough that you can do this without jacking it up.

[redgriff500]

Take a look on the Volvo owners forum - lots of unhappy owners on there.

I bought one for my wife a few years ago, it was a 40k FSH car.

It was also the worst and 2nd most expensive car I've ever bought.

Crank seal popped out - known issue can cost you an engine £400+ to fix
Dash started playing up - known issue £800 to fix
Stereo played up - known issue £1200 to fix
Cutting out issue - no one could diagnose it until finally it did it as I pulled into a garage so we could finally grab a fault code.

Lots more I can't remember but it was a disaster.

Mine didn't have the 2WD issue nor the delay when accelerating away (issue with the Auto only) but plenty did.

It does seem all niche complicated 4WD suffer similar issues but I was pleased to get rid of it after a year the Audi A6 that it replaced cost a 1/3 of the amount and was a better car in every way.

I bought and modified a VW T4 for carrying all of us (4 kids) which is better at that job than the Volvo as it has loads more space albeit less luxurious.

[Renn Sport]

Red Griff:

You went through quite an ordeal! Yikes.

I will look at later models, however I know all models have one or two problem cars.

I actually want to reduce the number of cars I have and also this car is for he wife. I want one car that does it all and one that not too wide for the driveway.

Looks like I need to be cautious.