Volvo V70 Phase 3 (2007-2016) What do we think?

[inconsistant]

They’re heading towards Autoshite money and I don’t think anyone has asked yet. For reference, it's these ones:

 

We’re still happy with our 2004 V70 D5 but looking to see what’s about so I'm ready when replacement is required, as it's on 220,000miles and obvs won't last forever. We love it so ideally replace with another V70 the same but most Phase 2 V70s are either same age/cost/mileage as ours or £3-4K for a low miler, and I can get a newer Phase 3 for that price or less. So that begs the question:

What are the Phase 3 V70s like? Any experiences/wisdom, engines/models to avoid/aim for?

I’ve been casually looking at V70 ads, diesel at the moment but not 100% fixed on that. The engines offered are baffling. I think in the drive to increase efficiency and chase the g/km ratings they were tweaked for output and efficiency almost yearly. Every advert seems to have a different power rating/performance and g/km and tax rating even for the equivalent engine size. So I’ve been scouring online buyers guides to try to understand engine offerings. Feel free to correct if wrong.

2007    Launch engines                                                    2009 minor facelift (front grill/bumper)

2.0 D    4cyl      134bhp             157g/km                      2.0 D    4cyl      134bhp             157g/km

2.4 D    5cyl      163bhp             172g/km                      2.4 D    5cyl      172bhp            ???g/km

2.4 D5  5cyl      185bhp            178g/km                      2.4 D5  5cyl      202bhp            ???g/km

 2010 Engines updated

1.6 DrivE/D2     4cyl      107-115bhp     11.3secs           57- 67mpg                    111-129g/km

2.0 D/D3               5cyl      134bhp              11secs              63mpg                                119g/km

2.0 D/D4               5cyl      161bhp            9.5secs               65mpg                                 113g/km          £30

2.4 D/D5               5cyl      213bhp            8.2secs                59mpg                                 126g/km

2013 range rationalised: 

Facelift black grill, chrome surround, bigger Volvo badge: Petrol dropped, Diesel only, 1.6D, 2.0D and 2.4D all have start/stop

D2.       1.6 D                115bhp            13secs              67mpg             

D3        2.0 D                136bhp                         

D4        2.0 D                163bhp                         

D5        2.4 D                215bhp            8 secs               61mpg

To end of production 2016 Engines:

D3        2.0 D                148-150bhp     9.8 secs             65-69mpg         108g/km          £20

D4        2.0 D                179-181bhp     8.6 secs            62-65mpg        114g/km          £30

D5        2.4 D                209bhp            7.8secs             55mpg

 For reference, Our current Dark Beast is a D5, originally 163bhp but quite possibly been chipped to 210. The wall of torque and ability to spin the front wheels in the wet in 2^nd are the best clues but nothing to prove it. Brim to brim over mixed driving it does 45mpg. Seems like a brilliant all rounder. Tax is £240, I think the Phase 2 D5 185bhp goes up to £330 tax.

Launch trim levels        

Most ads list the car as either ‘SE’ or ‘Rdesign’ but there were 4 trim levels at launch, these are the things to spot in ads to determine:   

SE                     Cruise control

SE Sport            + electric heated seats  spoiler

SE Lux              + leather seats              power boot

R Design           lower suspension        spoiler       2 tone leather seats      18in wheels 

 Late trim levels

Along with the Diesel only engine line up, from (I think) 2013 to end of production trim levels were changed to:

Business

SE         (sat Nav)

SE lux   (leather)

I don’t think these are anywhere near AS money yet so I’ll ignore them.

Conclusions so far:

Everyone says to avoid the 1.6drivE like the plague so I will. 

Later engines lots less co2, more power, cheaper tax.

Post 2013 engines look the best but still pricey used.

 You can get a nice looking Phase 3 V70 for about 2500 now. They still look like nice cars. We would be looking anywhere between £2500 and £4500

The sweet spot for a cheapish diesel V70 look like a post 2010 2.0D/D4, 161bhp, 113g/km, £30 tax

About 80% of V70s for sale in the £3-5K range are the 134bhp 2.0D but would this also be underpowered for a V70? 

I love the waftyness of ours especially over long journeys. Would a 2.4D be better bet than the 2.0D?

Or are there better alternatives? the V60 doesn't float our boat and I'm not keen on BMW/Merc/AudiSkodaVW. Still appreciate Mondeos but don't want to own one. 

 

Your thoughts/experiences  on the Ph3 V70 much appreciated please folks...

[davehedgehog31]

@davidfowler2000

[inconsistant]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Volvo-V70-D5-SE-2-4-Estate-Semi-Auto-185bhp-400nm-torque/294091377356?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

 

This early one looks nice, advertised at £2700 and a genuine sounding advert, but had]s repeated MOT advisory of corrosion on underside. Also it's an auto, also it's in Northampton. Otherwise looks like a nice one.

 

 

[inconsistant]

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2009-Volvo-V70-2-0-D-R-Design-Premium-Pack-FSH-Top-Spec-Lovely-Car-/274712281865?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&nma=true&si=zreeryZzIPdRfuIrl0maR2pwdyk%3D&orig_cvip=true&nordt=true&rt=nc

This one was on at £4495 but just sold. Looks lovely.

 

 

Don't fancy that interior much though...

 

[garethj]

I quite like that interior, although obviously it would be better if it was brown and cream.

The sweet spot for V70s is actually the one you have.  Euro3 engines before 2005 are more reliable and give better fuel economy.

I’m no help at all for later ones, but discovering the Euro3 / Euro4 thing took about 200 hours of internet research and wading through the usual bluff of “My Volvo was crap, it had 2 punctures and there was only one spare wheel”

Have you been through the wailing despair that is Honest John or the Volvo fora?

[inconsistant]

2 minutes ago, garethj said:

The sweet spot for V70s is actually the one you have.  

 

Yep... we bought it with the intention of running it for the 3 months we needed a car and moving it on, but still have it 2 years later and counting.

 The problem is how to replace it when the time comes!

[davidfowler2000]

4 hours ago, davehedgehog31 said:

@davidfowler2000

They are very nice but the build quality isn't traditional Volvo. My 2010 V70 is currently in the shop to get the rain water ingress fixed - a common fault due to poor windscreen bonding however mines also appears to be pissing in the sunroof drains.

As for engines, I can't comment on diesels with cheap tax seeing mines is the T6 (3.0 turbo petrol 6 pot) at £560 a year which I got to replace a 2.0TDI Golf because the Golf wouldn't have been Glasgow ULEZ compliant but the T6 Volvo will be. You'll also see lashings of FoMoCo logos on various parts around the car but it is based on the same platform as the Mondeo. This could make parts cheaper IF you can get them from Ford rather than Volvo.

[Shirley Knott]

This is a question that I've always pondered too so keenly awaiting replies.

I've always worked on the understanding that that the older V70's were the last of the 'proper' Volvo's, although people also said that about 940's when I had one of those, so who knows... I suppose the real question is what impact, if any, Ford's involvement has had in the later (P3 onward) cars build quality etc.

As an aside, re low mileage P2 cars going for £3-4k, I've seen little evidence of that around here! Perhaps there are regional differences? My 2001 2.4 na has just clicked over 93k, and if someone offered me £2k for it I'd shake their hand out of it's socket (Not literally of course)

[GeorgeB]

There is a section on here for "Modern Shite".

[davidfowler2000]

4 hours ago, Shirley Knott said:

This is a question that I've always pondered too so keenly awaiting replies.

I've always worked on the understanding that that the older V70's were the last of the 'proper' Volvo's, although people also said that about 940's when I had one of those, so who knows... I suppose the real question is what impact, if any, Ford's involvement has had in the later (P3 onward) cars build quality etc.

As an aside, re low mileage P2 cars going for £3-4k, I've seen little evidence of that around here! Perhaps there are regional differences? My 2001 2.4 na has just clicked over 93k, and if someone offered me £2k for it I'd shake their hand out of it's socket (Not literally of course)

Depends what you class as "Proper Volvo"

The 940 and 960 (Later rebadged S/V90) were the last of the rear wheel drive models. Both models ceased production in February 1998.
You could argue that the S70 and P1 V70 were the last proper Volvos as they were based heavily on the 850 which was still a more traditional Volvo design.

[Shirley Knott]

9 hours ago, GeorgeB said:

There is a section on here for "Modern Shite".

It's lovely that you've taken the time to share your insight here, but given the modern subforum caters to "Vehicles under about 10 years old" and Phase 3 V70's started production in 2007, your point is nul and void.

Do you have anything useful to say?

8 hours ago, davidfowler2000 said:

Depends what you class as "Proper Volvo"

The 940 and 960 (Later rebadged S/V90) were the last of the rear wheel drive models. Both models ceased production in February 1998.
You could argue that the S70 and P1 V70 were the last proper Volvos as they were based heavily on the 850 which was still a more traditional Volvo design.

That was pretty much my understanding too, although I had read that the Phase 2 cars were to all intents and purposes designed by Volvo with very little Ford involvement?

As you say, the Phase 3 cars are based on the Mondeo platform and use a large number of Ford parts. I wouldn't like to speculate whether that's for the better or worse, I've never driven one, much less owned one.

[inconsistant]

11 hours ago, GeorgeB said:

There is a section on here for "Modern Shite".

Maybe you could go and be a dick there then and leave us to chat about 14 year old Volvos?

[GeorgeB]

On 4/9/2021 at 6:41 AM, Shirley Knott said:

It's lovely that you've taken the time to share your insight here, but given the modern subforum caters to "Vehicles under about 10 years old" and Phase 3 V70's started production in 2007, your point is nul and void.

Do you have anything useful to say?

It was meant as a humorous aside.

Unfortunately nobody on here has a sense of humour anymore.

Do YOU have anything useful to say?

[GeorgeB]

On 4/9/2021 at 8:31 AM, inconsistant said:

Maybe you could go and be a dick there then and leave us to chat about 14 year old Volvos?

Maybe you could fuck off?

[bigstraight6]

And maybe you could put your handbag away. Back to topic and as already mentioned the later D5 engines are not as bullet proof as the earlier versions.

[loserone]

1 hour ago, GeorgeB said:

Unfortunately nobody on here has a sense of humour anymore.

You certainly don't!

[inconsistant]

1 hour ago, GeorgeB said:

Unfortunately nobody on here has a sense of humour anymore.

Have things changed that much in slightly over 3 months? 

[outlaw118]

Yo R,  I read up a bit on these before I bought Megamoose - and the differences in the 2.4D states of tune are somewhat confusing. IIRC the top spec one with 210(?)bhp the RFL is £0, whereas the 185bhp version is £250pa. Mine, and I suspect yours have 163 and are £300+pa. 

Not sure if the congestion/low emissions zone thing will effect you, but the 163 lump in mine is deemed dirty enough to warrant a daily charge, but helpfully, while I typing this the TFL ULEZ checker isn't fucking working, but having filtered the adverts on Auto Trader, it appears none of the 2.4Ds are ULEZ compliant. (Stupidly enough the V8 4.4 pez XC90 IS ULEZ compliant though!)

As for everything else, from what I've read they're pretty well screwed together, albeit not as well as pre-Ford takeover, they're still going to be better than most - like you've already said the amount that seem to be kicking around with over 200k on them must be a sign!

[GeorgeB]

41 minutes ago, inconsistant said:

Have things changed that much in slightly over 3 months? 

No, but they have changed a lot since June 7, 2013.

Or hadn't you noticed?

[mk2_craig]

Mate of mine has a couple of these in D5 flava on fleet strength at the moment. Loves them, though the earlier one (10 plate I think) is starting to suffer some electrical gremlins and the infotainment system has been intermittent, apparently a big bill at Volvo to sort it out. He isn’t bothering. 

[Landy Mann]

Do the phase 3 V70's have the same geartronic problems as the phase 2? My old 2005 XC70 D5 Manual was the best car I've ever owned.

[jon.k]

This isn't going to be the most insightful comment, but my brother recently took a 2004 185 bhp manual up to 220k then upgraded to a 2007 163bhp auto which had done around 120k. Subjectively I don't think it charmed him like the old one did and the MPG was worse than he expected. The ride was harsh until he'd done quite a few suspension bushes and it didn't end up as quite the bargain mile-muncher that his previous one had been. I reckon if he went back he would spend the money on his old one rather than buy a new one that wasn't quite significantly newer. I realise that dilemma isn't peculiar to Volvos though.

I would love one of the last-of-the line d5s with the proper wood trim instead of the aluminium. 

 

 

 

[davidfowler2000]

On 4/10/2021 at 9:42 PM, Landy Mann said:

Do the phase 3 V70's have the same geartronic problems as the phase 2? My old 2005 XC70 D5 Manual was the best car I've ever owned.

Not as far as I'm aware. The P3 geartronic is an Aisin Seiki TF-80SC 6 speed. P2 models seem to have gotten the same 6 speed box but I'm not sure on that - it may have been the very last of them. As far as I'm aware it's the 5 speed chocolatronic you need to watch out for.

Mines is also AWD and according to the Volvo dealer I bought it from has been updated since the days of Ye Olde AWD systems so it can cope with worn tyres front to back. I still need to keep them the same across an axle but it means if I only need to do front, as long as JUST the front s get done in a pair then I'm alright. The earlier systems would need all 4 tyres done if you got a puncture.

[Zantimisfit]

I had a 1.6 diesel V70 Momentum for a few years. It had done over 200k kms when I sold it. Needed its water and fuel pumps replacing as a result of coordinated and simultaneous failure which was a bit irksome but otherwise no problems. Not fast but pefectly capable of relaxed motorway cruising and soooooo comfortable. Seats are great (get one with heated seats!) Sold it three years ago but about to go back into Volvo ownership on the back of it. My vote: HIT