Volvo V70 Reviews from Belgium

2002 Volvo V70 2.4T 2.4 5 cilinder low-pressure turbo

Model year2002
Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2006
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 2.4 5 cilinder low-pressure turbo Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.7 / 10
Distance when acquired38000 kilometres
Most recent distance42500 kilometres
Previous carVolvo 960

Summary:

I like it, hope to love it

Faults:

I bought this car with only 38.000km with two years full warranty.

It's way too early to say anything about it: nothing wrong happened yet, and I hope it stays that way. I'll post some additional information when something "interesting" happens. I'm very curious about it's durability.

General Comments:

In comparison with the older bricks:

Good:

- They still have the amazing seats, I have never encountered seats this good (and this good-looking for that matter) ;

- The automatic gearbox is smooth (when warmed up) and yet responsive (i didn't like the vague shifting from the 2001 BMW 5-series, the 2001 Lexus GS300 and the 2004 Honda Accord I was looking at). So it's a great and luxurious drive, that's what convinced me to buy this car;

- Great torque and a fair gas mileage: between 8,5l and 10,5l/100 km of petrol, depending on how and where you drive... and I plan to convert it to run on LPG;

- The integrated child seats in the back are an excellent idea;

- As you should find in a Volvo-estate: loads of space.

Bad:

- 200 bhp on the front wheels, not an ideal combination... but I don't intend to race it. I'm very curious about driving it in the snow though;

- A transversal mounted engine: supposedly for safety reasons, but together with the front wheel drive resulting in an absolutely terrible (sometimes dangerous) turning radius... now I park this car as poor as a granny.

Still debating about:

- A cassette-player in a 2002 Volvo?

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 5th September, 2006

9th Oct 2006, 09:45

I have Volvo v70 2002year 2.4T (193hp) too, but it eats 12.5l/100km if you drive like a pensioner. So, I think you made a mistake :)

27th Oct 2006, 02:22

Thank you for your comment.

However, I check the petrol consumption continuously. In the best conditions - which is driving between 70 and 90km/h on flat roads without too many stopping and accelerating - I get 8,5l/100km. With medium conditions (highway cruising speed and 'pro-active' driving) : 10,5l/100km. Lot's of city driving, traffic jams and hard accelerating takes about 15l/100km, but that means consuming tires as well. Anyway, I think it strongly depends on how the car is driven, even more so than with other cars.

By the way, it's not unimportant to know that this is fuel consumption without leaving the headlights on in broad daylight and just a minor usage of the airco. And I use the cruise control whenever possible.

Now I drive on LPG, and I get about 12 to 13,5l/100km.

2001 Volvo V70 2.4

Year of manufacture2001
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 2.4 Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.6 / 10
Distance when acquired12 kilometres
Most recent distance48067 kilometres
Previous carFord Taurus

Summary:

Nice car, but too much trouble; I will never buy another one

Faults:

I have had 12 recurring faults so far. Here are the high points:

Engine miss at 2250 to 2500 RPM.

Speedometer error of 10 km/h slow.

Passenger's side front speaker not working.

In-dash cup holder broken.

Power windows operate sporadically.

Multiple "bulb failure" messages.

Replaced 4 headlights in 30,000 km.

Remote locking system most uncooperative.

General Comments:

Dealer service in Belgium is the very worst I have ever experienced.

It is a nice car on the road, though. It is comfortable and easy to drive and handles nicely, although it has the turning radius of a river barge.

It has comfortable seats, with heat, and I can sit in them all day and arrive quite fresh.

The engine is quite willing, but I would like a bit more power when joining highways. I have the Canadian spec 168 hp model.

The car is a technological and maintenance nightmare for a busy person. There is a new fault literally ever week and I am completely fed up with this aspect of the vehicle.

In summary, I had expected a lot more from a "quality vehicle" after spending almost half a year's salary!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 7th January, 2003

Average review marks: 6.1 / 10, based on 2 reviews