Last post on Jul 01, 2011 at 7:51 AM
You are in the Volvo S40
What is this discussion about?
Volvo S40, Sedan
Jan 28, 2001 (10:17 pm)
I am planning to buy a second car. I test drove a 2001 Volvo S40 and liked it. I thought it was a bit smoother than the Accord which I have( no doubt that the Accord is an excellent car). I am a bit confused as to which car I should buy. I have 3 options, The Volvo S40/Volkswagen Jetta 1.8T/ 2001 Toyota RAV4.
Can anyone suggest me as to which of this three would be a best buy?
Thanks in advance
#406 of 1807 response to Jetta/S40/Rav
Jan 28, 2001 (10:38 pm)
I was faced with the Jetta or S40, If you must have AWD then the Rav, I put Spider Spikes on my S40 for the winter, the Jetta is a VW product, I had the same 1.8T engine in my 97 Audi the motor is good, but I didn't want another VW product, We drove a couple Jetta's and S40's--after that I easily made the call.
#407 of 1807 Response to Jetta/S40/Rav4
Jan 29, 2001 (3:21 pm)
Thanks for the response from Jim. I had almost decided on S40, but had a second thought because of its price which is higher than the Jetta or the Rav4. I wanted to reconfirm on the reliability of the S40. I read the reviews about Rav4 and felt that the mileage was not as per the sticker. Hence having a second thought of even considering it. I would be left out to choose between the S40 or the Jetta.
#408 of 1807 S40 - nice car - but there are troubles . . .
Feb 04, 2001 (8:11 pm)
My wife and I bought a 2000 Volvo S40 last February. It now has 20,000 miles and has proved to be a fun well performing car.
We have had more than our share of troubles I would say.
All cherrfully fixed by our dealer in Ohio. But you have to take the time to bring the car in . . . . .
- The most severe was a power brake malfunction. Pretty odd for a brand that prides itself on safety. Powerbrakes would not work for the first 10 minutes of operation of the car.
- the radio / cd has at times refused to play or fades all the way out. It seems the volume knob stopped working. Took it to the dealer and they could not find the problem.
- several problems solved by new / updated computer codes - check engine light, etc.
- air conditioner thermostat giving out
- door seal coming unglued from the metal
- cupholder in the rear not working right
Of course I am interested in any solutions owners and dealers have run across for these problems.
I also wonder if the 2001 models are any less troublesome? The S60 and V40 have sort of caught my eye as replacements for my 1992 Prelude. But if this experience is typical of Volvos I am not sure that the cars are worth the trouble.
Hondas may be bland -- but at least they are less troublesome for the same or less money.
#410 of 1807 Deciding on S40, but heard of some problems
Feb 05, 2001 (9:49 pm)
I test drove a S40 today and is thinking about buying it. However, I've been reading some of the comments concerning problems with the 2000 S40. The few that stands out includes: headlights burning out consistently, bad gas mileage for a 4-cyl, engine light comes on, and bad service from the dealership.
I've always owned a Japanese car and is looking for something a little more solid and safer. That's why I was looking for a Volvo. In fact, I'm still debating either the S40 or a 2dr Accord V6.
Does anybody have any suggestions or comments on what I should do?
#411 of 1807 To melbourne1, RE: Headlights
Feb 06, 2001 (7:36 pm)
I, too, have had issues with the low beam head lamps burning out consistently on my 2000 S40. There is an upgraded' bulb the dealer has on-hand issued by Volvo that should correct the problem. I have had the lamps on my S40 changed at least 4 times, all within a 9 month period. If the head lamps burning out were my only problem I would be happy. The car is on its way to another dealer, as a trade-in, toward a truck this time. There is a myriad of problems I have had from the head lamps, to the drivers seat coming loose, to the front suspension loosening up while driving, to the check engine light, to the radio..... I have given up on the car- period! Too bad, my wife's 2000 S70 is a great car. No problems at all with almost 25K on the odometer. If only Volvo could learn from there previous models the S40 may not have been a bad vehicle.
Feb 08, 2001 (11:04 am)
Just wanted to present the opinion of a more satisfied customer.
I bought a 2000 s40 in 12/00: 9K miles (had been dealer loaner) w leather/sunroof pkg for $20.6K. Perhaps could have paid $20K if I was a hard core negotiator. But, I was happy to get the interest rate benefits - 8% from dealer, less than my bank would give on a used - of a new car and to avoid some of the usual new care charges - no destination, advertising, registration, etc.
I've only added about 1K miles but have not yet experienced any of the problems reported above.
First impressions: pleased -- though for mostly superficial reasons.
1) I like the styling if only because it's not a Jetta. LA is overrun with the Volkswagons, and they're attractive, but I enjoy the meager amount of individuality the s40 provides.
2) The driving experience is pretty good. I am a commuter rather than a sophisticated driver, but it has pep (it's easy to pass), handles on the sporty side of average, has excellent brakes, a good climate control system and the seats are comfy. Negatives here include a mediocre radio, poor blind spot visibility and limited rear seat leg room (but I'm short, so that'll help riders).
3) Safety is a priority for me. Without having to do extensive homework, the Volvo name suggests that reasonable care has been exercised in designing the car. It's small, but has front and side air bags (would have liked the head bags issued in '01) and I'm placing faith in Volvo that the cage and other structural elements are decent.
4) The 4yr/48K mile warrantee is better than VW, Accord and some other competitors.
All in all, I prefer the image to the Accords and VW's I was also considering. I recognize that it might be hard to justify its higher price, but those cars aren't cheap either when you add leather (which I love) and a sunroof (which I could care less about).
In terms of comparing it to low end Audi's and BMW's, I think its hard a strech to put it in the same class as those cars. On the other hand, it's cheaper and safety is probably equal.
#413 of 1807 Please tell me they're wrong...
Feb 08, 2001 (2:37 pm)
Long story made short... was torn between a 2000 S40 and a 2000 CR-V. I went for practical and bought the CR-V. I don't regret the purchase, but I am always thinking about trading in my wife's car, giving her the CR-V and buying an S40 or S60 for myself.
Here's my question, I read in the Cleveland Plain Dealer that the 2003 version of the S40 will share a platform with the Ford Focus. Has anyone else heard this nonsense? In my opinion, that would be a disaster for the S40.
#414 of 1807 Why a disaster?
Feb 08, 2001 (5:51 pm)
The Focus is a Euro-bred small sedan. It's handling has been widely praised. Why would the S40 sharing its platform be a bad thing? You are aware that the S40 currently shares its platform with some Mitsubishi, right? Anyway, the platforms are pretty similar in terms of their suspension, drivetrain, handling, etc., so I doubt you'd even have noticed if you hadn't heard something.
IMO, using the Focus and Mondeo platforms on lower-end Volvos and Jags is a great idea. These platforms have a great reputation, so it's a good way for Ford to save money without there being any detriment to the consumer. Just because they're using the base platform of a cheaper Ford doesn't mean that the luxury features normally found on these cars will disappear, and they may in fact improve since less of the cost of the car will go toward recovering platform development costs.