1997 Volvo S70 T5 from UK and Ireland - Comments

The electric aerial sometimes decides to not fully retract, nothing else, not even a squeek.

A family car which neatly disguises the fact that it has 240bhp under the bonnet. Suspension on standard car not sufficient for the power but fitting lowered springs sorts the problem out. Power must be delivered gently to avoid shredding front tyres. Next time you come across a T5 try one out!

"Disguises the fact that it has got 240bhp under the bonnet"?

Yes - disguises it a bit too well!! I found mine a bit disappointing engine wise. Sure it was quick, but not nearly as much punch as I was expecting.

I raced mine against my previous car (which my brother in law bought from me), a Civic 1.8 VTi (169 bhp) and it was barely, and I mean barely, any quicker.

Also, why does the engine rev to 6,500 (and sound rough with it)when the power drops off after 5,000 rpm? I didn't even think the low to mid-range torque shove was all that good either, which might have compensated. I later had a Golf 130 TDi PD which was far more impressive in this respect.

Didn't give the best of either world.

And I couldn't agree with you more about the suspension. I thought the chassis was appalling. I'm glad you got yours sorted with aftermarket springs, but why should you have to?

And more to the point, why should you have to spend the extra money as well?

Surely the manufacturer should set the car up properly in the first place - they charge us enough for them??

It had some good points, I'll admit, but mine was unreliable as well (bought from a main dealer and properly maintained).

I was glad to see the back of it.

German or Japanese cars are where it's at!!

The above comments are all and well, but the driver misses the point of the car entirely. The car is quick - but it's not a hot hatch. The car is designed more for comfort as they usually cover a vast mileage. Perhaps he only had the 2.5t (not 2.3 t T5). How can the 5 -cylinder engine sound poor - it sound great. I have driven both the T5 and Golf Gt-Tdi 130 and agree that the golf has more 'punch' - however, the 'punch' comes and goes just as quickly! Very few (Japanese engines excluded) have much power above 5000rpm anyway. The trick with the T5 is to buy the estate and a dog guard - then no one will expect it when you beat them from the lights!!!

Hello, and thanks for your comments. I am 'the driver' you refer to above.

So we are going to get more technical? Fine!

I don't walk around asleep, therefore I know the difference between a 2.5t and a 2.3 T5. I had an S70 T5 and you can read my own review of it if you wish in the 1999 section.

I agree the engine did make a great sound, but at higher revs it also sounded strained and thrashy, ie uncomfortable.

And I also agree with you that the 'punch' from the Golf 130 is over quickly, but you have misunderstood the point I was making.

I meant that a lot of engines EITHER deliver good torque (eg the Golf) but have a narrow rev range OR good power (eg my Civic VTi) but at high revs and therefore lack mid-range torque.

In buying the T5, I was expecting the best of both worlds from a car with (on paper) good power AND torque figures. In comparing it to the Golf, I was saying that the low-mid range acceleration (at peak-torque revs) was not as good as I was expecting, but neither did it compensate with good top-end power, tailing off quite dramatically after 5,000rpm.

I also understand that not all engines produce power at high revs (like Japanese cars) but my question was why allow the engine to rev up to 6,500rpm if it has given it's all by 5,000.

It is perfectly possible to make a forced induction (turbocharged or supercharged) engine that continues to provide positive boost at high revs and until the rev-limiter is reached.

An example of this is the Subaru Impreza. I've driven a couple of different ones and they rev freely to 7,000rpm and keep boosting all the way, with no drop off in power.

I did not buy the car expecting it to be a hot hatch - it was marketed at the time as a sports saloon. Ultimately, it was a quick car, it's just that the engine was not very satisfying or sporty in it's delivery.

But that wasn't even my main concern. Whatever the car was designed for, be it comfort or sportiness, if they are going to give it that much power, it should have suspension that can cope, and I'm sorry, but it just couldn't.

The steering was slow and completely lacking in any feel or feedback, there was no traction control, it was under-damped and far too softly sprung.

It would understeer like a supermarket trolley, and would become dangerously unstable under hard braking.

My own example was also unreliable (and yes it was serviced at a main dealer, on schedule, was properly looked after and hadn't done a high mileage) and I got treated poorly by my local dealer.

It had some good points, which I have mentioned in my original review, but overall?? Less than the sum of it's parts.

It sounds like the person above just had a bad experience.

Are you sure your engine was in good order and your turbo was operating correctly? It is not unknown for new Volvo T5 owners to be disapointed with performance; only to later find that the turbo is only boosting at half what it should do or is knackered in some other way!

My experience of an 850 T5 (older version of a S70 basically), is that with 225bhp it has more than enough power to leave any warm/hot hatch standing on a motorway or in a straight line - But try doing traffic light Grand Prix or racing through back lanes and you will be in trouble!!

It's a volvo family / executive saloon, not a hot hatch or sports car.

My Step Dad has a Jaguar S-Type 3.0 sport - My 850 T5 is as fast in a straight line, has more leg room, the same gadgets (aircon, CD, leather, etc etc), cost only 1/10th of the price and is more reliable after 150k than his car is after 78k.

The T5 is not a sports car, only a fast limousine.

You cannot compare it to a Golf TDI in any way. The Volvo is bigger, it has more options available and it is more comfortable.

You also cannot compare torque of T5 and a diesel engine. Diesel's have got more torque as standard.

To the person from the 28th August:

Yes sir, you're damn right I had a bad experience!! My original review of my own car is in the 1999 section entitled 'An Expensive Disappointment' if you're interested.

I know the turbo was working properly because I had repeated other problems with the engine management during which it was checked over several times and repaired by a Volvo main dealer.

If you read my other comments above, you may realise that I'm not saying the car was slow, just that it's engine was not very sporty or satisfying in the WAY it delivered it's power, and as a result did not feel as quick as I was expecting.

I fully understand that the car is not a hot hatch or sports car, and I have said so several times in my comments above and on those attached to my original review - BUT!! It WAS marketed as a SPORTS SALOON - I still have the brochures to prove it!

And again, if you read what I've actually said, my main criticism was actually not the engine, but the chassis / suspension. Whatever you want to call the car, sports or otherwise, if a manufacturer is going to give a car 240 bhp, it should ensure the chassis can handle it.

I'm understand that this is a big, heavy car and you cannot expect it to be as agile as a smaller car, but that's not my point.

I don't wish to keep repeating myself endlessly, I've said all this in some detail before, but even allowing for the above, there were serious flaws with the chassis setup on this model. It was far too softly sprung and under-damped. The steering was too slow, to much body roll, understeer, instability, etc, etc.

A car that is this quick in a straight line should have a setup that can cope - plenty of other manufacturers manage it!

I am not a Volvo hater - it's just I had such a poor experience with mine.

To the person from 29th August:

Respectfully, did you actually properly read what I've written above?

I disagree; I still have the original brochures for the car, and Volvo DID market it as sports saloon. I fully realise it is a big executive car, not a hot hatch, but even so, as I've already said, the suspension was seriously lacking for a car with so much power.

And I have not COMPARED the Golf to the Volvo. OF COURSE they are completely different cars. I used it as an EXAMPLE when discussing my thoughts on my Volvo's engine / performance.

I used the Golf for no other reason that I drove one for 6 months, so knew what it felt like. It could have been any good diesel. The point I was making is that I found the T5 engine disappointing.

Having first had a hot hatchback that had lots of top-end power, but lacked torque, followed by the Golf which had loads of torque, but not great power or rev-range, I thought when I bought my T5 that I would get the best of both worlds.

I.E. a car that had great low and mid-range torque (like the Golf or other TDi's - that's the EXAMPLE - not a COMPARISON), but would ALSO have good top-end power.

I have clearly said that the T5 IS very quick in a straight line, but it does not deliver that performance in at all a satisfying way. THAT'S my point, and my reason for using some other cars that would never be compared like for like with the Volvo - to illustrate that A + B should have equalled C in the Volvo, but ultimately did not.

Oh, and by the way the T5 actually has more torque (249 lb ft) than the Golf 130 TDi (229 lb ft). Diesels usually have more torque than most mainstream non-turbo petrols, true, but the T5 had both a larger capacity and is turbocharged.

And before anyone else jumps in, yes I know the current T5 has a still higher torque output, but that is the correct figure for mine (1999 model)

Of course weight factors into things as well but this could go on all day!

Please take the time to re-read my comments carefully if you want to, hopefully my points will become clearer.

But in closing, it is not just what something does, but HOW it does it...

I agree. Performance that the T5 engine delivers, is not fully satisfying. That's because you get full turbo kick a bit too late as it is HPT and it has got rather big turbo lag. To avoid this, go with 2,4 Turbo (LPT with 200hp).

I agree with our comment on suspension. A car of that amount of power should have better suspension. With standard suspension the handling is not the best.

Thanks for your comments (I'm the person above arguing against the car). You are absolutely right about the HPT vs LPT versions, I have read comments in various buying guides and reviews that say that the 2.4T and 2.0T are 'sweeter' engines.

In practice, I used to find that you didn't get a particularly great torque 'rush' at lower revs, but that when the turbo hit full boost, you were at around peak torque revs and that partly masked the feeling of the turbo coming on boost.

I'm afraid my problem is, I was seduced by the headline power figure!! I think if I'd have bought a 2.4 or 2.0, I also wouldn't have had such high expectations of the chassis either, but at the time, the T5 was marketed as a sports saloon, so I did.

It's interesting that with the current generation '70' (mine was a previous gen 1999) they no longer seem to market it as a sporting variant. That now seems to fall solely upon the 'R' version.

Well, I also own a V70 T5, and to tell you the truth, I am satisfied with mine. Of course, 2,4T would be a better choice for normal driving, but I wanted to have something faster. 2,0T is far too slow as far as I'm concerned.

Fine if you are happy with yours, as I'm sure others are, but it was the first (and last) Volvo I owned, and I found mine disappointing.

I went for the T5 specifically because I wanted the power and anticipated extra ability in terms of handling over, say a 2.4T.

Coming from owning sharp engined and sharp handling cars, I found it a let-down and mine was unreliable as well.

Great if yours has been OK and it suits you - that's what matters. But my own experience was poor and the car did not match my expectations.

I am the writer of some of the comments above (going into detail about exactly why).

This actual review is not my own. My own review of my own car is in the 1999 section called 'An Expensive Disappointment' and that has also attracted a number of comments to which I've also responded!

Hi, I wrote the post reply on the 28th.

I can't help, but wonder if you actually test drove your Volvo before buying it??

When you say the way the power was delivered wasn't pleasing, what do you mean?

I think when all is said and done, if you buy a 1500kg car with front wheel drive and a 2.3 turbo charged engine, you have to accept that it is never going to handle like a Peugeot 205.

Having owned the 2.5GLT (non turbo) and a 2.3 T5 turbo, I can confirm they DO drive differently and the T5 is a better drive, but ultimately it is not a sports car, but it is a FAST family saloon car.

Maybe the marketing is a bit of a con, but then surely all marketing is?

Having owned / driven other large performance cars (such as Granada Cosworth, Omega 3.0 V6, Mondeo 2.5 24c), I would have to say I think the Volvo is just as pleasing to drive, if not more so, especially on a motorway or fast A-road where you can maximize the 60-100mph performance.

Hello again to the person above.

Of COURSE I test drove it before buying, but you cannot really tell that much from a half hour test drive, especially if you have not driven one before and you have the salesman along with you!

To answer your next question about what I didn't like about the power delivery, can I direct you to my reply above. It is the one from 8th Sept, just beneath my last reply to you (it was in reply to someone else who put a comment on 29th August, but it answers that question in detail).

I take your point about marketing, but I still feel very strongly that my car had a pretty poor chassis and could not handle it's power. Perhaps I just drive more 'enthusiastically' than your good self.

As I've said before, I get that it is a big heavy car and will not be as agile as a smaller lighter one. I've not driven the Granada or Omega that you mention, but I have driven a couple of Mondeo's, and I'm amazed you think the Volvo handled as well as that - nowhere near in my humble opinion. Did your T5 have the optional sports suspension upgrade?

I also have driven some other big cars that are as heavy or heavier than my S70, most notably the 5 Series BMW, which had a superb chassis, so it can be done.

We obviously have had different experiences, you have found your Volvo's to be to your satisfaction, great, my ownership experience was too much of a let-down for me to risk my hard-earned on another.

I wrote my original review (not this one, by the way) when I sold the car in 2003, and added one comment to this review and I am still replying to comments 4 years later!!

I love a good debate, but I will always stand by what I have said all along, which has been no more than a reporting of my own experience and my disappointments with the car. Continue to enjoy yours!!