Green-ness and safety of old three box saloon cars.

quote:

He got a V70 Diesel model, which stayed with him for eighteen months before he chopped for a VW!

Maybe it was the early V70 diesel with the engine manufactured by VW?

JohanR

Dear Johan,

It was fitted with the VW deisel motor> I drove it once. Compared to my 240, it seemed like a Rocket! But it had a great many silly little problems.

ATB from George

I've driven a Volvo 340 variomatic for a while, and I was keen on finding out how long it would last. We replaced it after various transmission problems, first the (automatic)clutch refused service and then the rear wheels locked on a busy road, immobilising the car. My wife got scared then and we bought a new one. We bought a Toyota. In the 7 years we've got it the battery was replaced as well as a light in the dashboard. First set of new tires at 110,000 and 120,000 km. It likes being ignored.

I still remember the sound of that 340.

GFFJ said

quote:

I have never had any doubt of the make's real quality, though reliability did take a dip at the the time the Ford Motor Company took on controling ownership. I hope that Volvo will be sold off by Ford as they are selling Aston Martin and Jaguar. Whether Volvo has a future as a small manufacturer I am not sure, but I remain to be convinced that Ford is the right partner either.

Perhaps a more distant partnership might be good with some company like Honda, which also makes excelent cars.

hmm, for me that would be a real nail in the coffin for volvo; I don't share the view that Honda make excellent cars. The certainly have a knack at extracting great specific power for a given capacity, and they're usually pretty smooth running. However, one rarely encounters hondas much older than 10 years and with greater than 160k kms/100k mi. They really do miss out on the durability stakes, falling well behind manufactirers globally recognised for excellence: Toyota and Nissan.

So for me, the idea of 'honda enhancements' to volvo reliability would - theoretically - further dampen my enthusiasm for the ovlov brand. certainly something I like about volvo is that they don't appear to rust - Honda genetics would probably put paid to that!

Dear Rico,

I would hope that Volvos would continue to be be [largely] Swedish and European made. I don't suppose Volvo could survive without a partner at least in the long term. I imagine Honda might well be able to learn something about making durable cars from Volvo, as Ford learned something about safety from them.

You might be right about the consideration of Toyota, though I doubt their interest would be that great in preserving Volvo as it stands. Nissan have got a link with Pergeot/Citroen/Renault now haven't they? And I doubt if the French car industry would make a comfortable bed-fellow for Volvo, but I might be wrong. For years various Volvo models have used P/C/R engines in certain of their models, though the best Volvo engines seem to be those developed in-house, like the Red-block "B-series," used in the 240 series.

I just hope that Volvo find a really secure future, as Ford looks a shakey proposition itself in the long run.

ATB from George

GFFJ

Nissan's link is with Renault, but there is a tenuous link with Volvo and the PSA group (Peugeot and Citroen) in that Ford has developed diesel motors with PSA, the 2.0litre diesel appears in the S40/V50..

Volvo did use Renault engines at one stage (the 2.8V6 petrol) in the early 960's as well as the 1.9D in the first generation S40 (incidentally a Mitsubishi Carisma underneath). Volvo even had Porsche help them with the later 24v 2.9I6 used in the refreshed 960!

I think Volvo has benefitted hugely from Ford's chassis experience, and as you say, Ford from Volvo's safety experience not to mention the 2.5T engine in the Focus ST..

I do find it surprising that Volvo's quality has suffered under Ford's control, it has made huge improvements to Jaguar (a top JD Power performer) and Land Rover/Range Rover (still some way to go).

I would worry that Toyota wouldn't understand what Volvo is all about and that a partnership would be very difficult. Let's face it, at least Volvo's have character whereas Toyotas are competent, reliable but ultimately dull.

Honda? There longevity was not really in question and there engines are reliable, but to me a Volvo should be torquey, not something Honda is very good at (except their excellent diesel). Volvo's ethos was in turbocharging at one time, Honda's in high specific output, not really compatible.

Regards,

Ian

Does Volvo actually need a partner these days? They seem to be doing very well shifting plenty of S40/V50/V70s. And surely supplying Ford with the 5-pot for several of its own models must earn plenty of income, not mention the fees they must earn at their safety research centre in Sweden?

From what I rember of the Volvo-Renault partnership, it was more for convenience of shared costs/power trains than outright leadership/marketing power that Ford seemed to offer.

S40/Charisma were built at the same plant but shared very little in terms of parts/chassis - a common misconception. Thank goodness that Mitsi sourced GDI engine was shot lived though. Coked up at 50k miles? Rubbish! OK, the Reggie 1721 unit wasn't that good either, but that was in the 400 series - best forgotten as well!

Cheers,

Steve

quote:

Nissan's link is with Renault, but there is a tenuous link with Volvo and the PSA group (Peugeot and Citroen) in that Ford has developed diesel motors with PSA, the 2.0litre diesel appears in the S40/V50..

It's even made by Volvo in the Skövde, Sweden plant. The new Volvo designed straight six, on the other hand, is made in England.

No, I don't understand it either...

JohanR

Dear Johan,

A new Volvo Straight-six? Fantastic news! What models will have this engine? I don't care for V8s, either the sound or anything else, but a Straight-six is a wonderful arrangement!

ATB from George

V8s are smoother with more power pulses at the right times of the crank revolutions, and hence more balanced than straight sixes. There have been some rather good straight sixes over the years; most of them are made by BMW or Nissan.

The V6 as a general config seems to have come a long way in the past 20 or 30 years. The Nissan VQ series is a fabulous powerplant, smooth, torquey, and also very flexible and sporty up top. Dare I say it, it rivals some of the BMW sixes for drivability.

Volvo? I'd have to recognise their 5 cyl block as a complete success. The only downside to it long-term is the over-engineered PCV system; however, with maintenance in the appropriate periods it works very well.

quote:

Originally posted by Rico:
V8s are smoother with more power pulses at the right times of the crank revolutions, and hence more balanced than straight sixes. There have been some rather good straight sixes over the years; most of them are made by BMW or Nissan.

I'm inclined to agree with you Mr Rico. I believe I've owned all 3 of the engines you speak. In a row no less

quote:

The V6 as a general config seems to have come a long way in the past 20 or 30 years. The Nissan VQ series is a fabulous powerplant, smooth, torquey, and also very flexible and sporty up top. Dare I say it, it rivals some of the BMW sixes for drivability.

The Nissan 6 is absolutely superb. Won a few "engine of the year" awards I believe (I wonder who decides those awards) It's quite amazing how they're managed to "tune" it for sport or cruise purposes and do a great job at it.

quote:

Volvo? I'd have to recognise their 5 cyl block as a complete success. The only downside to it long-term is the over-engineered PCV system; however, with maintenance in the appropriate periods it works very well.

I haven't driven that 5cyl but I have been driven. A lot of power on offer, surprisingly smooth and linear in delivery. Well, from what I could tell. I wouldn't be ashamed

GFFJ, The new Volvo S80 and XC90 have this new 3.2l I6, as well as the new LR Freelander and Jaguar XF. It’s also rumoured to be going into the Mondeo at some stage..

Rico, whilst your opinion that a V8 has more firing pulses per revolution than a 6-cyl is correct, an in-line 6 has a natural inherent mechanical balance that a V8 does not. A V8 needs to be counterbalanced to overcome the mechanical unbalances caused by it’s layout (which is not that difficult to achieve) then you have the more frequent firing pulses to help in the smoothness too.

If you really want to go to town, then a V12 is the best of both worlds, the mechanical balance of an I6 with more frequent torque pulses than a V8!!!

I’ll take off my anorak now...

Dear Jagster,

Not fond of the CX 90, but in that case the new S80 with new straight six - I agree with you about the balance issue and refinement of this arrangement - must leap straight to the top of my desirable new cars!

Can you post a link or photo of the new model, please?

ATB from George

PS: Foolish dreams, [whistling in the wind!] ...

GFFJ,

Here's the link for Volvo UK..
Volvo UK

Enjoy!

GFFJ,

Returning back to your original question, I think what needs to be weighed up is the amount of pollution your car is now emitting (regardless of it’s fuel economy) keeping it running compared to that of an new car plus it’s associated manufacturing energy requirements.

I would like to think that a modern car is cleaner to produce due to more efficient energy production, but can’t back that up with any figures, and legislation has seen the removal of many toxic coatings and substances used on parts (such as hexavalentchrome on fasteners, lead from red paint etc.) that exist on older cars. Even the emissions of tyres and plastics once fitted to the cars are measured to ensure they are not contributing unnecessarily!

A modern cars’ exhaust gas emissions are vastly reduced compared to those of 10 years ago, let alone 20. I can understand that once a car has been built, then keeping it running for as long as possible is more financially astute, but there must be a crossover point where a new car is favourable overall.

From a safety point of view, due to the advent of crash prediction software and bodies such as Euro NCAP, modern cars are much better in a crash. It’s not about how little the car deforms but how much of the energy is absorbed without transmitting it to the occupants. The passenger cell must stay intact, but crumple zones are engineered to deform and in doing so, absorb energy. Airbags, seatbelt pre-tensioners, ABS and stability control all contribute to increased safety in modern cars.

Whilst your Volvo was good in it’s day, it cannot compete on a modern level, reliable and capable as it still is.

Dear Jag,

It is surpprising how well the car does on fuel economy [easy for me to get 40 or 42 mpg the way I drive], and even more surprising that it was complying with the modern standards for emissions till the latest round [2004?]. It was one of the first Volvo UK models fitted with a cat, and has always flown the emissions test. In fact it is old enough not to require a cat at all! If it broke I could take it off and simply use a conventional exhaust without one, and still be legal!

It is also true that though I could dream of a new S80, I will never be able to buy another car, so the fate of the old 240 will be to run till it is no longer repairable!

ATB from George

Ah, one of the Lambda Sond Volvos eh? Well at least with Volvo's durability record of that era, you should enjoy your 240 for a long time yet..happy motoring!

quote:

Rico, whilst your opinion that a V8 has more firing pulses per revolution than a 6-cyl is correct, an in-line 6 has a natural inherent mechanical balance that a V8 does not. A V8 needs to be counterbalanced to overcome the mechanical unbalances caused by it’s layout (which is not that difficult to achieve) then you have the more frequent firing pulses to help in the smoothness too.

yes, of course! I stand suitably corrected. I guess it's about the natural 60-degree spacing of six cylinders on a crankshaft. I'd mem-o-rased the counterbalancers required for V8 power.

regards