G
GTIce
Would anyone recommend buying a second hand 850 wagon over the 940 ?
Are they reliable ?
cheers,
J
Are they reliable ?
cheers,
J
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
U
Unknown
same question here I'm currently driving a 91 940 turbo and love it......but
I'm in the market for either an 850 or v70 wagon......
not sure if I want to get rid of the 940 or not though....great car...
I'm in the market for either an 850 or v70 wagon......
not sure if I want to get rid of the 940 or not though....great car...
J
James Sweet
Unknown said:same question here I'm currently driving a 91 940 turbo and love it......but
I'm in the market for either an 850 or v70 wagon......
not sure if I want to get rid of the 940 or not though....great car...
The 850's are good cars, but most people agree that the 940's are better in
many respects. Personally I'd stick with the 940.
N
Nobody
"but most people agree that the 940's are better in
many respects"
That's quite a sweeping statement!!
many respects"
That's quite a sweeping statement!!
J
James Sweet
Nobody said:"but most people agree that the 940's are better in
many respects"
That's quite a sweeping statement!!
It's just my observation from reading the posts here, most people who have
or have had both seem to like the 940's better, I've never personally owned
either, just stating what I've noticed.
If the 850 was a T-5 I'd rather have it, but for non-turbo I'd definitly
take the 940, both are good cars though.
S
Sammy
The 940 will be easier and cheaper to service than 850.
940 is RWD while 850 is FWD. Like comparing apples to oranges.
Plus you didn't say if turbo on one or both?
Personally, I prefer RWD plus easier maintenance of 940. They are two
different cars. The choice is yours.
940 is RWD while 850 is FWD. Like comparing apples to oranges.
Plus you didn't say if turbo on one or both?
Personally, I prefer RWD plus easier maintenance of 940. They are two
different cars. The choice is yours.
M
Magnus
Buy the 940. Definitely!
G
Greg Cearley
Buy the 940. Definitely. My 1994 945TG (Turbo Wagon) has ~145,000 miles on
it and gives us no trouble. It starts every time, gets us where we want to
go, then back again. It gets regular tune-ups and changes for timing belt,
oil, coolant, transmission, and brakes. Garaged, it looks and drives like
the day I drove it off the lot 10 years ago. I do not hesitate in taking it
on long trips.
My only complaint is that I didn't buy the radio with the CD built-in, and
the new aftermarket units look ridiculous.
Three friend's 850's, while "more modern" and sporty has given them many
problems throughout approximately the same time period. Only one makes long
trips, the others are "not trusted".
As a result of our respective experiences I would buy another Volvo, they
would not.
YMMV
it and gives us no trouble. It starts every time, gets us where we want to
go, then back again. It gets regular tune-ups and changes for timing belt,
oil, coolant, transmission, and brakes. Garaged, it looks and drives like
the day I drove it off the lot 10 years ago. I do not hesitate in taking it
on long trips.
My only complaint is that I didn't buy the radio with the CD built-in, and
the new aftermarket units look ridiculous.
Three friend's 850's, while "more modern" and sporty has given them many
problems throughout approximately the same time period. Only one makes long
trips, the others are "not trusted".
As a result of our respective experiences I would buy another Volvo, they
would not.
YMMV
M
Mark Seeley
Nobody said:"but most people agree that the 940's are better in
many respects"
That's quite a sweeping statement!!
My dad's just moved from a 740 to an 850 - both excellent cars. The engine
in the 850 is definitely that little bit smoother, and more def more
economical than our 740 (B230E). If you go for an 850, allocate enough to
replace the ABS unit, just in case (they tend to go), otherwise the 2.5L 10V
engine seems to be yet another of Volvo's engine's that literally goes for
ever.
Limited experience with the 9 series - they're a bit bigger... but awesome
cars. Some 9 series engines are better - make sure it's one of the reliable
models. Not sure which are better, but others know the details.
Mark
V
v56k
Have an 850 20v 2.5 Wagon (1996) and love it - 90k miles and no problems asGTIce said:Would anyone recommend buying a second hand 850 wagon over the 940 ?
Are they reliable ?
cheers,
J
yet.
S
Stephen M. Henning
GTIce said:Would anyone recommend buying a second hand 850 wagon over the 940 ?
Are they reliable ?
The most reliable years are:
VOLVO 940 '94 & '95
VOLVO 850 '96 & '97
Drive both of them. I personally would never buy a used 940. Most
people that keep an 940 keep it because they like to work on it. I like
850s because I don't have to work on it. After test driving an 850 I
could never see going back. The 850 has antilock brakes, 4 air bags,
side impact protection, a strong history of engineering for durability,
low injury rates and low death rates, good gas mileage, good handling,
efficient use of space, good comfort, good accommodation to different
people, and a design which gives the driver a feeling of safety,
strength and confidence.
E
electricsheep
Not having experience with 940's but thought I would comment on the 850. My
folks bought their first volvo in '87 and loved their 745 turbo. Deciding that
it was time to get a newer car they went back to Volvo and bought a 850. My Dad
has hated the car since the first weekend he drove it. He is very uncomfortable
in the seats and hates the automatic. They have spent considerable time with
the 850 in the shop and have decided to never buy another Volvo. I am still
trying to convince them to give the Cross Country a chance but doubt he will
consider the option. That said he still keeps trying to buy their old 745 back
from me. No chance about that happening!
Chris V
folks bought their first volvo in '87 and loved their 745 turbo. Deciding that
it was time to get a newer car they went back to Volvo and bought a 850. My Dad
has hated the car since the first weekend he drove it. He is very uncomfortable
in the seats and hates the automatic. They have spent considerable time with
the 850 in the shop and have decided to never buy another Volvo. I am still
trying to convince them to give the Cross Country a chance but doubt he will
consider the option. That said he still keeps trying to buy their old 745 back
from me. No chance about that happening!
Chris V
J
Joseph Oberlander
940 wagon. It's basically a more modern version of the
700/800 series with a lot of the quirks and gremlins worked
out.
700/800 series with a lot of the quirks and gremlins worked
out.
J
Joseph Oberlander
Mark said:Limited experience with the 9 series - they're a bit bigger... but awesome
cars. Some 9 series engines are better - make sure it's one of the reliable
models. Not sure which are better, but others know the details.
Back in the early 90's when they had all three on the dealers' lots,
I sat in all of them. The 700 series was not in the same league as
the 800/900. The 800 was mostly the suspension and higher HP engines,
while the 900 series was a more luxuriuous 850 but made for the
same segment as the 700 series. Best of both worlds, IMO.
If you are getting one - go for a 1995-1997 960 or a 1998 V90(same car),
as the extra power is great, especially since there is no turbo boost
to deal with - you get linear power at city speeds, while the 850 tends
to behave like a non-turbo model until you press the accelerator down
more than about 1/2 the way, at which point it jumps to life. Really
a blast at that point, especially with a manual transmission.
Most people, thogh, would rather have a same power 6 and avoid the whole
turbo issue entirely. Not as much fun, mind you, but for getting around
town, as I suspect you are likely to want, given the "wagon" desire on
your part, the 960 is hard to beat.
J
James Sweet
Stephen M. Henning said:The most reliable years are:
VOLVO 940 '94 & '95
VOLVO 850 '96 & '97
Drive both of them. I personally would never buy a used 940. Most
people that keep an 940 keep it because they like to work on it. \
How do you figure? The 940 is at least as dependable as an 850 and a bit
cheaper to have worked on even if you don't do it yourself.
H
Henry
On alt.autos.volvo, someone wrote: (and I quote)
"They have spent considerable time with
the 850 in the shop and have decided to never buy another Volvo."
Well it just goes to show, you never know. The '96 year model was the best for the 850. Other earlier years gave many the blues.
<KNOCK ON WOOD><SUPERSTITIOUS ON>
MY '96 850 Turbo, with 123k miles on it, cradles me like a fetus in the womb of a mother. Of course, it has had every maintenance item done on time. The Space Shuttle Columbia was not any better serviced, yet there was the regrettable failure of the Columbia. Of course that was due to unforeseen circumstance. Nevertheless, that does serve to portray the incalculable well, in context.
There are individual circumstances, and those, while true to life, are not indicative of the collective experience.
I would recommend the '96 850 to anyone, providing the auto has been examined and judged by a person knowledgable, fit.
I just got a K&N air filter for my '96 850... she runs like the wind. I was driving home today and had the misfortune of being behind one of those large tanker trucks... it was making 60mph on a 70mph stretch. I waited till the traffic cleared and pushed the gas pedal to the floor. The 850 exploded with acceleration... by the time I was passing the cab/front of the giant truck I was making 100mph. I had an open stretch ahead, and held the pedal to the floor. The speed climbed surely and softly to 110mph, 115mph, 120, 125, 130... I let off the gas as the trees were going by so fast they were blurring into a collage of green. The car was quiet and easy at those speeds.
The car is going on 9 years old and runs smooth like a new car.
I love the '96 850.
If you know of a car as good, please recommend it.
Hank
</KNOCK ON WOOD></SUPERSTITIOUS ON>On alt.autos.volvo, someone wrote: (and
I quote)
"They have spent considerable time with
the 850 in the shop and have decided to never buy another Volvo."
Well it just goes to show, you never know. The '96 year model was the best for the 850. Other earlier years gave many the blues.
<KNOCK ON WOOD><SUPERSTITIOUS ON>
MY '96 850 Turbo, with 123k miles on it, cradles me like a fetus in the womb of a mother. Of course, it has had every maintenance item done on time. The Space Shuttle Columbia was not any better serviced, yet there was the regrettable failure of the Columbia. Of course that was due to unforeseen circumstance. Nevertheless, that does serve to portray the incalculable well, in context.
There are individual circumstances, and those, while true to life, are not indicative of the collective experience.
I would recommend the '96 850 to anyone, providing the auto has been examined and judged by a person knowledgable, fit.
I just got a K&N air filter for my '96 850... she runs like the wind. I was driving home today and had the misfortune of being behind one of those large tanker trucks... it was making 60mph on a 70mph stretch. I waited till the traffic cleared and pushed the gas pedal to the floor. The 850 exploded with acceleration... by the time I was passing the cab/front of the giant truck I was making 100mph. I had an open stretch ahead, and held the pedal to the floor. The speed climbed surely and softly to 110mph, 115mph, 120, 125, 130... I let off the gas as the trees were going by so fast they were blurring into a collage of green. The car was quiet and easy at those speeds.
The car is going on 9 years old and runs smooth like a new car.
I love the '96 850.
If you know of a car as good, please recommend it.
Hank
</KNOCK ON WOOD></SUPERSTITIOUS ON>
"They have spent considerable time with
the 850 in the shop and have decided to never buy another Volvo."
Well it just goes to show, you never know. The '96 year model was the best for the 850. Other earlier years gave many the blues.
<KNOCK ON WOOD><SUPERSTITIOUS ON>
MY '96 850 Turbo, with 123k miles on it, cradles me like a fetus in the womb of a mother. Of course, it has had every maintenance item done on time. The Space Shuttle Columbia was not any better serviced, yet there was the regrettable failure of the Columbia. Of course that was due to unforeseen circumstance. Nevertheless, that does serve to portray the incalculable well, in context.
There are individual circumstances, and those, while true to life, are not indicative of the collective experience.
I would recommend the '96 850 to anyone, providing the auto has been examined and judged by a person knowledgable, fit.
I just got a K&N air filter for my '96 850... she runs like the wind. I was driving home today and had the misfortune of being behind one of those large tanker trucks... it was making 60mph on a 70mph stretch. I waited till the traffic cleared and pushed the gas pedal to the floor. The 850 exploded with acceleration... by the time I was passing the cab/front of the giant truck I was making 100mph. I had an open stretch ahead, and held the pedal to the floor. The speed climbed surely and softly to 110mph, 115mph, 120, 125, 130... I let off the gas as the trees were going by so fast they were blurring into a collage of green. The car was quiet and easy at those speeds.
The car is going on 9 years old and runs smooth like a new car.
I love the '96 850.
If you know of a car as good, please recommend it.
Hank
</KNOCK ON WOOD></SUPERSTITIOUS ON>On alt.autos.volvo, someone wrote: (and
I quote)
"They have spent considerable time with
the 850 in the shop and have decided to never buy another Volvo."
Well it just goes to show, you never know. The '96 year model was the best for the 850. Other earlier years gave many the blues.
<KNOCK ON WOOD><SUPERSTITIOUS ON>
MY '96 850 Turbo, with 123k miles on it, cradles me like a fetus in the womb of a mother. Of course, it has had every maintenance item done on time. The Space Shuttle Columbia was not any better serviced, yet there was the regrettable failure of the Columbia. Of course that was due to unforeseen circumstance. Nevertheless, that does serve to portray the incalculable well, in context.
There are individual circumstances, and those, while true to life, are not indicative of the collective experience.
I would recommend the '96 850 to anyone, providing the auto has been examined and judged by a person knowledgable, fit.
I just got a K&N air filter for my '96 850... she runs like the wind. I was driving home today and had the misfortune of being behind one of those large tanker trucks... it was making 60mph on a 70mph stretch. I waited till the traffic cleared and pushed the gas pedal to the floor. The 850 exploded with acceleration... by the time I was passing the cab/front of the giant truck I was making 100mph. I had an open stretch ahead, and held the pedal to the floor. The speed climbed surely and softly to 110mph, 115mph, 120, 125, 130... I let off the gas as the trees were going by so fast they were blurring into a collage of green. The car was quiet and easy at those speeds.
The car is going on 9 years old and runs smooth like a new car.
I love the '96 850.
If you know of a car as good, please recommend it.
Hank
</KNOCK ON WOOD></SUPERSTITIOUS ON>
S
Stephen M. Henning
Joseph Oberlander said:Most people, thogh, would rather have a same power 6
Not a Volvo 6. They were the least reliable Volvos ever made. Volvo
turbos are much more reliable and that is not saying much.
S
Stephen M. Henning
James Sweet said:How do you figure? The 940 is at least as dependable as an 850 and a bit
cheaper to have worked on even if you don't do it yourself.
It is not how cheap it is to work on that is important, it is how often
it has to be worked on. With 310,000 miles of experience with 850s and
840,000 miles of experience with the RWD models, I will stick with the
850s. They have proven much more reliable for me.
R
Rob Guenther
Wow this is basically why we got a 960 in 1993. No turbo to break down, lag,
or affect linearity. No front wheel drive to happer the tow-car ability
(this is the ONLY reason we didn't get the 1994 850 turbo wagon, as there
were a couple things the 850 did better then the 960), and to add to
possible complexity. And a big 6 cylinder engine to compensate for the 4/5
cylinder turbo's added power.
960 is the best one of the Volvo's if you want it all.
or affect linearity. No front wheel drive to happer the tow-car ability
(this is the ONLY reason we didn't get the 1994 850 turbo wagon, as there
were a couple things the 850 did better then the 960), and to add to
possible complexity. And a big 6 cylinder engine to compensate for the 4/5
cylinder turbo's added power.
960 is the best one of the Volvo's if you want it all.
R
Rob Guenther
Are you thinking the PRV V6? Because our inline 6 has been completely
trouble free, and it's of the oldest design.
ie: its design can have the porous oil pans, it has the very low KM rating
for the timing belt, it still have 201hp, 197 torque... engine was made in
Nov 1992. No issues, just buttery smooth power.
trouble free, and it's of the oldest design.
ie: its design can have the porous oil pans, it has the very low KM rating
for the timing belt, it still have 201hp, 197 torque... engine was made in
Nov 1992. No issues, just buttery smooth power.