2000 Volvo V40 review from North America
"I like it"
What things have gone wrong with the car?
After owning the car for 1 1/2 years, the brake light came on so I took it to the dealer to have it checked out (assuming if anything was wrong it would be covered under my four year/50,000
mile warranty). They told me the rear brake pads had to be replaced at my expense.
I'm dumbfounded that a car this new whether driven in the city or the country, has to have new brake pads. Volvo corporation has offered to do nothing except to explain that it is because of inferior fabrication (less asbestos content). Why then, do they use these types of brake pads? I'm beginning to see that Volvo, like most every other big company now is full of hype.
General comments?
I LOVED my Honda and will probably go back to Honda with my next auto purchase.
Recommended reviews
| A ford escort in a Volvo package |
|
| Nice seats, but unsafe at any speed |
| Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? | Don't Know |
| Year of manufacture | 2000 |
| First year of ownership | 1999 |
| Engine and transmission | Automatic |
| Performance marks | 7 / 10 |
| Reliability marks | 7 / 10 |
| Comfort marks | 6 / 10 |
| Dealer Service marks | 7 / 10 |
| Running Costs (higher is cheaper) | 8 / 10 |
| Overall marks (average of all marks) | |
| Distance when acquired | 13 miles |
| Most recent distance | 13000 miles |
| Previous car | Honda Civic |
| Date of Entry | 9th January, 2001 |