Forget the dealers, prices, styling, servicing costs etc. Focus on the reliability issues only, please.
Which do you think is generally more reliable:
1) Volvo
2) SaaB
Please consider only the latest models (9-3, 9-5, S60, S80 and so on...).
- - - - - - -
I am the only Pole over here.
|
Which? 2005 Car Guide says the Volvo is more reliable.
|
On the whole, SAABs are not more reliable than anything else.
--
RF - Da DAA. < changes in phone box > Its TOURVAN man
|
|
|
|
According to reliability surveys Volvo & Saab are not up there with the best mid table or worse.
The best are all Japanese - Lexus, Honda, Toyota, Mazda......
|
|
They may be the most reliable but are also some of the most expensive to repair/service.
|
Weren't Volvo found to have the most expensive main dealer labour rates (above BMW, Mercedes etc.)?
I was charged 116 pounds for a one hour inspection on my Volvo. A factor to consider even if they are now more reliable.
|
Heheh. He put the question as succinctly and exactly as he possibly could, and he's still only managed to get 1 reply out of 5 that actually answers it, rather than a completely different question.
Actually, now I've replied that's 1 out of 6.
|
BB - Volvos are more reliable than SaaB's
there - hows that?
--
RF - Da DAA. < changes in phone box > Its TOURVAN man
|
|
Having owned both a Saab 9000 and a Volvo S80, the Saab was well behind in reliability as was the 900 my father owned 30 years ago.
The Volvo, whilst not perfect, never let me down, the Saab did and a couple after I sold it, the engine blew up.
I remember a Top Gear or simialr programme about four years ago. Compared the Volvo V70 (old shape) with a Saab 9-5. Looked at reliability as well and the Saab was found wanting.
--
Espada III - well if you have a family and need a Lamborghini, what else do you drive?
|
Have a look on reliabilityindex.com, you can search all models and get a rating and comments on them.
|
|
|
|
I've looked at a few reliablity league tables. On every one, Volvo beats Saab. Sometimes there is not much in it, sometimes there is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If it's any help, I've had a 2002 volvo S80 2.4 140bhp since March this year. A low mileage car at 23K when I got it, I've done about 8K myself now. It's not let me down and it's not been back to the dealer yet. It's not perfect though, when it does go for a service later this month I'll be asking them to look at the front wheel bearings as it has a noisy patch at about 30mph then again at 60, the front suspension will 'clonk' in certain circumstances, so I suspect there's a bush somewhere needs replacing and finally very occasionally when I've driven a couple of miles at slow speed it will stall, so perhaps it needs some software update or the idle value attending too. Nothing bad enough for me to have taken the car in before now as it is under warranty, but not perfect.
|
SAAB 9-5 estate 2.5 years 70k miles.
Power steering pump went, wheel bearings (FRONT) went, was sold with defective aricon as it had dumped its refrigerant.
--
RF - Da DAA. < changes in phone box > Its TOURVAN man
|
Another 1 vehicle sample approaching 100k miles in just under 4 years on a 9-3 2.2 turbo diesel not had any problems.
Always find these sort of what's more reliable questions hard, seems to me you hear good stories and bad from owners of most makes.
|
|
Exactly - and in my opinion that's largely due to the fact that the dealerships seem to vary so much in the quality of service they provide.
|
|
|
My 1 car sample wasn't meant to imply a terrible unreliable car. The aircon could have been holed by a stone, power steering pumps probably have a right to get fragile after 70k miles, - After 70k hard miles it still polished up a treat and the inside looked like brand new. It was a candidate for a haircut!
It was just as you say a 1 car potted history.
----------------------------------------
TourVanMan < yes its RF reborn >
|
|
|
|
Both had its good and bad models. To name but few issues - French engines in Volvos weren't too reliable compared to Volvo's own units. On the other hand Saab's 2.2 TID engines commerdriver likes so much are known to kill their air flow mass meter and make the driving experience painfully slugish and expensive to repair.
|
|
|
|
|
I've heard of one Volvo failure, head Gasket went on a mate's 850, albeit after 160,000 miles.
As for SAAB's, I've heard but can't verify lots of horror stories about 900 (Cavalier based) and old 9-3, and i was looking at a 9-5 myself, but was put off by the things that apparently go wrong. A common one is the SID (SAAB Information Display) failing.
Shame, the old "proper" 900 seemed to last forever, still see quite a few around. Same is true of the older Volvo's.
|
TEST
----------------------------------------
TourVanMan < yes its RF reborn >
|
|
|
|
Horses for courses. My 9-5 hs covered 150,000 in six years & has been totally reliable, likewise the 9000. Th eproblem is that you only hear the horror stories. Like most cars these days, some of the problems are "dealer only" jobs. For what its worth, my 9-5 still has the original exhaust, turbo, water pump etc. The key is good and regular maintenance, and frequent oil/filter changes using good quality parts (Mobil 1 and Saab oil filter).
As to the SID mentioned by one of the other backroomers, yes they are a problem in the earlier cas - but as they can be fixed at home for free, it's hardly a big deal although admittedly annoying.
|
To add my sample of 1.
I've got a 1999 Saab 9-3 2.2 TiD, bought with 75k miles on it. I know some owners have had problems with them, but I've done 35k miles in 18 months and mine has been 100% reliable. A few niggles, but its not let me down yet.
The engine is pretty agricultural ( I think they forgot to put the balancer shafts in mine) but the newer ones are supposed to be much better. Ive got a tuning box fitted which got rid of the turbo lag and makes it a lot more fun to drive.
|
|
Having ordered a new one for 1st Feb delivery the new 9-3 is much better. I will be disappointed to lose the current 2.2 TiD hatch, still thing it's a great car in many ways.
|
|
|
|
