Volvo alternative

[ph9]

I've recently been thinking about buying a V70. I don't really need the carrying capacity on a regular basis, but it might come in handy from time to time.

I suppose what I'm looking for are safety, comfort (including good ride over rough roads), and low road and wind noise. Economy is also an important consideration.

I initially tried a 2008 140,000 miler with the D5 185bhp engine and Geartronic automatic gearbox. It seemed quite comfortable and quiet, and nice and nippy, although a bit bargelike, as expected. £305 road tax and a slight thirst were less appealing.

I then tried a 2014 75,000 miler with the D2 1.6(!) engine and Powershift automatic gearbox. I got less than a mile down the road before it went into "reduced performance mode". I was taking things easy before then, but it seemed to be struggling off the line - perhaps it had a long-travel accelerator which required a heavy foot! I took it back to the garage as soon as the warnings came on the screen, so a proper test drive will have to wait until they fix it.

I know all cars have problems, but I get the impression that some of the newer Volvos might not be particularly reliable, and can suffer from typical modern diesel afflictions along with the ongoing maintenance of a large, heavy car.

The newer V70 seemed to have less suspension travel over potholes. Also, I'm just not sure about Volvo steering and handling - my parents used to have a 240 which I found quite scary, and being a passenger in some older Volvos (I think up to 960) always made me feel that they just didn't handle well.

So, I'm wondering if it might be worth looking at some alternatives. The D2 Volvo was around £8,200, and my budget would be that (ideally a bit less).

The Honda Accord appeals, but I can't see any for sale near me. Would it be worth waiting for one to come along?

I'm not so keen on Audis. BMWs seem to be rated for handling, but I'd be worried about their servicing and repair costs, and I suspect the same would apply to Mercs.

What other alternatives might be worth consideration?

Just to add: although both V70s I tested were autos, I've not owned an auto before, and think I would still prefer a manual.

Also, I presume a petrol might be potientially have less to go wrong than a modern diesel, but I'd still need to have good fuel economy. I'd drive about 20,000 miles a year, but my brother does a similar mileage, and I know he's had problems with DPFs and EGRs even with using the car for long journeys.

Edited by ph9 on Wednesday 9th December 17:11

[wiliferus]

V70’s are fine workhorses. You’ve just got to find the right one!
The D5 185 is a great engine, mines on 187k (2006) and it’s been great. 45mpg on the combined, plenty of power for the size of the car. The difference being, mines a manual. They’re not exactly rare on a V70, but they were not as popular as the auto so can be harder to find.

The 1.6d is best avoided. I think it was a company car tax option for people rather than the engine of choice. It’s a big old car to be getting hauled around by an engine that was designed essentially for a Ford Focus.

Find a D5 manual and test drive that, I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

[GreatGranny]

I'm a big fan of Volvos but there are alternatives which I'd consider

Mondeo

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202011286...

Passat

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202012076...

Avensis

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202011136...

Don't be put off the 5 series.
Great gearbox and will ride well with the standard wheels

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202008283...

Accord but not many around

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202010175...

The 1.6d engine in the V70 is underpowered and best avoided.

[ph9]

Thanks very much.

I had my doubts about the 1.6, but I tend not to do fast 0-60mph sprints, so had hoped it would have sufficient midrange grunt. A quick web search shows a lot of similar problems with V40s which have a variant of that engine, so reliability might be an issue. It's possible the garage might clear the error but leave an underlying problem, so I'm not very enthusiastic about this particular example.

As you say, perhaps a D5 185bhp manual is the way to go. An alternative would be to find an earlier Euro3 variant - I've seen an older S60 which also appeals.

Thanks for the list of alternatives.

The Avensis might be quite good, although I think I prefer the looks of the previous generation. The Passat also looks nice. I'll keep my eyes out for those, and will also reconsider a BMW.

[wiliferus]

A euro 3 D5 with 163bhp is a good option. If you hit the sweet spot there were some 2005/6 facelift cars with the 163 engine. No dpf egr gubbins, a real world 50mpg, much more on a run... I once filled the tank part way through a long run and the OBC predicted over 1000 miles range. I think it came home at about 850 miles, but that’s good going on a single tank.
Just be mindful that the clutch is a big job. You’ll struggle to get it done for under a grand, so if you test drive and it feels weak, walk away.

You may have noticed I do love a Volvo (on my 5th) and looked after they’ll treat you well. The 5 pot D5 is a peach if not a little agricultural by today’s standards, but it’s a great unit for a daily drive.

Find a manual D5 and I think you’ll be sold.

[Doofus]

wiliferus said:

V70’s are fine workhorses. You’ve just got to find the right one!
The D5 185 is a great engine, mines on 187k (2006) and it’s been great. 45mpg on the combined, plenty of power for the size of the car. The difference being, mines a manual. They’re not exactly rare on a V70, but they were not as popular as the auto so can be harder to find.

I'm on my fourth or fifth V70/XC70. I've had the D5 185 before and currently have a D5 with a 215bhp Polestsr upgrade.

I have never seen anything close to 45 mpg, even on long, cruise controlled motorway runs(200 miles+) I've never even got into the 40s.

Yes, the current car is an XC70,so heavier and 4wd, but on the V70 before it, mpg was similar.

ETA: As of now, the only thing I'd replace it with (other than a Volvo) is a Skoda Superb.

Edited by Doofus on Thursday 10th December 14:36

[ph9]

Thanks again. I think the D5 163bhp manual might be the one. I had my eye on a facelifted 2005 one and drove it a day or two ago, but had a couple of doubts about it. Strangely, I didn't know about the clutch, but that was one thing which I wasn't quite sure about. I wanted my mechanic to check the car, but he's on holiday this week, and I think the car has sold now.

[GreatGranny]

ph9 said:

Thanks very much.

I had my doubts about the 1.6, but I tend not to do fast 0-60mph sprints, so had hoped it would have sufficient midrange grunt. A quick web search shows a lot of similar problems with V40s which have a variant of that engine, so reliability might be an issue. It's possible the garage might clear the error but leave an underlying problem, so I'm not very enthusiastic about this particular example.

The 1.6d I had in my S40 (59 reg) was ok until it hit 100k ish and the problems started. DPF and DMF were the expensive ones and I was advised to get rid before it cost e even more. It was a decent engine for the S40 and gave 60mpg and I drove it pretty hard.
However I didn't know about the issues when I got it. In hindsight I would have gone for a 2.0d.

As above the Octavia and Superb are also good alternative but if you want to stick to Volvo we had a V60 D3 and it was very reliable and we took it from 75k to 144k miles.

[CzechItOut]

Skoda Superb (and it's manual):

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202010155...

I was very impressed when I took a trip in a friend's. If you can ignore the badge I think you're getting a car which is 90% the German marques, but with significantly lower costs all round.

[alfabeat]

That Skoda looks good. I have an Octavia with the same (140bhp engine) and it felt underpowered, which will probably feel even more so in the larger Superb. I have since had it remapped (Celtic Tuning - £295) and EGR blanked and it goes so much better (138 to 195 bhp / 236 lb/ft to 305 lb/ft). Well worth doing with no noticeable drop in mpg.

[ph9]

The Skoda did cross my mind. It's probably even bigger than a V70, though. I seem to remember they have oodles of rear legroom. I know someone who's had one for years, so I'll ask him about it next time I see him.

[Pica-Pica]

CzechItOut said:

Skoda Superb (and it's manual):

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202010155...

I was very impressed when I took a trip in a friend's. If you can ignore the badge I think you're getting a car which is 90% the German marques, but with significantly lower costs all round.

No need to ignore the badge. Most people with sense (Cambridge and other police forces?) buy Škodas.

[DavidY]

ph9 said:

I had my doubts about the 1.6, but I tend not to do fast 0-60mph sprints, so had hoped it would have sufficient midrange grunt. A quick web search shows a lot of similar problems with V40s which have a variant of that engine, so reliability might be an issue. It's possible the garage might clear the error but leave an underlying problem, so I'm not very enthusiastic about this particular example.

I have owned a V50 D2 since new (Jul 2012) - the Reduced Power Warning came on at 194K miles (it was the unsurprisingly the DPF filter), but drivetrain wise that is the only thing that has been replaced, car passed 220K miles last week.

It has been ultra-reliable, with only a couple of steering gaiters and lower front arm bushes being replaced (and a plastic part in the clutch pedal assembly). Even the battery managed 7 years and nearly 200K miles! Its still on original clutch and exhaust.

I know that early D2 engines have a bit of a bad reputation, but I believe from 2011 the issues were resolved and I feel that my car backs that up.

[ph9]

wiliferus said:

A euro 3 D5 with 163bhp is a good option. If you hit the sweet spot there were some 2005/6 facelift cars with the 163 engine. No dpf egr gubbins, a real world 50mpg, much more on a run... I once filled the tank part way through a long run and the OBC predicted over 1000 miles range. I think it came home at about 850 miles, but that’s good going on a single tank.
Just be mindful that the clutch is a big job. You’ll struggle to get it done for under a grand, so if you test drive and it feels weak, walk away.

You may have noticed I do love a Volvo (on my 5th) and looked after they’ll treat you well. The 5 pot D5 is a peach if not a little agricultural by today’s standards, but it’s a great unit for a daily drive.

Find a manual D5 and I think you’ll be sold.

How do you identify the 2005 cars with the Euro 3 D5 engine? It looks like I'll be going back to see the car (an S60 Sport) next week, and I'd like to confirm that's what it is. I never knew there could be so many engines with different variations in a car model - I'm finding the Volvo thing to be quite confusing!

A daft question, but what do a DPF and EGR look like, and where are they found on this engine? I think it had a black engine cover with something like "Common Rail..." stamped across it in silver.

The advert says it is a Euro 3 engine with 160.9bhp (2401cc, 0-62mph in 9.5 seconds and 130mph). However, I suppose all that could be wrong. It was first registered in May 2005.

[wiliferus]

I think, but am happy to be corrected, a 163 should have a black engine cover, and will be 5 speed (don’t be put off, it’s a fantastic motorway cruiser)
The 185 will have a grey engine cover and be 6 speed.

[wiliferus]

Doofus said:

I'm on my fourth or fifth V70/XC70. I've had the D5 185 before and currently have a D5 with a 215bhp Polestsr upgrade.

I have never seen anything close to 45 mpg, even on long, cruise controlled motorway runs(200 miles+) I've never even got into the 40s.

Yes, the current car is an XC70,so heavier and 4wd, but on the V70 before it, mpg was similar.

ETA: As of now, the only thing I'd replace it with (other than a Volvo) is a Skoda Superb.

Edited by Doofus on Thursday 10th December 14:36

I’m guessing yours have been auto. The auto manual difference on the D5 is huge.
My D5 185 AWD manual is returning a genuine 46mpg brim to brim. My father in laws S80 D5 185 2wd auto struggles to break 35mpg. The old Volvo slush box autos really do sap a load of mpg.
My old manual 163 wouldn’t drop below 50mpg no matter what I did with it.

[Doofus]

wiliferus said:

I’m guessing yours have been auto.

Yes. All of them.

[PurpleTurtle]

ph9 said:

I then tried a 2014 75,000 miler with the D2 1.6(!) engine

Another diesel bought by somebody who shouldn't have - no doubt lured in by the headline good mpg and low tax - but only doing 12,500 miles a year on average. These people should be in petrols, if they need an internal combustion engine.

The DPF will be clogged up, most likely because of loads of stop/start journeys, hence immediately hitting limp mode.

Sooner these cars (or rather, the low mileage use thereof) are consigned to history, the better.

[Doofus]

PurpleTurtle said:

Another diesel bought by somebody who shouldn't have - no doubt lured in by the headline good mpg and low tax - but only doing 12,500 miles a year on average. These people should be in petrols, if they need an internal combustion engine.

The DPF will be clogged up, most likely because of loads of stop/start journeys, hence immediately hitting limp mode.

Sooner these cars (or rather, the low mileage use thereof) are consigned to history, the better.

Mostly generalisation, partly rubbish.

[ph9]

Thanks very much.

Yes, the modern diesels can be a bit of a nightmare when used for short journeys. I'm glad this one flagged up an error on the test drive - probably why the previous owner traded it in!

The fuel consumption figures in the old Volvo brochures show a 5mpg difference across the board between the manual and automatic D5.

If everything else pans out with the car I'm interested in, I think I'll be happy with the old Euro 3 163bhp 5 speed manual.