1991 Volvo 460 1.7 petrol
Volvo's greatest mistake, avoid at all costs
Erratic engine temperature gauge/sensor.
Alternator replaced 2009, 2010.
Clutch replaced 2009.
Engine sub-frame rusted from the inside and snapped off.
Very prone to rust.
First of all, this is not a real Volvo, but a DAF car mated with a french engine. Very low quality, and I would say Volvo's greatest fiasco.
It has very comfortable seats and the factory sound system was very good. Excellent cold starting abilities. Excellent car for long distance driving if it suddenly doesn't break down and leave you stranded.
The engine is weak and the gearbox is abysmal. Very bad traction on ice and snow with good tires, due to very little ground pressure on the front wheels. Very prone to breakdowns and component failure. Rusts even worse than a Japanese car.
Repairing this car is like throwing money away. Something new will always need attention and fixing.
I was lucky and had a total breakdown while driving on a snowy road. The engine subframe rusted out from the inside and snapped off, leaving the engine tilted down on one side. This was the end of a disgusting car.
Repair costs for the year I had this car could have bought me a real nice proper Volvo.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 23rd October, 2012
2nd Nov 2012, 19:30
210,000 miles and you expect a car not to have parts needing replacement? That's a bit unrealistic.
84% of owners reviewing the Volvo 460 on this site would happily buy another one, and do not consider it to be "Volvo's biggest mistake."
Ignore this review, the owner bought a beaten up, thrashed and worn out 460, and wants to blame his misfortune on the makers of the car... not the careless previous owners who messed it up for him.
9th Nov 2012, 19:30
I am the original poster, and I can assure you that this car was taken care of, it has been in the family since it was new. It had a full service history when I got it.
A sturdy construction like that of true Volvos gives longevity and few repairs. The 400-series is a different breed, it feels like an old carrot when you drive it.
Don't listen to people like the one above. If you want a good car that you can keep for the rest of your life, buy a 200/700/900-series Volvo. If you want more comfort, go for the 850 - V70N.
The 400-series is a joke, you will regret buying it.
10th Nov 2012, 12:27
I've got to agree and disagree. These 400's are not quite as solid as 'proper' full size Volvo's, but are usually better than their competition.
I own a few modern Volvo's, and have driven/owned many of the older ones too. However, there are very good 400's out there. My 1992 GLT is one of them, with great black metallic paintwork and very little rust, as well as 169,000 miles on the clock. I have owned it since 110,000 miles, and it hasn't missed a beat.
Get this - last month I took the car out of retirement (it's been parked at the back of my Dads barn for 6 (YES, SIX) years covered in dust with 3 flat tyres, etc). I put a new battery on it, pumped up the tyres and it started first time! Excellent car. Even better - I jumped in it and drove it to the MOT station where it just needed a puncture repairing and a bulb to pass!!! You just can't get better than that! So, basically, not all 400's are bad, some are excellent!