Car Forum / Volvo Cars / February 2006
Questions About Volvo's US Sales
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Sills - 09 Feb 2006 09:06 GMT So many cars; so many choices!!! I'm researching different makes as possible car replacements for my Volkswagen. Volvo is one brand on my short list. I noticed that Volvo's US sales dropped some 11% in 2005 over 2004, and that they're not off to a good start this year, either; -12.5% Jan '06 from Jan '05....Is this an ongoing drop that has been happening for awhile, or is this a fluke? Volkswagen of America dropped 4 years in a row, but now they're finally going back up. I've heard many good things about Volvos; i.e, they will last forever. Are they expensive to maintain? I've heard that they are a profitable brand for Ford Motor Company. I have noticed that every other semi-truck on the Interstates are Volvos. Why are they owned by Ford? Were they in trouble at one time? I can't seem to find the information I'm looking for about Volvo. Can anyone answer some of these questions?
Pat Durkin - 09 Feb 2006 15:11 GMT > So many cars; so many choices!!! I'm researching different makes as > possible car replacements for my Volkswagen. Volvo is one brand on my [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > noticed that every other semi-truck on the Interstates are Volvos. Why are > they owned by Ford? Were they in trouble at one time? Ford bought Volvo's car division for $6.5 billion about 7 or 8 years ago. Volvo continues to build construction equipment, marine power drives, standby power generators, air craft jet engines, and trucks. It is one of the world's largest truck builders. It has nothing whatsoever to do with automobiles today.
I own a 2001 Volvo S80. It's not very good.
Pat
zencraps@comcast.net - 09 Feb 2006 15:36 GMT I bought a new 1996 850 Turbo in late '95 snd was highly dissatifisfied with it. Lousy handling, unfixable rattles, high price.
I soon sold it, and did what I should have done: bought and restored an '82 244 Turbo: nice car, very happy with it.
Both Volvo and Saab have committed suicide so far as I am concerned by becoming part of an American company.
Saab in particular, but Volvo, or "Fjord" as I call it, is imploding too.
If you've looking for a new car with sporting pretensions and good quality, I'd consider Audi (the new A3 seems a good deal) and Acura (particularly the TSX).
Jeff Spenader - 09 Feb 2006 16:24 GMT Gee, by your reasoning, every Chrysler is really a Mercedes. Of course Volvo still makes cars. there is some sharing of technology between Ford and Volvo, but Volvos are still Volvos. It's not like Ford fired all of Volvo's workers and brought in UAW labor from Detroit. To help Sills out- I bought an '05 S40 T5 and absolutely love it. The only pricey maintenance issue is that is uses synthetic oil. I would, however, stay away from pre '07 S80s since those particular cars seem to be earning a less than stellar reputation. I can't speak to the sales issue, but I do know that sales are cyclical.
>> So many cars; so many choices!!! I'm researching different makes as >> possible car replacements for my Volkswagen. Volvo is one brand on my [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Pat Howard Nelson - 09 Feb 2006 16:37 GMT > Gee, by your reasoning, every Chrysler is really a Mercedes. No. by the reasoning stated Mercedes is really a Chrysler Volvo is really a Ford Saab is really a Chevy :)
The idea of the Corps was to save cost. So the lowest common denominator wins. :).
Howard Owner of both Fords and Volvos
Of course
> Volvo still makes cars. there is some sharing of technology between Ford and > Volvo, but Volvos are still Volvos. It's not like Ford fired all of Volvo's [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > > > Pat Pat Durkin - 10 Feb 2006 05:52 GMT > Gee, by your reasoning, every Chrysler is really a Mercedes.
> To help Sills out- I bought an '05 S40 T5 and absolutely love it. How nice for you.
I'm having trouble understanding your opening paragraph though, about Chryslers and M-B's. I made no reference to either brand. If you're trying to draw a link between my dissatisfaction with my 2001 S80 and the fact that Volvo was bought by Ford in 1999 and that there is cross-pollinization at work that takes "bad" Ford ju-ju and sprinkles it on the precious Volvo product, that's specious. The S80 was designed before Ford entered the picture. Ford had very little if anything to do with my car.
To expand on my dissatisfaction - part of it stems from the poorly designed and built car, but most of it stems from the incompetent dolts who work at the two Volvo dealerships I've dealt with.
Pat
Rob Guenther - 09 Feb 2006 18:50 GMT The S60 and V70 and S80 are all getting a little older now... S80 is being replaced for 2007, S60 and V70 probably a year or so after... The S40 was just recently re-done, and seems to be doing well... their SUV got a new V8 and sales of that derivative are suppose to be climbing.
Their cars are long lasting... but the new ones are more complex then the older ones... but all new cars are more freakin complex then older ones, I don't get why people are so scared of this fact. In the 70s and 80s cars got way more complex then 50s and 60s cars... Its evolution.... They are rated better for reliability then most other European makes, major issues are software related.
They are, in general more boring to drive then German cars, but they ride better over bad pavement, and they handle competantly, compared to a lot of other cars out there... You don't see too many Volvo's screaming down the highway, or with their tail ends hanging out around corners... but it's more because the owner group is more mature and the cars don't beg to be driven hard.
They aren't that expensive to maintain (but you will pay for the high quality parts in the way of H or V rated replacement tires, brake pads, and possibly synthetic oil in the turbo models)... actually cheaper then a lot of other Euro brands tho... Your VW was costly for what it was... I know I had a 1999.5 Golf TDI, very expensive to maintain... My parents' have a 1993 960 wagon with 170K Kms on it.... it's been comparatively cheap to operate.
Volvo trucks are a separate entity
Volvo was bought by Ford because they (Ford) thought it was a good idea, Volvo was profitable, and are still making a profit... they also had a brand new chassis (P2) and excellent engine ranges (that Ford isn't really using right now)... Volvo was lacking funds to develop as quickly as they wanted and needed to... but was doing alright on its own.
Volvo has an agreement in their contract with Ford, that basically states that Volvo's will always be Volvos... I think that means they will run the company the way they see fit, and build the cars they want to build.
> So many cars; so many choices!!! I'm researching different makes as > possible car replacements for my Volkswagen. Volvo is one brand on my [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the information I'm looking for about Volvo. Can anyone answer some of > these questions? zencraps@comcast.net - 09 Feb 2006 20:22 GMT Volvo is now using Mazda technology, thanks to pollination by big daddy Fomoco.
Saab sells rebadged Chevys and Subarus.
About the only thing of decent quality made in Scandinavia these days are anti-Islam cartoons.
Rob Guenther - 10 Feb 2006 07:34 GMT For the S40 chassis, Mazda mainly concentrated on the business end of things - getting suppliers, making sure it could be produced in a timely fashion, efficiency etc...
Ford worked on the suspension
Volvo did the main work on the crashworthyness and the structural stuff....
Volvo's are still great cars, you don't like em' drive something else.
> Volvo is now using Mazda technology, thanks to pollination by big daddy > Fomoco. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > About the only thing of decent quality made in Scandinavia these days > are anti-Islam cartoons. Spanky - 10 Feb 2006 07:29 GMT I can't answer all your questions but I can say I am the owner of a 2000 S80 T-6 that has been nearly flawless since new. I did have one small "aspirator fan" replaced under warrantee during it's 7,500 mile service and a strut lost it's dampening after I rallied the car over some really rough roads at high speeds but, other than those two things, nothing but scheduled maintenance. IMHO it's a tough, well designed car. And the chassis is really strong and rigid unlike it's American designed counterparts.
Spanky
> So many cars; so many choices!!! I'm researching different makes as > possible car replacements for my Volkswagen. Volvo is one brand on my [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the information I'm looking for about Volvo. Can anyone answer some of > these questions? Sills - 10 Feb 2006 15:17 GMT Thanks for all the responses. The inept dealer service that Pat mentioned with his Volvo is a very commom problem with Volkswagen, although my local VW dealer is top-notch. I love VW's, but I am very interested in the S40, which has styling that many potential Jetta buyers feel should have been used by VW. Instead, the New Jetta has been criticized for resembling a Toyota Corolla. Another downside to VW's is that they are very expensive IMO to maintain; about $1000/year, not including oil changes. Then again, I could just be living in the past, but I had a 1986 Ford Escort that cost about a fifth of that per year. (But that was 20 years ago when Labor rates were $35 an hour, too......)
|
|
|