I have two babies now, and since I don’t like SUVs or minivans a wagon is probably in my future. Volvo has for decades been the top European seller of wagons in this country. But I never liked the previous V70. The styling was poorly proportioned and boxy, and reviews in the auto press suggested the chassis was fairly crude. Then for 2001 Volvo totally redesigned the car, placing it on the much more sophisticated platform of the S80 luxury sedan. I certainly prefer the styling of the new car. Though still clearly a Volvo, with fairly vertical surfaces and substantial pillars connoting solidity, the edges that once marked transitions between panels have been worn smooth and the car shares the subtle shoulders of the S80. With all of this in mind, I visited my local Volvo dealer.

Volvo V70 Reliability

People often email me asking about the reliability of the cars and trucks they are considering. Existing sources of reliability information just aren't helpful enough.

In response, my website, truedelta.com, will more clearly identify what difference it will make if you buy a V70 rather than something else by providing "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats (among others). Those who help provide the data--which will require just a few minutes a year--will earn free access to the site's reliability information. To encourage participation, this access will otherwise cost $24.95.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.

Accommodations

In the showroom I sat in both the smaller V40 and the V70. I quickly ruled the V40 out for two reasons. First, I wouldn’t pay over $20k for a four-cylinder car. Second, the dash on the V40 is quite tall and bulky-looking. I strongly dislike the view forward from its driving seat. Finally, there’s a lot of Mitsubishi under there somewhere.

So, if you want a Volvo, I’d suggest finding the extra cash (or credit) for the V70. In the showroom the V70 comes across as a very nice car. I open the door and take my seat behind the wheel. Much nicer than the V40, with expansive views in all directions. Though the interior styling remains very Volvo, composed mostly of edges and flat surfaces, it looks a bit more upscale than past Volvo interiors. It doesn’t look especially German, American, or Japanese. I guess this is Scandinavian design, in a car. Not my dream interior, but everything looks and feels solidly constructed. Most of the controls are very easy to figure out and use (it did take me a minute to figure out the climate controls), and they have a high quality feel to them. The gauges are conventionally styled and easy to read. This used to be a given, but with more and more cars coming with overly stylized, hard-to-read instruments it could become a deciding factor in the future.

There is plenty of room for four people front and rear. Front seats in the Swedish tradition are mounted high, large, moderately firm, and nicely supportive. I suspect they’d be quite comfortable on long drives. The rear seats could be a little higher for proper thigh support (for an adult male), but for wagon seats that fold flat they are very well contoured. (Often in a wagon the seat cushions are virtually flat.) The rear seat in the XC has an interesting feature: it folds down in three sections instead of just two. The leather that covers these seats doesn’t look or feel especially luxurious, but this could make it more durable in the long term. It would certainly make spills easier to clean up. A third, rear-facing seat in the cargo area is an option (from the factory or the dealer). It’s meant just for kids, but a pair of adults could probably squeeze back there in a pinch.

The cargo area is large and very nicely designed. The vertical sides and tailgate combined with the design of the rear suspension permit the cargo area to be very regular in shape, with only minor intrusions. There is a lot more room here than in an Audi A6 or BMW 5-Series, the closest competition to this car. If you don’t get the third seat (available in the Audi but not in the BMW), you get a usable amount of under-floor storage.

Volvo is known for safety. This car has plenty of safety equipment, and was undoubtedly designed with safety in mind. It should score well in crash tests and compile a good safety record in the real world. All good. But then the same could be said about a Ford Taurus wagon, with the exception (for now) of curtain airbags. And any BMW or Mercedes is certainly engineered to similarly high safety standards.

On the road

I actually drove two V70s. Both, like all V70s, had a five-cylinder engine. One was the base car, with 168 HP. The second was the 2.4T, which adds low-pressure turbocharger to the base engine. This is good for another 29 horsepower and, more importantly, another 40 lb-ft of torque peaking at a low, low 2000 RPM. The dealer did not have the 247 horsepower T5 in stock, so I did not test that model. The all-wheel-drive XC uses the low-pressure turbocharged engine. I did not drive that model, and personally dislike what they’ve done to make it look like an SUV (though the unpainted bumpers don’t look too bad with the darker colors), but due to its greater weight would expect it to be considerably slower than the 2.4T.

So which should you get? Well, if you want a manual transmission, which I personally would, then the 2.4T is out. Only the base model and the T5 are available with manuals. But the dealer had no manuals in stock, so I drove two automatics. As I was to find out, an automatic probably makes more sense in this car anyway.

If you tend to drive conservatively then the base car might do well enough. Though the 168-horse engine is far from powerful in a 3400 lbs. car, it moved the car adequately. I never thought it felt weak. Perhaps this was because the five-cylinder, with a distinct note closer in tone to a four than a six, never sounded strained even though it was fairly loud. Call it the sound of a good, solid, well-engineered effort. It reminded me of the sound made by the engines in older German sedans, a very mechanical sound, the sort that encourages aggressive driving. On the other hand, this engine never produced the refined sounds I expect from a luxury car’s engine. It needs another cylinder for that.

The turbocharged engine’s extra power was easily felt. It still didn’t shove me back in the seat (that’s the role of the T5), but it moved the car effortlessly and with considerably less commotion than the base engine. Worth the extra two grand? For many people I suspect so, especially since the 2.4T’s higher price also includes larger, alloy wheels and an assortment of extra lights and minor features. For buyers who want a Volvo wagon for the least amount of money, and don’t care for the additional stuff available on the 2.4T, I can see how the base car would make sense.

I had more issues with the chassis than with the engine. The turbocharged engines can promise all they want, this chassis simply won’t deliver. The 2.4T supposedly includes the same “touring-ride” suspension standard on the T5. This suspension is not available on the base car. I couldn’t tell any difference in handling between the two. Both became a bit ungainly in aggressive driving. Body motions were not controlled as well as I’ve come to expect from a European luxury car. When pushed the chassis produced considerable understeer—it plowed towards the curb. Overboosted steering didn’t help. Neither did a small amount of torque steer. Ford is currently planning to base its future mid-sized cars on the Volvo chassis. I’m having a hard time seeing why.

Sure, none of this is an issue when the car is driven in a relaxed manner. But I want a wagon that is fun to drive, and this isn’t it. Overall, this feels like a large car. Actually, it feels like a wagon. Should I have expected otherwise? Well, I’ve driven a 540i wagon, and it handled much better. Yes, the BMW is much more expensive. But if I were spending nearly $40k on a wagon, I’d either settle for the smaller capacity of the BMW 3-Series or find the extra cash for the 5. Maybe I would have liked the T5 better? I’m sure the extra power is nice, but as far as I can tell the steering and suspension are the same, and thus unlikely to make me happy.

And that’s before even taking the brakes into account. They’re awful. Response is far from linear, and feedback is virtually absent. At first there is only mush, then they suddenly bite, and bite hard. It’s a shame, because these are powerful brakes. If only they were easier and more satisfying to use.

Ride is a better story. On most surfaces it was sufficiently smooth for a near-luxury car. The ride became jittery at times, but this is common with lower profile tires and especially with wagons, the suspensions of which have to be tuned for a wide variation in loads. For a wagon the V70 is quiet. Most noise at highway speeds is wind noise.

Last words

Do not get me wrong. As a wagon this is an excellent car. It just falls down a bit in its other roles. As a luxury car it’s not quite up to the German competition. But then it is a bit cheaper than they are. Most luxury car buyers on a budget will be very happy here. But as a sports wagon in the BMW mold the V70 just doesn’t cut it. If you want a wagon that’s fun to drive, and “fun to drive” means more than powerful acceleration to you, then you’ll be happier elsewhere.