Volvo vs. VW reliability?

I know I am in for some biased but am hoping for some fair opinions.

This questions is directed to Volvo owners that have owned or still own a VW as well.

In your experience - which of the two vehicles has been most reliable?

That encompasses frequency of oil changes and taking it to the garage for irregular maintenance.

Strengths and weaknesses between the two?

I am looking into older VWs or Volvos - early to mid 90s. If anyone has any experiences to share - I would love to hear them.

Thanks,

Tmuld.

Reply to
tmuldoon
Loading thread data ...

I have a 2001 XC70 with 50k miles and a 2001 Golf with 55k miles.

The Golf is the 5th VW I have owned and the last, The Volvo is the first I have ever owned and will be the first of many....nuff said!

Never had any non-routine maint. on the Volvo, 2 window lifts, 3 remotes, and now the rear latch is not working on the VW. Ithink they knew what they were doing when they only offered a 2 YEAR WARRANTY from new.

David

Reply to
David Poles

Had both and will never own another VW. Jetta was the only car I ever owned where people would come up to you and hand you parts of your car that had fallen off it. I prefer my BMW for handling but the Volvo for dependability.

Reply to
Michael

Never had a VW, had a honda, have lexus, volvo and toyota. I promised myself this volvo is the last one I'll have. It is always in the shop and the repairs are expensive.

Reply to
nobody

It is hard to use anecdotes of one or two models and years of a make to summarize the entire make. All makes have some winner and some loosers.

A well known comsumer magazine gives the following advice:

Avoid the following used Volkswagens: Cabrio '99, ?01-02 EuroVan '03; Golf ?97-03; bad in general Jetta ?97-03; bad in general New Beetle ?98-04; bad in general Passat (4-cyl.) ?98-99, ?01-02; Passat (V6) '97, ?99-01, '04; Passat (AWD) ?00-01, '04; Passat W8 '03; Touareg ?04

Avoid the following used Volvos: 960 '97; V70/Cross Country '98, '01; Cross Country ?99-00; V70 '02; XC70 '03; S60 (AWD) '04; S80 ?99-03; bad in general S90/V90 ?97-98; XC90 ?03-04

Between VWs and Volvos, the only model they highly recommended was:

Volvo S70 '99 to '00 (no VW's)

These recommendations are based upon statistics and owner surveys. The high reliability of modern automobiles has raised the bar to a relatively high level. Not only is a trouble free experience the norm, it is to be expected may the majority of the owners on better cars. If you have had a good experience, that doesn't mean that other owners have had the same experience.

I have a '01 V70 XC which is on the dog list and have had no problems. However, that doesn't reflect the experience of all owners.

Reply to
Stephen Henning

Volvo if you want to have a big item fail due to age every so often, but otherwise provide a far safer and more solid car... Oil changes are the same KMs as on VW's, for about the same money, routine service isn't too different... Tho Volvo dealers are more pleasant to deal with.

Volkswagen if you can put up with little niggling BS problems that won't cost and arm and a leg, but if you don't fix yourself you will be at the dealer... and of course the occasional big problem.... Sometimes VW parts are actually more money then Volvo stuff

In general i'd say Volvo tho.... Especially if you bought from new, and a used Volvo is a better deal, value wise then an old VW.

We (my family including me, my father, my mother) have a 93 Volvo 960 (solid car, only old-age related parts.... best car we've owned), a 99.5 Golf TDI (all the maintenance like brakes, shocks, tires, timing belt, etc etc etc all seems to be designed to happen in a 1-2 year span so get a car where it's all been done), a 2003 Golf CL (2.0L engine base model - stupid warranty issues so far... annoying things, nothing has broke tho)

Have had a 1991 Golf CL (many bullshit problems assosiated to it having only driven 65K Kms in 12 years - exhausts, batteries, then later on electrical system problems, water leaks, and oil leaks), 1985 Golf GL (piece of crap - built in the USA in Westmoreland PA apparantly by 1991 the car had no exhaust system, clutch was going, despite no abuse, brakes were shot, interior was falling apart... got similar use to our 91') 70's Audi Fox (POS!!! It was based on the old Passat platform I'm told)

1989 740 GLE 16V muffler fell off after 2 years, no problems other then that 1985 740 GLE antenna aerial mast failed, no other problems 1976 244 GL (maybe a DL) oil leaks, windsheil leaks, rust 1974 144 no problems 1972 144 no problems, car sold for more then what my dad paid 1969 VW Beetle no problems, sold for more then what my dad paid
Reply to
Rob Guenther

I've had limited experience ( but good) with Volvos, except for an 81 GLT. Currently a '94 850, which is as reliable as anything I've ever had, though I've only had it a year.

Now for VWs, I've had an '82 Jetta, 88 Jetta, '91 Jetta, 92 Passat( from hell) and currently a '95 Passat. Overall, I like the VWs and have had good service from them...BUT there does seem to be a bunch of little stuff that always needs to be done. If you are a D-I-Y person, it's no big deal, but if you send the car to the shop for everything, don't get one. Also, ( like my '92) some VWs are just plain horrible lemons, and are always going to be a problem. VW service can be a problem as well. Like the cars, if you have good dealer service, you're OK If your local service department is not good, the are awful. Nothing in between, from what I gather.

Now, all that aside ( sorry everyone) I enjoy driving my Passat much more than the 850...better power, better handling, better ergonomics. Offsetting that, the 850 is so easy to work on, and that damned Passat is a pain to even change oil in.

So it's your call >I know I am in for some biased but am hoping for some fair opinions. >

Ron/Champ 6

1963 8E5 Champ (Champ 6) 1962 Lark Daytona Convertible (Boomerang) 1995 VW Passat (Vanilla..yuk) 1994 Volvo 850 (Tilley) 1973 Volvo 1800 ES (An Clar)
Reply to
Ron

Currently own 96 Golf (bought new) and 87 Volvo 740 (bought used in 1998 as "tank" for new male driver). Both have been very good although both are fairly lightly used. Virtually the only Golf problem has been glued on side moulding falling off. Except for about $1000 in initial fixup (seals, U-joint, etc.) Volvo has had only minor nuisance repairs, in particular electrical components which don't seem well protected from rust and wear.

However I just bought a new car and despite my wife's love of her Golf, reports of diminished VW quality especially at low end pushed us towards a Mazda. A new Volvo is too expensive for me.

Reply to
Raymond Cruz

My experience is mid 80's, but for the first 150k or so they're about the same, maybe even a slight edge to the VW, but as they get older and higher mileage the Volvos just keep going and the VW's tend to start to fall apart and/or rust. Volvo is certainly a lot safer and more comfortable as well.

Reply to
James Sweet

i'm in america, so if you are not your model designations may be different. but if your looking at early '90s volvos as you stated in your post, you can't go wrong with a well maintained petrol powered 240 series or 740 series. if you look at any vw model from that time with similar mileage (most likely high) and all other things being equal(maintnence, repairs, etc) the volvo will most definitly go much longer and without nearly as many problems as the vw. which most likely would drive you insane with repairs. again though, here in america we don't know from deisel. deisel is a bad word over hear for some reason. so this bit of advice is for gasoline powered cars only. in america old volvos are considered the toughest, longest running cars on the road. and they have earned that reputation well. particulary cars with engines in the B23F family.

Reply to
jd

Thanks for all the advice.

I am in Canada. Cold (-40 C)and salt on the roads is a consideration. Ton of snow. In the summer it gets warm - last summer it got up to

+35C some days.

Long drives happen regularly 4-10 hours in a year - road trips! And of course daily driving in the city - stop and go.

Tmuld.

Reply to
Tavish Muldoon

Definately Volvo then!! Our 960 has been in Ontario for all it's life (1993 car) and not a spec of rust... my 99.5 Golf is already starting on the fender!!! 12 year rust warranty apparantly doesnt cover surface corrosion either.

You don't want a long trip in an older VW... the wind noise and the engine note, not to mention the the inferior (to Volvo, the VW seats aren't bad) seats and room.

Reply to
Rob Guenther

Perhaps because it's spelled "diesel" over "here".

Gary

Reply to
Gary Heston

thanks for the spelling bee. and who are you quoting, exactly? oh no! look ma, no caps in my post. the shame of it all!

Reply to
jd

Reliability for any particular used car will be highly dependent on the previous owner's care and maintenance of _that_particular_car_.

If you are not a do-it-yourselfer, you may want to consider the quality of local repair shops (dealer or otherwise) for each kind of car.

Reply to
Timothy J. Lee

Reply to
John Robertson

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.