Faults:

No problems to date and none expected.

General Comments:

Not a vehicle for those who wish to be away from the lights first but cruises comfortably at higher speeds.

Reasonable fuel economy and running costs for a car of this specification.

Less roomy than the Galaxy, but feels like a car rather than a Transit Van. No need to remove rear seats to carry luggage.

Faults:

Electrical.

Computer.

Lights.

Brakes.

Power steering.

General Comments:

I was a content and loyal Volvo driver up until my third Volvo vehicle which I leased in 1999. The only good thing about the car is that I can return it once the lease expires.

The car has had a myriad of technical concerns and problems. More importantly the car is well below my expectations and falls well short of what I would consider to be a luxury automobile.

Beyond the technical problems, I am of the experience and perception that the Volvo organization makes it quite difficult to find satisfaction for defective vehicles and is less than responsive. The only other company I can think of that may be less responsive was "Crazy Eddie".

"Crazy Eddie" was infamous for having its customers report problems with merchandise via a special phone in each store. A clerk in headquarters manned the phone. Of course the clerk had absolutely no authority or inclination to address customer concerns. This was by design a mechanism for "Crazy Eddie" to avoid and evade customer issues. Much like "Crazy Eddie", Volvo positions itself away from direct customer interaction. The shield in this case is Volvo's franchise dealerships that have no intent or power to address concerns beyond the warranty.

I found numerous instances of Volvo quality problems of a similar nature in the public domain. My guess is that Volvo may be milking the perception of quality that it developed over time. Because of this perception, the sale of Volvo vehicles may not be that hard to accomplish.

I can assure Volvo that should the quality of their product, and the responsiveness their organization, remain at the level I have experienced their future success will be short-lived. It takes a long time to build a reputation for quality and service, and a very short time to lose it.

My latest experience indicates that the car is far less than the 1992 and 1996 that I have owned. My recommendation to a perspective Volvo owner would be to avoid the car. Instead, I would heartily recommend the Chrysler LHS or 300M. You will find that both these alternatives are considerably less expensive than Volvo and are in fact higher quality vehicles.

Faults:

None.

General Comments:

Change from Audi A4. Volvo is roomier, more comfortable, has better roadhandling but is noisier under power. Much better value for money than the Audi.