Best Vovlo models?

Not the Polestar, that's for sure. POLESTAR LOL

>>14102911

Anything with redline engine 5 speed rwd they have 4 or 6 cyl turbo optional not much to choose from hombre. That is unless ur talking new Volvo and if so give up living

>>14102924
We're talking like old Volvo to right before it was kill by shitty boring cars. The ones w/ character.

File: 1426576429513.jpg (3MB, 2688x1520px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2688x1520px

>these beautiful taillights

>>14102940

Volvo... with character?

They're just boxes.

240 turbo

>>14102916
I work for a dealership network and we have 4 of those things sitting in the volvo store's showroom

File: 12028675_888954821140281_5977781648453170426_o.jpg (72KB, 960x1280px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 960x1280px

>>14102911
I like the p80 chassis even though it was the automotive e equivalent of Metallicas black album.

Do want a 98 or 99 v70 t5 manual. Would also like an 855R even though the performance is the same as a turbo with a tune and some springs.

>>14102911
The one you're not driving faget

>>14104936
740 turbo and B234 are superior.

>>14102911
Anything with a B8444S. Shame they never mounted them the right way around from the factory.

>>14105067
.....and link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=037Wo7SEPpY

File: Screenshot_2015-12-24-08-39-17.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

I posted in a few Volvo threads some time ago. I was talking about a 240 wagon in my neighborhood that i wanted to buy. I left a note on the windshield but its been over 2 month and no call....I'm sad.


Pic related

File: 6f09639156b7cd182e1e8cbb989aa5f5.jpg (1MB, 3768x2398px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3768x2398px

>>14105121
I remember you anon.
House might be abandoned or maybe it never gets driven or looked at.

Here's a 240 for your troubles.

>>14102911
RWD god tier
FWD range from good to shit
AWD accountant tier

>>14105121
Try again anon, maybe they didnt get the leaflet, thats such nice car. I really love the paintjob on it.

>>14105283
>>14105503
Well i know when i put the note under the windshield wiper, they weren't home. Once one of them got home, the note was gone. I noticed the tags were still up to date so maybe its only used in the winter. Either way, im pissed i can't have it.

File: Volvo 265 Transfer.jpg (62KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 1000x667px

Try finding a better Volvo than this stretched RWD brick wagon, I dare you.

240
4
0

>>14107509
dat shit long

>>14107509
mmm comfy

File: volvoBR.jpg (2MB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1920px

Any Volvo made before they killed their last rear-wheel drive platform should be pretty good.

The nice thing about all the RWD models is they just improved the same engine over and over for decades, so they're stupid reliable. Everything that goes wrong in an old Volvo makes sense. It's fixable, and somebody has definitely fixed it before you. This means guides like the 7xx/9xx FAQ (google it) give all of the information you need to diagnose pretty much any problem.

The most interesting daily-drivable RWD Volvos are the Amazon and the 140 series, but they're hard to find. Most people drive the 240, 740 or 940. The 740/940 cars had the steel on the lower half of the car treated to prevent rust, so they survive better than the 240. The 940 was a "luxury" model, and never came with a manual in the US. Automatics can shift okay, but get boring after a while. Non-turbo cars are noticeably slow, turbo cars move like regular cars.

I searched for a rust-free 5-speed 240 wagon for a couple years but most are rust buckets on the East Coast, and the 240s are beginning to pull a premium. I finally bought a 945 Turbo.

Now here's the important part: Volvos aren't gonna be cool. Get the fuck over it. Your car friends will never understand unless you make them. They'll never like your car until you prove it's indestructible and does everything.

Here's how I proved to my friends that a Volvo is good:
1. Bought it dirt cheap in excellent condition, did all the maintenance myself.
2. Did a 1,500 mile road trip up the East Coast into Canada
3. Took it to an autocross and kicked a bunch of people's asses in a 20-year-old "luxury" wagon. It was an extremely rainy day, I did wicked powerslides, and I actually outpaced a Porsche Cayman S and came within a second of a Corvette Z06. Let's reiterate: Turbo. Volvo. Wagon.
4. Take them for a ride. It's comfortable. It's fun. It's weird and sensible and a good car.

Cars have the character you give them. Your car only sucks if you do.

>>14109594
There was this Volvo RWD sedan I was thinking of in the background as my RWD power platform. It was a 7 something something, and I was told everything was solid and it could be boosted. Know about it?

>>14110985
It's a 740, if it's not a
turbo forget it.

File: 850r_spoiler.jpg (116KB, 1024x575px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1024x575px

The 850R is the best Volvo of ALL TIME.

File: vulva-turba.jpg (31KB, 300x202px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 300x202px

>>14111168
One of the neatest as it commemorates the 855 touring car. But the only performance changes were springs ecu and different injectors. Too bad we never got an mt here. I would vote the 98-99 v70 t5 with a manual as the best of the p80 chassis.

>>14102911
My ultimate Volvo garage:
>C30 T5, Arctic White, manual
>V60 D6 AWD (DD)
>P1800/Amazon coupe with the Yamaha V8
>240 with a B5254R

s60r all the way

File: IMG_20130118_112327.jpg (744KB, 2592x1944px) Image search: [Google]

744KB, 2592x1944px

>>14102911
anything pre 2000

/thread

File: volvo-s60r-2002-02.jpg (34KB, 550x303px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 550x303px

>>14113219
pic related

Assuming this is a Volvo thread, I'm that guy that posted in a Volvo thread months ago. I've started to narrow down what I want to do. Because of where I live I can't drive anything that's 'high powered' for my first 3 years of driving.

The car itself, I want to get a 745 NA with the 16 valve head, so I can get used to the Volvo until I can drive a more powerful car

The engine, I'd either get a 745 turbo or a engine from one, rebuild it using the head from the 16v from the NA engine. Then maybe switch out the turbo for a more modern one.

The other things, a T5 or T56 gearbox, a upgraded exhaust system, a limited slip differential, Lower it slightly and upgrade the suspension and handling, and maybe upgrade the brakes

I've probably left something out, but what do you guys think of this plan?

>>14107509
Oh god that poor 4 cyl

File: VOLVOXC70-712_3.jpg (125KB, 1024x729px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1024x729px

There is nothing wrong with the V70 or the XC70

Volvo v40 T4 -99 is bretty good. 200 horsepowers for no reason at all

File: Volvo-FH-Globetrotter-cabin-view[1].jpg (324KB, 1500x968px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 1500x968px

FH

>>14116497
>265
>4 cyl

you know the 2 stands for the 200 series, 6 for 6 cylinders and 5 for 5 doors, so the wagon.

File: 8d3fdaf907faac91633aaa9b486bc9fd[1].jpg (253KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 1600x1067px

>>14116620

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2447px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2447px

My '88 740 Turbo is one of the most based cars I've ever owned, for sure

>>14116620
wtf no shifter

File: volvo_rozzers.jpg (184KB, 640x334px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 640x334px

really any volvo with a turbo is what you want. Such hoon.

All the models really excel at different things. The only things all platforms share is being great DDs, having tons of space, and being relatively reliable and easy to work on.

File: volvochp.jpg (53KB, 500x297px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x297px

>>14102924
>redline engine
noob means redblock
>not much to choose from
noob plz go.

>>14104891
>just boxes
casual detected.

>>14113627
>lower it
NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE

>upgrade it so it goes faster
>maybe ill upgrade brakes

I want to start a fire in my house, MAYBE I'll install a fireplace.

Basically anything with a numbered name. 240, 740, 940, 850. Early V70s as well.

The redblock four cylinders are goddamn unkillable and the inline five cylinders are excelent as well.

>>14116529
nothing wrong with the older V70 sure but the XC70 and every XC that came after is crossover cancer

>>14117018
>slightly
I'm not one of those kids that go 'hellaflush', just might bring it down ever so slightly and if I don't like it I'll change it back

I think disc brakes all around is sufficient, if I feel they don't stop as good as the ones on my current car that has disc brakes all around, I'll change the calipers to something more beefier, which is why I said maybe

But anyway, what do you think of my idea for the engine? and gearbox choice?

File: image.png (546KB, 640x1136px) Image search: [Google]

546KB, 640x1136px

Checking out this 850 tomorrow, not sure if it's turbo but it's a beauty

>>14118061
I thought the XC70 was just a V70 with AWD.

File: images(2).jpg (15KB, 295x171px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 295x171px

Thisss. This is the shit right here.

File: 148169-500x375.jpg (64KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 500x375px

Anyone know about the

2002 Volvo S60 2.4T

I found one in my area for ~3k at 145k miles

I really like the look of this thing... Is it a shit car?

>>14102911
Hey volv/o/ I'm thinking of buying an 09 c30 manual. Test drove one today and everything felt great. Only thing i didnt like was the key... looks and feels like a child's toy. Any of you guys own one? How do you like it?

>>14118184
>>14118186
No

>>14118147
hnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng

>>14118201
No to looking at one or no to is it a shit car?

Need a little more than just "no" my man

File: 500px-Volvo_C30_1.6_front_20100918.jpg (38KB, 500x264px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x264px

>>14118230
I was just about to post that thanks

>>14118184

I helped my fiance's family sell their '04 S60 2.4i (the non-turbo pleb version of this car), it had 126k miles on it at the time of sale. Nothing terribly scary went wrong on that car, but it was thankfully one of the 03-04+ cars with the correct transmission flashing done from the factory, the earlier cars are known to burn up the transmission due to how it is calibrated, something about when the car is stopped and in drive. Front end needed work (strut bushings and tie rod ends, maybe a ball joint), they had some no-start issues at one point, and there was an airbag warning and the info screen in the dash was gibberish due to bad solder joints. I also replaced a window regulator plastic nub (mechanical fuse more or less). You need Volvo's scanner to reset the window level correctly, same for airbag warnings, you need to resolder the circuit board behind the dash and reset things. The interior trim was starting to look pretty shabby as well.

In the plus category it had great paint and metal, absolutely zero rust anywhere after 10 years of life in the Midwest. More ding resistant than something Japanese. Awesome seats too.

So overall pretty mediocre IMO, not enough to really differentiate it from something more serviceable like an Accord. If I was buying a European car and dealing with their oddities and niggling issues I'd hunt down a stick shift Saab, at least it'd be worth it then.

>>14118252

Any experience with the c30 t5?

>>14118252
Disappointing, thanks for the info.
Guess i'll go back to looking at civics then.

File: 20150818_070057.jpg (4MB, 4160x2340px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4160x2340px

>>14118186
i have an 08 RDesign T5M with a polestar tune. love almost everything about it! buy it.

>>14118275
Yeah ive already set up to go buy it on Monday \

who ever owned it before stuck some bullshit non functional scoop to the hood... everything looks awesome... any word on maintenance costs?

>>14118286
well mine only has 66k on it, so i havnt had to do really anything yet.

File: volvogrill.jpg (200KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1024x682px

>>14118069
>not using a turbocharged I5 20 valve from an 850 or v70
you're taking the worst thing about the 740 and keeping it.
>upgrade turbo
the turbo on the 5 cylinder is already the upgraded version
>t5 or t56
t56 is better than a t5 but either is good
>LSD, exhaust, suspension and handling upgrades
exhaust better be a catback. otherwise sounds good

seriously if you
>slightly lower
your ride quality will go to shit, you need that bounce height

>>14118252
>worse than an accord
JDMfag plz go.

>>14103012
That is a nice ass dog

>>14119109
How much power can I get from the I5 20 valve? I'm assuming more than I can get out of the I4 with the 16 valve head, not even sure if it's widely available where I live. How difficult is it mounting the I5 in the 740?

The turbo on the I5 not needing to be upgraded would save me a bit of money, And I'd try to get a T56, if I find a T5 cheap I'd go with it

I shouldn't have been think of lowering it, I don't even know how the ride is with stock height, how does it go on twisty roads?

>>14119109

Sorry bud it's true. At 125k miles this thing just felt pretty used up, and aside from front seat comfort and quality rust proofing, did not stand out in any way whatsoever. A 5spd accord would be more fun to drive, and easier to get parts for and work on. The rear seat was also damn near unusable when anyone over 5'10" was sitting in front.

>>14119293
>How much power can I get
how long is a piece of string
decide how much power you want and your budget and go from there

>>14119293
300hp on stock internals. All it needs is injectors, tune and a good exhaust to get there. Any higher and you risk turning the rods into cooked spaghetti. Replace the rods, na cams and throttle body, s60R exhaust manifold, slap an 18t on it and a streetable 400 is pretty easy.

File: volvo-s60-2002-7.jpg (173KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 800x600px

>>14118184
I own one of these cars right now, and it's at comparable mileage too.

Just don't buy it. It has so many damn electronics and so many things that can go wrong that you have to fix. Also if it's an automatic transmission, run far away, the damned tranny is probably near ready to kick the bucket like mine is.

Other things I can tell you:
The driver visibility is kinda shit.
The car doesn't feel nice to drive, it feels very heavy and not exactly sporty at all.
Mine has a horrible leak in the sunroof that allowed the floorboards to become flooded with rainwater. This might not be a regular issue but it's worth considering.

It was probably a perfectly decent car around the time when it was put into production, but it's not sustainable and you'll likely be investing in a money pit if you buy a used one with that much mileage.

File: IMG_20151220_073622 - Copy.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>14109594
This man speaks the truth.

Drove this home 1000km's about 5 days ago. I think I got a steal. I've since removed the roof rack though.

>>14119598
That's exactly what I want to get to, about 300hp, I'll start with that then just buy the other things as they come up near me. Thanks senpai

A few questions, is it the 2.4L engine, the B5244T? I looked it up on wikipedia, peak torqe at 1800rpm, seems pretty great. I'm also assuming a after market ecu would be needed? I assume it would make it a lot easier the add in the other parts and just general ease of tuning it. I'm just determined more now because of the low down torqe

>>14102911
It has a smaller turbo and lower red line. You want a hpt 2.3 for power a lpt 2.4 isn't bad to Dr though.
Check out ardideas.com. they are the best ecu tuners for p80 cars imo.

>>14118124
originally yeah, IIRC the XC70 was just a V70 lifted an inch or so with AWD and "CROSS COUNTRY" written on the back

if you live in the 'states, since 2010 or so the V70 no longer exists, only the XC70 which has become a fullsize crossover cancer machine

>>14119987
>taking the rack off your brick
But why?

>>14120485
What that meant to be directed to me?>>14120447

>>14120485
>>14120591
If so, I should have looked at the other engines as well instead of the biggest ones. The 2.3 seems better, peak torque more widely available through the rpm range. What do you mean by 'hpt' and 'lpt'?

File: 2014-volvo-xc60-photo-575311-s-986x603.jpg (66KB, 986x603px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 986x603px

>>14120487
You are getting the XC70 and XC60 mixed up

>>14120624
Low pressure turbo
High pressure turbo

The 2.4t was used in the later GLT and awd volvos the 2.3 was in all the sporty models

>>14120694
Am I? Fuck.

Volvo stopped making sense to me when they stopped using XYZ model-engine-door names for their cars.

>>14118186

I have one and I'm pretty pleased with it. The T5 and 1.6d drivE/d2 are the ones to buy for fun and fuel economy respectively.

>>14120695
Thanks again, you've helped me refine my plans for a 740 wagon and now I have a list of stuff I want to do to one. I'll call it a 755 when it's done. I'll be sure to post in the Volvo threads when I start making it

>>14120794
If you can find a 98-99 v70R they already have an 18T but beware anything newer as they have drive by wire throttle. If you can't find one get a 96 or 97 hpt for obd2 so you can run diagnostics easier and apps like torque pro. They do use a return type fuel system so your tank may require mods. I have retrofitted fi into old carb cars and just plumbed the return into the filler neck so I didn't have to mess with the tank.

>>14120708

they did make an XC70, but it didn't "evolve" past being a slightly lifted "rugged" V70

>>14116647
It looks sick anon

File: 1515616.jpg (2MB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2592x1936px

>>14118184
>>14119931
>>14118252

2003 S60 2.4T owner here.
The ones before 2003, has the shit ETM, which will fail, 100% guaranteed..

As for the 03 S60, it has worked good for me, only real problem it has had, was the tranny acting up, (switching hard) so i flushed it, and had Volvo re program it.

Besides that, its the usual front end noises and wear & tear items. But the + sides of the car out weights the cons.

+ side: Interior is awesome.
+Great highway cruiser
+with Turbo (even if its the low press one) it has good torque.
+bulletproof engine
+easy to work one

the minus side:
-Front suspension noise,
-Very poor city driver (shit Mpg´s)
-the usual turning radius of a container ship

so overall i am pleased with my decision to have sold off the S70, and buying this. though i admit that the S70 felt more "solid" in its construction.

So to answer the guy who asked if to buy a 2002 S60, NOPE. Dont.
Get at least a 2003 or newer, with Turbo.

I keep getting the urge to buy a v70r/t5 but they've all got such high mileage (for thr uk) and i dont trust that other people have maintained them well

>>14118090
nice car m9
what does "GLT" stand for?

>>14120952
" Grand Luxe Touring" so no Turbo.

File: Volvo_TP21_at_Battlesbridge.jpg (644KB, 1746x1383px) Image search: [Google]

644KB, 1746x1383px

Anything with a B-series engine 1.8 or bigger

And this ofcourse

>>14120956
in 97 they got the lpt. only year the glt was turbo. avoid the 10 valve, they are poo.

>>14121055
but they make the best sound

lets get some Volvos racing in here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIP6d3lT3hs

>>14121132
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1aB4Va0qug

File: 2016-Volvo-S90.jpg (74KB, 1024x734px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1024x734px

>>14121199
bump for what could have been...

File: Volvo_YCC.jpg (263KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1200x800px

>>14123174
and what maybe

>>14102916
The real polestar is fucking amazing. The one released to consumers were... Meh.

>>14113219
S60r t5s are nice, even though some are fwd. Usually as tuneable as a saab, my s60 is pulling 350 bhp.

>>14120809
From MY99 (read: august/septembre 1998) on they have drive by wire...

>>14120694
>>14120487

He's right - the V70 is kill in the states, onyl the XC70.
V60 is still being sold, tho...

>>14118090
No turbo.

>>14118286
>>14118275

i have one. maintenance kind of sucks. full synthetic changes are fine obviously but i've also had to replace a thermostat (which warped the reservoir when it fucked itself), and an alternator. both were in the $500+ neighborhood with labor costs. the electricals on this car (and most euro cars in this class) are not top notch.

mechanically it is in perfect shape however at 106k miles, and the costs aren't m3 tier

File: t5r.jpg (47KB, 799x582px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 799x582px

chalk yellow 850R T5

>>14123430
You can't say that if you don't know the build date, it could be both the 170 (B5254F/S) or 193 hp (B5254T) version.

>>14119293
>how does it go on twisty roads
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn06BFdDejo

>>14120447
>is engine code b5244t?
no you want a B5234T for an old 850 turbo with 1st or 2nd style turbo, will be cheapest and decent option. 1st style turbo from early 850s a shit; 2nd style is okay, 3rd style is best but i think only '97-98

Other good options:
B5234T- anything(3,4,5,7,9)

>>14123706
>pastel colors
>not gay
choose one

>>14105062
>tfw friend recently got a 740 turbo
I'm a bit jelly, but I'd rather have the 240 still.