2003 Volvo S80 2.9L NA (non-turbo) from North America
Summary:
For used car buyers like myself, you get Mercedes comfort at a Honda price, but they're not reliable
Faults:
Upper and lower torque rod motor mounts were completely shot. Replaced upper with IPD poly and lower with stock rubber.
Rear main seal leak still unresolved, but using a high mileage motor oil seems to have helped.
Oil cap was warped and leaked onto coils, two of which needed to be replaced.
Preheating pipe from exhaust manifold to airbox was rubbing on lower radiator hose, and almost wore a hole right through.
Front oxygen sensors needed to be replaced. Bosch (the OEM) recommends a 100,000 mile service interval, but Volvo makes no such recommendation.
Mass airflow sensor (MAF) needed to be replaced.
Numerous problems with frayed wires, including injector wires rubbing on the side of the block, and transmission control wires rubbing in a tight spot they were threaded through.
Rear brake light relay blown, was hard to find and replace.
Transmissions service urgent warning and slipping solved with a flush, bottle of Lucas Trans Fix and clearing codes with ppc-diagnostic.com tool.
All this and I've only owned the car for 1 year and about 12,000 miles. Luckily I did all the work myself or it would have bankrupted me at dealer's exorbitant rates.
General Comments:
Leather seats use a water-based, eco-friendly dye that wears prematurely, but they're very comfortable.
Handles nicely on the highway. You have to be careful not to fall asleep on long trips.
Audio system is excellent.
Not so great for stop-and-go daily driving with the relatively unreliable GM transmission.
2.9L inline six Volvo engine will go half a million miles, but unfortunately most everything else seems to fall apart at 100,000. There's a reason they're so cheap used. A nice ride if you can do the work yourself, otherwise look elsewhere.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No
Review Date: 20th November, 2009
8th Apr 2004, 10:12
In general, the majority of turbo-engined cars are slow off the mark, if they are not given plenty of revs when moving off. This is due to the turbo not being fully spooled up until a certain rpm point. Electronics do tend to make things better (by regulating the turbo pressure and playing with the waste-gate where fitted), but the problem cannot be totally eliminated: To regulate turbo pressure you *have* to have exhaust gases to spin that turbo fan... Large heavy automatic vehicles are particularly affected, as they feature high inertia AND the torque converter slip - and both have to be overcome by the engine at near idle speed when moving off.
On the other hand, lighter vehicles, especially, manuals are less affected due to the fact that you may move off by revving the engine hard (and slip/"burn" the clutch). As they say there's no substitute for cubic inches- at least at this particular case...