Then why would someone choose say a V70 wagon over a Taurus wagon? (aside from the available manual).
I know they're not the same platform but aren't most Volvo fanatics in love with "Swedish Engineering" etc.? I'm a pretty big Ford fan but I don't get how a company known solely as a pioneer in safety and design uses a fairly pedestrian Ford platform to underpin thier cars.
Tell me what I'm missing.
Let's not forget that the post-80's Tauruses of old were never really "modern" in any way. It was like a ten year old car when it was brand new. So to answer your question: improved safety, better engines (20V I5 turbo and non), available AWD, available manual, significantly better build quality, much nicer interiors and equipment, strong aftermarket, better fuel economy, better handling, much faster, available third row seating.
So, a lot of reasons. 
Also, keep in mind the newer Volvos are not loved as much as the true Swedish bricks of yore, since they are not "true Volvos" and had a lot of Ford meddling. You won't find many enthusiasts rushing to defend any Volvo made past the mid-90's, though they are good cars. I really want a V70R myself.
I don't think if you ever sat in a V70 front seat you would be asking this question.
SlickDizzy covered it. Because it's a vastly different and mostly superior car (for pretty much the same money, in many cases).
Also, i know SHOs exist and all that but they have nothing on this:
Or this:
ebonyandivory wrote: Tell me what I'm missing.
You've got it backwards. Volvo designed the P2 platform themselves, before being bought by Ford. Ford copied it and cheapened it down for their own D3 use.
See? And THIS is what makes this place great! My wife teased me that it seems every week I have a new car obsession. That's not (entirely) accurate. I'm a sponge mostly because I'm late to the "car" scene as I've been a rock crawling 4x4 guy my entire adult life.
Edit: I got two very opposite replies regarding whos platform it was and who designed it. Can this be cleared up?
Thanks guys and keep it coming!
Ford bought Volvo in 1999
The P2 platform was introduced with the 1999 S80 and was designed by Volvo before the Ford acquisition.
Ford adopted it and simplified some things to become the D3 platform.
P2 cars (once they got straightened out) were every bit as good as the earlier cars. They all had traditions/problems (240 heater fans anyone?) We were always told that without Ford's money Volvo could have only produced the S80. There wasn't enough cash for the S60, XC90 or any other vehicle. Ford definately screwed up Volvo once the decision was made to sell them, but without Ford, the 2000's would have been tough for the Swede's
foxtrapper wrote:ebonyandivory wrote: Tell me what I'm missing.You've got it backwards. Volvo designed the P2 platform themselves, before being bought by Ford. Ford copied it and cheapened it down for their own D3 use.
That's what I was going to post, too.
No way that Volvo is a DN101 chassis. But the 500 and later Tuaruses started life as Volvos.
SlickDizzy wrote: I really want a V70R myself.
That is my current obsession despite lots of talk about getting a base car, throwing some suspension at it, and calling it done. Can't help myself, I guess. Just got off the phone with the local Volvo independent (who personally owns an S60R) in fact.
The biggest problem seems to be the coupler to the angle gear (which is a 90 degree transfer case). A lot of the "AWD" cars are actually FWD now because the coupler strips. If you ignore it, you ruin the input shaft to the angle gear. Beyond that, custom shocks ($400ea) and lots of rubber bits that require attention.
alfadriver wrote:foxtrapper wrote:That's what I was going to post, too. No way that Volvo is a DN101 chassis. But the 500 and later Tuaruses started life as Volvos.ebonyandivory wrote: Tell me what I'm missing.You've got it backwards. Volvo designed the P2 platform themselves, before being bought by Ford. Ford copied it and cheapened it down for their own D3 use.
You guys are all correct, I was wrong in my response as well. Erroneous info edited out.
I would probably be just as happy with a V70 T5 5-speed myself, but they seem to be even harder to find than the R-model!
ebonyandivory wrote: Then why would someone choose say a V70 wagon over a Taurus wagon? (aside from the available manual). I know they're not the same platform but aren't most Volvo fanatics in love with "Swedish Engineering" etc.? I'm a pretty big Ford fan but I don't get how a company known solely as a pioneer in safety and design uses a fairly pedestrian Ford platform to underpin thier cars. Tell me what I'm missing.
Five Hundred = S80. Different drivetrains but same chassis.
V70 is not related to anything Ford.
Knurled wrote: Five Hundred = S80. Different drivetrains but same chassis. V70 is not related to anything Ford.
S80 uses a GM transmission (auto), I never really thought about it until now. Kind of funny.
Instead of threadjacking, I will provide links to the sort of thing I was about to start asking
Any thoughts on P2 V70Rs
Learn me on Volvo V70R
Learn me 2006-07 Volvo V70R
Hopefully all our questions/answers are in there somewhere...
P2 cars (once they got straightened out) were every bit as good as the earlier cars. They all had traditions/problems (240 heater fans anyone?) We were always told that without Ford's money Volvo could have only produced the S80. There wasn't enough cash for the S60, XC90 or any other vehicle. Ford definately screwed up Volvo once the decision was made to sell them, but without Ford, the 2000's would have been tough for the Swede's
Interesting theory. It would be nice to think the s80 would have sold on its merits (and thus sold well) and financed further Volvos, but i honestly have no idea how they were priced back then. You can only sell so many mid-lux large sedans, i guess.
Im glad my mom's s80 has the gm 4t60 because it's a 'known known' and i would not have any trouble getting a good rebuild for a reasonable price on it. Also, in general it's a pretty good transmission!
In reply to Vigo:
Unless it's living attached to a B6284T
bigdaddylee82 wrote:Knurled wrote: Five Hundred = S80. Different drivetrains but same chassis. V70 is not related to anything Ford.S80 uses a GM transmission (auto), I never really thought about it until now. Kind of funny. - Lee
If I'm not mistaken, so does the Five Hundred. Six speed co-developed with GM.
But yes, it's kinda funny when Ford buys Volvo and Volvo sources a ton of parts from GM. Or when BMW's Mini used engines built by Chrysler which was a part of Mercedes at the time.
mfennell wrote:SlickDizzy wrote: I really want a V70R myself.The biggest problem seems to be the coupler to the angle gear (which is a 90 degree transfer case). A lot of the "AWD" cars are actually FWD now because the coupler strips. If you ignore it, you ruin the input shaft to the angle gear. Beyond that, custom shocks ($400ea) and lots of rubber bits that require attention.
+1
The V70 was based off of the 850.. that last "true" Volvo designed before ford bought them lock, stock, and barrel
In reply to mad_machine:
The original S/V70 yes, but the "second generation" V70 are P2 cars.
Unless it's living attached to a B6284T
It doesn't make any more torque than an SC 3800 GM and they do fine. The 4t60 is, in general, a strong and reliable transmission. Keep it cool and it will live a normal lifespan even behind 280lb ft.
In reply to Vigo:
Pretty sure the Super Charged 3.8L (L67 & L32) got the 4T65-HD. Wiki agrees, but Wiki isn't always the most reliable of sources.
Since I started this thread, I feel like I can hijack it a bit. I'm REALLY disliking the sharing of platforms. I get the Infinity/Nissan stuff for example, thats not what i mean. Its when you pay the money for a Volkswagen but get a prettied up Caravan (we love our Caravans btw) its annoying to me.
The Volvo/Ford is another. Saabaru, and on and on. I HATE IT! I don't make these judgements based on the quality of outcome either as I think the Saabaru is a nice ride.
ebonyandivory wrote: Since I started this thread, I feel like I can hijack it a bit. I'm REALLY disliking the sharing of platforms.
Sometimes it works well.. other times, it kills major car companies.. GM being the biggest offender of platform sharing. When you have the same car sold by Chevy, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, and possibly even Caddilac with the only differences being interior, bumpers, lights, and trim.. you have a problem.
As for the Basic platform sharing, I do not mind that. A good chassis is a good chassis.. it's the work you do to make it different from the other cars built on it (like the difference between Volvo and Ford cars) that makes it worth while
bigdaddylee82 wrote: In reply to Vigo: Pretty sure the Super Charged 3.8L (L67 & L32) got the 4T65-HD. Wiki agrees, but Wiki isn't always the most reliable of sources. - Lee
I think that was a mid-cycle change for the H-bodies, my 1996 Bonneville SSEi has the 4T60,(First year of the L67) I believe they went with the heavier duty 4T65 in the 1998 and later models with the L67. The 4T60 has been really robust so far, it's usually something other than the transmission that takes those H-bodies out.
You'll need to log in to post.
