A very long time since my last posting, although I do read regularly. My present company car is a MkIV Golf Estate 1.9TDI 130, possibly one of the last before production ended in 2005/6. Decision time is rapidly coming up for my next car. We do not need an estate, at the time it was a cheap way to get a well speced Golf. Leasing costs have gone up significantly in the last few months and our monthly limit has not changed. I really cannot get excited by the MkV Estate although the Jetta or Passat are possible options. Another option is a Volvo S40. We like the look and feel of the car inside although we have not had a test drive yet. Now the cheapest option for me with a well specced S40 would be the SE or SE Lux model. I could choose between the 1.6DRIVe or the 1.8 petrol. Now, my daily commute is around 40 miles each way, mostly easy A roads. Around half of the A road journey is dual carriageway, in the single carriageway sections there really are no overtaking opportunities and my speed usually ranges between 50 to 70 mph. The last four miles or so are stop-start town driving at one end of the journey only. I appreciate that the performance of either option will be much less than the Golf, mut how much less in the real world? Does anyone know if the 1.6DRIVe is going to feel tediously slow in the mid range? Is it going to be gasping up steep hills? What about the 1.8 petrol? I guess performance will be resonable but what about real world fuel economy? Does anyone know from experience? Any personal experience appreciated.
Edited by Pugugly on 01/05/2009 at 11:01
|
Oh to have the luxury of once again having a company car!
You are lucky too - you get a choice!
Meeeeeow!!!
I am just envious of course...
In your boots? I'd go with the best spec of Volvo my allowance would permit as I feel it out performs and is more 'comfortable' seat wise than the other vehicles you have listed.
Edited by Tron on 30/04/2009 at 22:45
|
|
When I compared the S40 to the Jetta, I was quite shocked how much smaller the Volvo is.
|
|
I test drove a S40 a while back and was similarly surprised how small it was inside. For a car that is only a reskinned Focus, it is spectacularly poor value for money and a lot smaller inside as well.
|
No room in the pedal box of the S40 for my size 10s.
Focus quite a bit better in that respect.
I'm guessing, but the OP coulld probably get a top spec Focus for the same leasing money as much lower spec S40.
|
I'd pick a Focus over an S40 too. It's a no brainer.
|
Pity in a way, because I like the look of the S40 and, even as a Ford fan, am quite prepared to accept the Volvo has the better badge.
But you don't drive the badge, do you?
I just think the OP will be much better off in the depths of winter with a Focus with heated seats, heated screen, punchy 2.0 litre diesel engine and better, and therefore safer, handling than many a sports car.
Edited by ifithelps on 01/05/2009 at 10:04
|
S'pose I could live with either if they were being funded by someone else. Had an S40 on hire in Denmark a while back. It had a two point something petrol engine so it went well enough and a clever free standing dash/console thingy. Fairly ordinary to drive but nothing unpleasant about it. I'd have the Focus if it were me, but I do have a soft spot for Fords.
Comparing apples and oranges I know but I went to look at a V70 when I was looking for another estate. It was also OK but failed to light enough synapses to make me want one. Still, I'd not turn down a free one of those either.........
;-)
|
|
|
|
I'd pick a Focus over an S40 too. It's a no brainer.
I say this as a current Volvo owner (and fan) and a previous Ford owner (and fan also). I have no bias or preference between brands. The Focus is just more of much the same (excellent) car for your money.
|
|
|
|
|
Is a Seat Exeo an option?
Nice handle, by the way OP. I remember her well. :-)
|
>For a car that is only a reskinned Focus...
That old thing again! As someone else said, you don't drive the badge - but nor do you sit on or touch the engine, gearbox and suspension. My point is that a Volvo interior - even a small one - is a much nicer place to be than a Ford one, even if the mechanical bits are the same. Yes, you pay more for the privilege, but Espada's comment suggests you get nothing in return, which is plainly incorrect. You may judge that you don't get enough in return, but that's not the same thing at all.
|
Many thanks for the input so far. We have considered a Focus, but the leasing costs are dearer than for the S40 so on that basis alone it is not worth considering further. Seat are not on our list, my options include Ford, Vauxhall, VW or Volvo. Having had two completely trouble free VW's in the last eight years maybe I should think about another, but part of me just wants a change. Any views on the real-world performance of the S40 1.6D? Staying with VW another option would be a Passat Bluemotion. This is bigger than we really need but attractive in a VW sort of way. Spec is poorer though without me contributing cash.
|
Servelan was some kind of space age dominatrix wasn't she ?
Or maybe I dreamed that a long time ago...
;-)
|
|
|
The only way to check the performance of the 1.6D is to drive it. What's adequate for you might be intolerably slow to someone else here. Volvo dealers are pretty good about proper test drives - my S60 was my last company car, and Tollbar Volvo Coventry (bless 'em) lent me one for a 250-mile business trip to Hampshire and back. It sold me on the engine, the seats and the sound system; I even ordered mine in the same colour as the demo car.
That was nearly seven years ago, and I still have that car - although I run it myself nowadays.
|
lent me one for a 250-mile business trip.
That is a very smart way to sell an S60, and one which I suspect had regular success.
It's never a car you'd buy on reviews or typical road tester priorities, but the deeply impressive way it chews up the miles in total comfort, and the general feeling of wellbeing it gives you when driving it has caused two people I know to buy one after borrowing mine for far shorter journeys than that.
I still think it's one of the most underrated cars of the modern era, especially if you are after something that's just all round pleasant to own and live with rather than dynamically earth shattering. Unless you crave excitement in the lanes, I suspect most people would view this car more positively after a lengthy drive than before one.
Good sales tactic!
Cheers
DP
|
I once had a Volvo S40 as a rental car for a couple of weeks. It had the 2.4 5 cylinder petrol engine and was no ball of fire. I dread to think how slow a 1.6D would be. I also found it very cramped and the seats, previously a Volvo strength, were nothing special and appeared to be designed for people shorter than my 6'2".
If it's of interest, the estate version of the Golf 6 should be in the showrooms in September.
|
When they were introduced, the S40, V50 and (I think) C30 had the D5 and 2.4T engines only (and bizarrely) combined with the slushy Geartronic auto, which removes the crispness of the engine's response and sends fuel consumption and CO 2 emissions sky high. There are now manual versions too.
I've driven a 1.6 petrol S40 and found it perfectly acceptable - although I doubt it would be as relaxing as my car on a long, fast trip. I thought the seats were good by most standards - just not as top-drawer as those in the big Volvos - and I had no trouble fitting my size 12s round the pedals.
|
Thanks for the comments, I do appreciate that nothing beats actually driving the S40 and that is what we intend to do....It is just useful to get other peoples thoughts too.
Any knowledge on the other key option, a Passat Bluemotion? Nice to know I am not the only Blakes 7 fan here, although I must be getting old because not many others seem to have heard of it!
|
Blakes 7? I have a vague memory that there were only 5 of them, none of whom were called Blake....
Until very recently I had a Golf V estate 2.0 TDI - excellent in every way apart from noise: the new common-rail diesel engine is a lot quieter and this is available in the Mark VI Golf as well as the estate (still Mark V for the moment). It may be worth trying a VW of whatever size suits you with this engine.
I tried a Volvo V50 2.0 D, admittedly about 2 years ago: performance was no more than adequate and I'd have thought that a 1.6 or even a 1.8 petrol engine would struggle to pull along a solid Volvo with anything approaching verve.
Do let us know how you get on.
|
Blakes 7? I have a vague memory that there were only 5 of them, none of whom were >> called Blake....
Except the leader called Roj Blake. And there were seven of course ;-)
Back to motoring.... The Volvo looks a little small on the inside to me considering the underpinnings. You need to drive the 1.6D to see if performance is okay by your terms.
|
I tried a Volvo V50 2.0 D admittedly about 2 years ago: performance was no more than adequate a
My in-laws have one, and it's easily as quick as their 130 bhp mkIV Golf estate. Admittedly it has a completely different power delivery to the VW PD, but you'd never call it slow. Maybe the one you drove had something wrong with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If its any good to you, I hired out a 6month old Focus C-Max with the 1.6 TDCi unit (same as the DRIVe 1.6) and found it more than acceptable on the motorways. Lovely smooth power delivery, quiet, and very good on fuel despite only 11k on the clock.
|
|
I haven't driven a S40 with the 1.6d engine (though plenty with the 2.0d) but the 1.6d is surprisingly adequate in the 407/C5 (it is the same 110ps engine) as long as you don't expect it to set the road alight. A lot more economical than the 2.0 in the real world as well.
|
Thanks Smokescreen and PD, useful info. I will arrange a test drive shortly and let you all know the outcome......
|
No idea what the "DRIVE" model is all about, but I leased a new S40 1.6 Diesel for 3 months a couple of years back and it was diaboloical. Zero performance - really lacking in power. Regularly left standing by commercial vans etc. Supposedly had 110PS, but I could only locate about 30 of them!
Economy was impressive (60mpg no problem), but it was definately at the expense of performance.
Interior tiny. Especially the rear seat and the boot. Honestly, most convertibles have bigger boots than an S40. In fact, some cars have bigger ashtrays than an S40 boot.
Not that well build either - bits of trim creaking after just 3 months. Seats were uber-comfy, but reliability was a problem - failed to start several times due to mis-alignment of the geometry between where the starter motor engages with the flywheel causing it to just go Cchhhh every now and then when you turn the key. I found the solution - short term, push the car forwards and backwards with it in gear to move the flywheel a smidgen. Long term solution was to hand the keys back and walk away (very fast, and without looking back!).
My advice? Instead of the Volvo, go for the Passat Bluemotion. Or the Jetta. Or a focus. Or a bus.
|
My advice? Instead of the Volvo go for the Passat Bluemotion.
A colleague has one of these at the moment as a hire car while his Peugeot 407 1.6HDi is in for its usual monthly breakdown/warranty repair. It's a nice enough car, but if you're buying one with any aspiration of performance...lol
Rice puddings and skin spring to mind.
|
Okay, it has been quite a few weeks since the last posting. Time for an update I think. We did arrange a long test drive in a V50 from Doves near Slinfold who bent over backwards to be helpful. I told them before I arranged the test drive that the car would be leased so they were under no illusions that they would sell a car to me directly. The V50 we drove was a 1.6DRIVe. Okay, so it is no ball of fire but it was more than adequate for me. It did not quite have the outright push-in-your-back of my present Golf but the power delivery is much smoother and less peaky through the narrow rev range. Certainly four up the performance was fine. I suspect that in real world conditions there is not much in it between the two.
Very refined, quieter than my MkIV Estate with more comfortable seats and a nice slick gear change, well trimmed interior and it has all the toys I need and more.
We were impressed. I thought that we should go and have a look at a Passat Bluemotion as this was option two. The Passat is a bit bigger than we really need, we have tight parking spaces at the office and at home. The VW dealer that I have used for servicing my two VW's over the last eight years through the leasing company unfortunately lived up to the worst of VW dealer attitudes. By contrast they went out of their way to be unhelpful. I phoned up first. Yes we could see a Passat, no it is not in the showroom, it is out the back. No we cannot spend the time unlocking it for you, you will have to look at it as it is if you can get to it. Now I know that it is a company car so they have no hope of selling to me directly, but their attitude, bearing in mind they have had 8 years of servicing from my last two cars, was rather disappointing. Maybe they just wanted rid of me? Anyway, the decision was made. Volvo V50 is on order, expected late October. There is the added bonus that the Volvo is cheaper to lease and my BIK will reduce due to the low CO2.
|
Someone will be along in a minute to say "But it's only a rebadged Focus," but I think you've concisely described why Volvo does better than most at winning and making loyal customers. You tried the car, you appreciated the nice details, you liked the helpful dealer. Simple, really, but amazingly hard to find.
Thanks for letting us know.
|
|
|
There is a good thread here on the 1.6 DRIVe engine, and possible tuning.
www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/general-discussion/66651-d...l
|
Volvo dealers are good. We bought our S60 D5 (agreed with DP & Will- a highly under-rated machine) from Lipscomb in Maidstone, and they couldn't have been more helpful and accommodating. High contrast to SEAT, where the salesman would not get up from his desk to talk to us, despite the fact that we were chatting in loud voices about what deal we might go for. Hyundai were also good, Kia not bad, but not willing to deal.
I know an S40 is rooted in the focus, but it's a different ownership experience. I can't quite describe it, but Volvos feel Swedish; solid, reliable and capable. At least I think so. My next car will be a Volvo, too, but not for some time (too happy with the S60).
Cheers,
Alex.
|
Is this another example of "the car matters less than the dealer"? Or, perhap, "less distinguishes models than distinguishes dealers"?
Of the three dealers I have been familiar with recently, Ford, Toyota and Volvo, only the Ford was interested once I'd given an indication I was interested in a good deal. Toyota and Volvo were very much "take it or leave it" - although when I found a better deal at another branch of the Toyota dealership, amazingly they were able to get me that car, which I'm happy with two years down the line.
Beats me why car dealers can't see that ordinary courtesy and interest will get them customers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
