24th Apr 2007, 02:20

I also agree with the above comments. I am also a proud Volvo owner and have owned several with no major issues what so ever. I love the comfort, practicality and above all, safety. I can't see myself buying anything else with my hard earned cash! Love them.

28th May 2007, 20:47

Lots of different opinions here. I'm considering buying a 1998 V70R AWD and am interested in any comments or experience any of you may have regarding the AWD systems of these cars. I have heard about problems with the AWD system in the early V70s and XC cars (pre 2002). Has anyone had any bad experiences with the AWD system? The car I'm looking at has 62k miles on it.

My brother and father both have Audi A4s; my brother also has a V70 (manual transmission, non turbo). He asks why I'm not considering an A4 Avant... my answer is... all the maintenance $$. I've seen them pour tons of money into their Audis.

I can handle some maintenance from the V70R, especially consumable parts; that's normal. What's encouraging is that I see so many V70s with 100k - 150k miles on them out there.


8th Jun 2007, 02:09

I bought a 1998 Volvo V70XC AWD in December 2006 with 198,000 miles on it. I'm a long term Volvo owner and I'm used to getting 300,000 miles out of my Volvos. I found this car at a dealership and it ran so perfectly and had so little wrong with it (just minor interior wear - leather getting loose on some of the door panels, but you hardly notice it - that I decided to buy it. I was concerned about the high miles at first, but I've put 8000 miles on the car and it runs and handles great. I've only had one unexpected repair - an air mass meter. A $200 charge at my independent volvo tech's garage. Other than that just scheduled maintenance. Everything on this car works and I love the way it drives and handles. I'm figuring that if this car did have problems the prior owners must have fixed them all. The only fault I've noticed is an occasional hesitation of the engine, but the engine checks out fine, so it's hard to say if it's a warning sign or just an idiosyncrasy. But overall I love this car. I've owned about 8 Volvos and this is my favorite so far. Comfortable, fast, every bell and whistle I need, and I prefer the pre-Ford body style. From reading these comments it seems the pre-2001 Volvos are more reliable than later ones. When did Ford buy Volvo? Anyway, if you are willing to diligently stay on top of basic maintenance I would highly recommend any pre-2001 Volvo, especially with low miles. I retired my 1986 240 with 335,000 miles, so I plan to get at least another 100,000 out of this 1998 V70 XC AWD.

16th Aug 2007, 10:21

It is amazing to me to read these (great) comments!

I own 2 Volvos -- a great 1991 240 Wagon, which I absolutely love (except for constant and expensive brake repair!) -- I keep it well maintained and baby it, and it runs as good as new at 153,000 miles. I will keep it forever.

Meanwhile, there is the saga of my 1998 V70 XC AWD. I love the way this car drives. However (and this is no lie, my dealer has the records to prove it) I have had to replace the rear brake pads, calipers and rotors almost every 12 months (no lie!) like clockwork, to the tune of about $1000 a shot. Not to mention front brakes! The brakes on this car are an unmitigated absolute disaster (as admitted by my dealer about 1998 Volvos).

Plus I spent at least $2500 trying to get the front AWD coupler fixed (many comments on the forum about this problem!) -- only to have the problem come back 2 months later -- only to have the AWD disconnected and now it runs fine -- on front wheel drive only!

I am obviously a Volvo nut -- and nuts to keep this car! I totally agree with everyone's comments here about Japanese cars, and I thought I never would say that. I am a total Euro car nut (I am in Europe working there monthly). I hear great stories about A4s from friends who drive them there. And I also hear great low-maintenance stories about BMW 3-series wagons too. I never thought I would say this, but: I will never buy another new Volvo, as much as I love my 240, and as much as I like driving the 98XC. They are simply far too much money to maintain.

24th Oct 2007, 06:59

From all the comments about the negative and positive things about used V70s, I think that they all come from two different situations: either you bought a V70 which was poorly maintained by its previous owner, or you happened to be lucky enough getting a well-maintained V70. If one of us fell into the first scenario, then we'll have a high probability of a lemon.

So for us who would like to purchase used V70 -which applies to purchasing used cars of all brands-, our primary homework is to check everything with the car before buying it. Take it to an authorized Volvo dealer (like in my country), which would help us general-check the car to find out what problems it may have (and the related cost of repairing them).. it's not so expensive.

The most ideal condition is when we happened to know a friend who owns a V70, rest assured that you can ask everything about the car (not necessarily showing your interest in buying from him!) and even join a ride in his/her V70. Now that you know its history and all about it's positive and negative side.. you can convince him to sell it to you :)

12th Dec 2007, 15:26

I was considering either a Volvo S70/V70, Lexus ES300, Audi A6, or a Mercedes C280. All I have to say after doing a lot of research is, Volvo engines and transmissions last the longest! I don't care if they nickel and dime you to death; the engine and transmission are the most costly parts of a vehicle to replace.

The C280 apparently has biodegradable wiring harness, causing MAJOR electrical problems. I dismissed considering one.

After reading numerous ES 300 reviews, it was apparent the transmissions commonly fail around 100k miles. No thank you, moving on.

The Audi A6 seems to have similar transmission longevity and oil burning issues after passing 100k miles. Next!

The Volvo S70/V70 seems to be the only model with an engine and transmission that actually hold up with time. That's very important to me. I would rather spend a couple hundred dollars here or there every few months, and have little silly things go wrong, than have to worry about replacing a $2,500 transmission or engine... cha-ching.

I am very Volvo-biased. I've had excellent service from all 3 of my Volvos, an '85 240 (165k miles), '89 740 turbo (224k miles), and '95 940 (172k miles). Original engines and transmissions on all. Volvo has given me no reason to think anything other than that they build well engineered, durable cars. I would prefer an 850 because they sound a little less problematic, but I may give the S70/V70 a shot too.