New advice. Petrol estate <£1K. Volvo?

Slinky1989

Slinky1989

Slinky1989

Soldato
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
3,586
Location
Swindon, Wiltshire
Well, I've been running an MX5 as a daily and only car for almost 3 years now, and things are now going to change in my life since I have my first child on the way and I'm moving up to the midlands for a new job soon.

So, as sad as it is, the MX5 has to go, and since I've always wanted an estate, now is as good a time as any to get one..

My first thought for it's replacement was toward Volvos. Either an 850 or a V70 of some kind since I also have a dog and will need to carry lots of stuff for the kid.

However, apart from the T5 and R models (which I would love but can't justify because of their taste for front tyres and fuel), I know nothing about the engines available, but I don't want a diesel as I won't be doing enough miles to justify it.

I only have a small budget of about £1000 as I'm planning on using it as a stop gap until I've been in the new job for a few months and saved up a bit more cash, so again, the volvos seem to be the one to go for.

I've seen lots with high milage (>180K miles) and although I know they can go on for 200K+ I'm still nervous about anything over 150k. Anything in particular to look out for?

Also, if anyone has any other suggestions for a low budget, reliable (within reason, I'm fairly good mechanically so not too bothered about minor things going) child lugger, I'm all ears!

Thanks :)

p.s. I'll be doing around 8000 miles a year. Anyone who has any man maths that will justify a T5 let me know haha.
 
Anecdotally, they are solid. They look old and crap of course but they should be pennies to buy and run these days.
 
They're not easy on petrol. My old mans V70 2.5 10v averaged 28 with 34 on a run (if he was a good lad) over the 10 years he owned it from new. The 2.5 10v is a better shout than the 2.0 as the economy is similar but performance is better. Company car market preferred the 2.0 20v as it was cheaper on tax liability at the time.

Whatever you do they're heavy on front tyres, especially the insides. Also check the hinges where the front door attaches to the A pillar. The old mans was fixed under recall and needed further work a few years later.

Only other thing that went wrong was the CD player - needed a new laser. It's an Alpine made unit with Volvo style Fisher-Price buttons. Dead easy to use and sounds excelent!
 
Last edited:
MagicBoy said:
They're not easy on petrol. My old mans V70 2.5 10v averaged 28 with 34 on a run (if he was a good lad) over the 10 years he owned it from new. The 2.5 10v is a better shout than the 2.0 as the economy is similar but performance is better. Company car market preferred the 2.0 20v as it was cheaper on tax liability at the time.
Click to expand...

I only get an average of 24MPG out of my 2.4 LPT V70. It'll do perhaps 34 on a run if you're lucky.
 
You might want to consider a Saab 9-5 as well. They're just as bad on fuel as the Volvo's though the base models are a bit quicker and respond very well to a remap.
 
MagicBoy said:
They're not easy on petrol. My old mans V70 2.5 10v averaged 28 with 34 on a run (if he was a good lad) over the 10 years he owned it from new. The 2.5 10v is a better shout than the 2.0 as the economy is similar but performance is better. Company car market preferred the 2.0 20v as it was cheaper on tax liability at the time.

Whatever you do they're heavy on front tyres, especially the insides. Also check the hinges where the front door attaches to the A pillar. The old mans was fixed under recall and needed further work a few years later.

Only other thing that went wrong was the CD player - needed a new laser. It's an Alpine made unit with Volvo style Fisher-Price buttons. Dead easy to use and sounds excelent!
Click to expand...

Cheers for the advice. Any idea if there's much difference between the 2.4 and the 2.5 engine?

Burnsy2023 said:
I only get an average of 24MPG out of my 2.4 LPT V70. It'll do perhaps 34 on a run if you're lucky.
Click to expand...

Tbh, I can live with that as that's about what I get in my MX5 atm, as long as it's not worse I'm ok with it.

Gribs said:
You might want to consider a Saab 9-5 as well. They're just as bad on fuel as the Volvo's though the base models are a bit quicker and respond very well to a remap.
Click to expand...

Someone one pistonheads said this as well so they're now on my radar.
 
I'd be surprised if a 9-5 did much less than 30mpg average, they're fairly frugal for a turbo engine.

Things to check on the 9-5s are the breather system, and if its had regular oil changes with decent synthetic oil. The breather system had several revisions since they cocked it up several times. If this gets blocked, then you have problems. They can also get sludge issues on the oil pickup in the sump, hence the check for regular oil changes with decent synthetic oil.

The LPT models are less prone to problems, but still check! The engines will go forever if looked after.
 
well i've got a 2002 v70 t5, paid 1k for it, had 203k miles on it when I got it and now on 208k, average is 29.3mpg, and this is motorway miles at some pace, round town work, and towing the caravan round the lakes. It's heavy on front tyres, but all v70's are from what i've read. friend has a 03 v70 d5 and his average is 40.1mpg, but he uses it daily on the motorway for journeys that are at least 75 miles each.

I looked at a 2000 audi a4 estate, was a 2000 model, and it just felt cramped inside. Boot wasn't that big, and seating area felt claustrophobic. 8k miles a year isn't much if it's on the motorway i'd get a t5 and use cruise at 75, and it will return 34-35mpg depending on how it's been looked after.
 
MG ZT-T 190?

I think you'll struggle to end up with anything with a great deal of life left in it for under a grand, especially with Audi. Saab is a good shout though.
 
Worth keeping an eye on Galants as well maybe? Just a thought, haven't driven one myself. Might not be many estate about though.
 
Last edited:
Hi there,

There is no point getting an 850 or early V70 with any petrol engine other than the T5. They all do within a couple of MPG of each other. Just buy yourself a T5 and be done with it ;)

Kind Regards

Alec
 
allllec said:
Hi there,

There is no point getting an 850 or early V70 with any petrol engine other than the T5. They all do within a couple of MPG of each other. Just buy yourself a T5 and be done with it ;)

Kind Regards

Alec
Click to expand...

I'd definitely agree with this. The difference is averaging 30 with a T5 to averaging what, 32 with a 2.0 or 2.5? If you're doing enough miles for that to be noticable, then you're well past the point where you should be looking at diesels. Over 8000 miles it works out as being about £100.
 
I'd recommend an 850 T5, I love mine despite the terrible economy (I get 14-16MPG) but then again I can never resist booting it everywhere. If you're more delicate with the throttle you should be able to do a lot better than me, although I doubt you'll see anywhere near 30MPG.

As far as front tyres go, they do eat them (I've been through a set already and I've only put about 5k on it) but again, if you're gentle with it you shouldn't find it too bad. The tyres are quite cheap anyway because the wheels are fairly small by today's standards.

There's loads of space in them and they're really well spec'd for such an old car - you get climate control, electric windows/mirrors and even cruise control on some models. For the money, I don't think you can do any better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom