Jump to content

Volvo XC90 D5 Manual - Reading - £1995


Wingz123

Recommended Posts

Surprised no interior shots have been posted up

To tell the truth, the weather has been pretty crappy, its dark by about 3.30pm and I am working a lot AND my wife and I had a row about this car the other day as she is asking why I’d want to sell it as it suits us perfectly....

 

Reason I want to sell it is I want something newer plus I have an impending purchase which requires significant deposit coming up soon. Once thats all done I may well and very likely buy another as these are awesome cars

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Nobody's suggesting that a Peugeot 205 is a good vehicle to crash. But I am saying that it's a vehicle which encourages you to drive carefully.

When I was 21, I had a 1.6 GTi.

 

Your statement is incorrect. At least in my case.

That vehicle encouraged me to drive like a twat.

 

Fast forward 25 years and I'm taking interest in diesel Volvos.

What happened?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I was 21, I had a 1.6 GTi.

 

Your statement is incorrect. At least in my case.

That vehicle encouraged me to drive like a twat.

 

Fast forward 25 years and I'm taking interest in diesel Volvos.

What happened?

What happened is you became the man you'd have despised by back then.

 

I suggest you take a good look at yourself and sigh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am genuinely interested in a proper case being put forward; illustrating how a Peugeot 205... in the round... is a safer car than a Volvo XC90. And, for absolute clarity, I want you to win. I am no Volvo apologiser or proponent of ‘modernz’ - but if you can show me, quite simply, how in an accident (in the purest sense of the phrase) I’m safer in one - I will buy one.

Meantime, in the real world...

No offence man.

Longtime post revival, but I read in several articles in the 90s that stated the car you were most likely to be killed in in an accident was the 2cv, BUT the death rates per car were lowest for the........ 2cv. The arguments as to why were split between its slow so unlikely to go fast enough to have an accident and its known to not crash well so people are more careful when driving them. No idea which is the case but possibly a combination of the two.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...