RE: Shed Of The Week: Volvo V50

[Justin S]

Owned one for 18 months and was a great car. Wife drove it like it was stolen , which kept the dpf clear . Ford bits meant cheap , like new rear pads for a tenner or so. As said the cabin filter is an arse and requires glove box, loads of plastics and fuse box to come out. Ours was an old gold greenish colour, the sort old people have, which shocked a few people as the pace we managed to get out of it. Was the PSA engine 2 ltr in it. It then had a steering rack issue and suspension bushes on the rear, so bobbed it on for an XC60, but we still think about getting one as a snotter, as they are getting cheaper. Great cars and much better than the focus floorpan its based on.

[pSyCoSiS]

I was looking at these earlier this year, and there was an 06-plate one for £800, 2.0D.

Bodywork had a few marks but interior was decent and it had FSH.

Probably would have been a bit too small for me but was a decent commuter tool.

[Matt-il77s]

BFleming said:

Rear drivers side door has had paint, and the trims have been put on with blue tack afterwards. S40's & V50's have never done it for me. Someone said 'classless' above, but bland probably fits better. Only slightly less bland than the Focus they're based on, but all of the faults*. I will never again buy something with a PSA-sourced engine - My Focus 2.0 TDCI (2008) went from a 'DPF blocked' warning to blown turbo seals (due to backpressure) quicker than it has taken me to write this sentence.

• I wonder if these spontaneously combust like the Focus?

In the Volvo, the 2004-2005 years are Euro 3 and do not have a DPF, the later Euro 4 and Euro 5 and all of the 1.6D engines have a DPF and Volvo recommend replacing it every 70k miles

It can be removed though

[CubanPete]

Very nice and an apparent bargain.

Not do much a shed as a summer house...

[FN2TypeR]

D200 said:

FN2TypeR said:

Not correct, there were indeed D3 and D4 five cylinder engines available

https://www.media.volvocars.com/uk/en-gb/media/pre...

I drove one of the five cylinder D3's, it was only 150bhp but it was bloody brilliant for a small diesel engine

From the article:

The new five-cylinder 2.0D diesel is, in principle, the same engine as the well-established 2.4-litre diesel, but its displacement has been reduced with a shorter stroke to optimise fuel consumption. The injection system also has a different type of piezoelectric fuel injector compared with the D5 engine. These injectors minimize fuel consumption with their exceptionally rapid and precise injection pulses under high pressure to promote extremely efficient combustion. This engine is now available to order in all cars across the range apart from the Volvo XC90 seven-seat SUV.

Excellent I stand corrected, every day is a school day

I assumed only D5 were 5 cyl hence the '5'

I drove one before but it must have been pre 11

It has changed again since then, they are still using the T/D monikers (ie, T5/D5) but they're all four cylinder two litre turbos now

Apart from the automatic V40s, I think that they are 1.5 litre, but I have no idea as to why that has come about!

[prewy]

Remember when we ran these as rapid response vehicles in our Ambulance service, took abuse well and proved pretty reliable, well up to about 130k when they had a tendency to drink all the engine oil and hit max revs until they self destructed! made for an interesting shift

[bearman68]

I have an old 08 plate one.Most are the 1.6 (don't touch it with someone elses barge pole ) engine, or the featured 2.0. I looked hard to find a 2.4 5 cylinder, and very nice it is to. With a little mapping, it has epic torque, though doesn't like to rev too much.
Lovely seats, and at 164k since tight and smooth, and just lovely.
Handling is not the greatest, but is 'OK', it's good on a motorway, and absorbs bumps nicely.
Fuel economy on the read out is about 41 mpg ( but filling tank to tank gets nearer 48 being driven normally within speed limits.
Not often the indicator is that way around.
A top spec 2.4 cost me just over 2k 6 months ago. No regrets there.

[yellowbenzene]

I have the 1.8 petrol one of these and it's far too slow. Hard to overtake on hills and bordering on unsafe to try it! But very comfortable, practical and has OK economy. The 18" Medusa rims are very fragile and the stock tyres are very expensive.

[anonymous-user]

kapiteinlangzaam said:

If you can trust the gearbox to take it, the 2.4 D5s will map up to around 230bhp.

Ive put a 205bhp map on my 163bhp S60. Engine is fine, clutch wasnt impressed though.

They shift very well with 200+bhp though. The diesel torque surge is most satisfying.

My D5 C70 has an MTE map to a claimed 225bhp. As standard these P1 platform cars only had 180bhp from the D5 as opposed to the 185bhp of the larger cars, due to thermal constraints.

Interestingly my car felt well down on power in the recent hot weather, so I suspect that while maybe they can make 225bhp with a remap they cannot do it as consistently (and reliably) as a standard car produces 180bhp.

As you say it's quite entertaining with the remap, and must be even more so in a lighter V50 or C30. I needed a clutch almost immediately after the map was put on though...

[fatandwheezing]

I love my T5. It might be down to it being to thirsty for me to commute in, so making a nice weekend change from my ok but dull Citroen C5. Only downside is rear legroom.

What's really weird with mine is a lot of issues we've had that have fixed themselves including parking sensors, ignition needing two attempts to start, and drivers for refusing to lock.

If I could stretch to a polestar V60 I'd chop it in, but nothing else appeals.