A bit of advice please?
I am considering changing my car in the summer with a budget of about £9-10k. I am currently looking at the volvo s60 d5, honda accord pet/dis, and audi a4 tdi. I suppose i should be looking at 2002/3 examples here. I have spotted many good examples (low miles, FSH) of the volvo but i have a worry about apparent injectors failing on them costing £1500 or so? Has this problem been rectified with newer models?
thanks
|
Volvo S60 injector problems are confined to pre 2003 vehicles according to HJ's CBCB so you'll have to get a 2004.
Your budget might stretch to a very high mileage 2004 but they're fairly rare.
|
|
|
A great car, I've just replaced mine after three years with an XC70 D5 as I need to tow off-road.
I would be also check the suspension and steering. Mine felt a bit tired at the end of 3 years 60k. I believe new models have injector problem resolved. I've also heard Volvo pay towards the repair if it is just outside warranty.
|
You and i have a very similar short list and if i could get the three combined i would be a happy man!
The SE spec V60 is much nicer, leather, better stereo. The seats are the best i can find in any of the cars i have looked at.
I find the S60 disappointing to drive, it feels a big lump, ride stodgy and notorious for a poor turning circle. Parking not easy!
But it feels very solid and refined so great cruising.
Prices are very good for the petrol, half price after a year. Lots at Volvo for 14k. beyond your price i know but if you do not have too have diesel look at the 2.0T.
At this price you may get a high miler Accord(latest model).
I am an Accord fan but they are pricey, seats a bit hollow feeling, not that refined but very good to drive. Super reliable, not many about used. Avoid big wheels that tramline.
A4 very refined, very expensive second hand but huge range of engines. I loved the multitronic 1.8Turbo. footwell cramped for my taste and interior good but not sure why the press rave about it so much i think the S60 is much better.
I do not know what i would choose, as i have to have auto for a back problem that narrows the range for me. I keep going back and forth over the above 3. Any input from the rest of the readers??
|
|
I hired own on a quick trip away recently ,black with leather ,satnav ,tv, electric everthing looked super but what a disappointment to drive a big lump of nothing.Maybe thats what Vovos should be but its not my cup of tea.
|
|
|
I intially set out to buy a S60 D5 but switched and bought a 2.0T SE auto from a main dealer because it was nearly £5k cheaper than the D5. Have had Audis for years and the Volvo is a different as chalk and cheese. It meets my requirements perfectly and is used a couple of times a fortnight for my long commute when my wife won't get out of my A4 Cabrio. The A4 is a lease from my office so try and put the miles on that rather than the Volvo but have been using the Volvo more recently because it is so relaxing. Great seats, amazing hifi and I love the noise of the 5 cylinder engine. Some of the interior plasics aren't up to Audi standards but I'm splitting hairs. Would buy another tomorrow !
I had a A4 B6 Tdi a couple of years ago and miss the economy but the miles were piling on and the servicing was getting expensive coupled with the warrenty expiry. Never found it very comfortable as you say cramped footwell and it wasn't that reliable.
Before I bought the Volvo I drove an Accord Type S (??). It was the 190bhp sports model and I quite liked it but ruled out because is was so noisy on the motorway.
Quick look on Volvos website and they have '54 plate 2.0T SE Autos at £12990 (£1k more for '05) with around 8k -> 12k on. About what I paid for my 04 plate last year and they are probably fresh off the rental fleet - but what a price !! Since the Omega is now extinct I've noticed a lot of S60s appearing on rental fleets.
MPG wise I easily get 32-34 on the motorway at a smidge over the limit. In central London about 22-25.
|
|
I'd echo the above. Are you sure you need diesel? The 2.0T petrol engine is a gem and you'll get a newer/higher specc'ed car for your budget. My '03 S60 2.0TS will barely fetch £8000 as a trade-in I fear, but it's barely run-in at 40k miles and must be a better bargain than a leggy 70k D5?!
|
Thanks for input, you are adding points to my S60 list!
Audikid, thats a very useful review,auto mpg figures were a concern and that sounds acceptable . How about servicing costs on a Volvo? Cambelt is 5 yrs 100k i think, is that correct? Seems a lot of miles but never heard of a failure.
How reliable is the turbo?
I intend keeping the car as long as possible(ie until it is not economical to repair or my needs change due to unfoeseen circumstances)
|
Mine's in for a 24k service next week at a cost of £240 all in - think costs are on a par with other makes. Yep 100k for a cambelt and I don't think turbos give trouble - its quite low pressure.
I change cars a lot and actually think I'll keep this one until it gives trouble. Have a look in HJ's Car by Car breakdown (if you haven't already!) and there doesn't appear much to worry about.
|
|
The one thing that is impresive is the dashboard at night it looks like the starship enterprise.
|
|
|
Thanks for figures Audikid. The S60 seems very reliable and i cannot find much negative comment about that aspect at all. I think it was Which?'s "used family car best buy" a couple of years back.
Georgem let us know how you get on with your search , there are lots of S60s about on the Volvo web search. Prices seem cheaper "up North"
|
|
thank you for this information, i think i may hold for a few months to see if ican get a late 2003 or 2004 model to avoid those injector problems. I am still not convinced on the petrol model and will be seeking the d5. Oh yes thanks Rodger for the tip about s60 being slighly cheaper up north, i will keep an eye out! Its still neck and neck between the Honda accord and the VOlVO???
|
Back to your original price I assume you are happy with the Accord in petrol as their diesel is only a couple of years old.
And as such too pricey? Even the latest model petrol is quite pricey as they do not seem to have sold many. Believe they kept production down and did not go for fleet sales.
Do you prefer diesel for economy or the drive? I found the D5 very powerful but more noisy and more of a lump to drive. The salesman did the trick of showing me the consumption computer reading 48mpg when i was at a steady 50. So it looks impressive.
As the D5 is generally in demand it fetches a premium of £1500 ish or even more at some Volvo dealers. You need to save a lot of petrol to cover that initial purchase. Suggest you do the sums to see how you stand.
|
need to save a lot of petrol to cover that initial purchase. Suggest you do the sums to see how you stand.
Indeed.
The D5 is a cracking engine, especially when married to the superbly smooth auto 'box; my brother has owned such a V70 for three years and it has proven the perfect choice for the high mileage he drives. Essentially for reasons of economics though when I ordered my V70 in December 2002 for March 2003 delivery I went for the 2.4T; it was going to take a huge amount of driving that I simply don't do to recoup the purchase cost difference. Although the D5 is very refined, with the 2.4T I gained an engine that is even more so and which despite 20bhp and a hill of torque more has a drinking habit no different in the real world to the smaller 2.0T. Now tuned to 258bhp and 444NM torque it actually runs more efficiently and drinks a little less than in standard form too. So, horses for courses; my high mileage brother made the right choice with D5, but likewise 10k miles per annum me did too with 2.4T.
For the record, my brother's late 2002 D5 developed the common early model injector fault some weeks ago. By timing chance though the car has been traded for an XC90 at a Volvo dealer of course well aware of the issue. What engine and gearbox combo has he gone for? D5 auto of course, though now the 185BHP / 400NM variant.
Oh yes; the Volvo dealer prepared to do the best deal on the XC90 was "oop norf".
|
Thanks Roger, point taken. I have seen 2003 D5's for about 9.5k(low to average miles to FSH-not main dealer). As for the Accord, plenety of 2003 2.0 petrol around the 10k mark. I like the idea of owning the s60 as i think it is a proper exec car with gravitas and am also pleased about general reliability. The Accord is appealing because its a newer and perhaps a more refined car and of course its bullet proof reliability record. Oh yes, i think the 2.0 petrol is also fairly economical is'nt it?
I am likely to do about 12k a year. What do you think? i suppose if the Honda diesel was cheaper it would sway me!
|
If you get 35 mpg on petrol
12000 miles costs (at £4.05per gal(90p a ltr x4.5l))
12000 / 35 = 342 x £4.05 = £1338
If you get 45mpg on deisel
12000 costs at £4.27 per gal (95p a ltr etc)
12000 / 45 = 266 X £4.27 = £1138
Pls check my sums(hope i have not made any silly mistakes)
So you only save £200 a year on fuel. If the diesel car is £1000
MORE expensive it will take 5 years to break even.
This is harder to judge for used cars as prices and condition varies so much.
Some new diesels seem to be up about £1500 more for an equivalent model.
other threads also take service costs into account but it then gets more complex. It seems diesel is not all it is cracked up to be from a fiscal view but then you get the driving experience which may be good or bad.
The 2.2ctdi honda is very good but still noisier than petrol i found.
Also no auto which rules it out for me.
The S60 is much classier inside and a very good used buy but I still like my old Accord after 113,000 miles and 8 years on my drive!! Choices choices, not sure what to do either, just wait and see how the old one goes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
