Hi folks, new member here. Don't know why I haven't been here before, I've been driving Volvo's for decades. Had a highway orange 144, 242, and now an 97 850.

I'm a cheap SOB and as such never buy new cars. Try to do most my own maintenance but can't do it all.

Contemplating replacing my 850 with an S40. My 850 has 155k on it, still runs like a champ, but it drives like an F350. Suspect it needs new struts and shocks, not a big deal, but considering stepping up a notch. My 850is a non-turbo andhas been extremely reliable for me. I keep up on my maintenance, flush the tranny fluid myself, brakes, O2 sensors, plugs, timing belt etc.

Test drove a 2001 S40 1.9T with 79k for just under $8k. Drove great,very clean and tight, drives like a go-cart with lots of power. Surprised how quick this car is, although almost anything would be compared to my n/a 850.

Also lookin' at a 2005 S40 2.4i w/ 65k for $14,more than I want to spend, but will if I think it's worth it.

Anyhow been poking around here reading a bunch of posts on the pre 2004.5 S40's and the various issues with them; brakes, engine mounts, bulbs, the only one that really scares me is the tranny. I assume the trannies on these don't have filters (850 doesn't either) and you have to stay up on the fluid flushes. Also I realize they are not 100% Volvo's so I assume the parts/components are of a little cheaper build quality.

Like the styling of the 2004.5+ S40's. The 2005 one above seems like a reasonable price, although I haven't driven it yet so not sure I'll like the 2.4i non-turbo vs the 1.9T, but if it's a more reliable engine I'm willing to sacrifice some HP. Flip side on the newer ones are they more complicated to work on, I would assume they are so that wouldmean more checks to my local mechanic. Or are the newer ones more reliable than the pre 2004.5's?

Sorry for the long winded post, but any info/experience you folks can share would be helpful.

Thanks

 

S40's are a nice way to go, but from experience as I have an 04, you better have some money when it comes to maintenance on them. Yes the trannys have been a problem on these, and flushes should be done. The brakes work great but will produce a lot of dust. I dont know as much about the 2004.5's but from what I've seen they have had their share of little problems. Overall however, as long as you maintain the phase1+2's (2000-2004) you should have a nice experience.

 

Test drove a 2001 S40 and a 2005 S40. The 2001 definitely out accelerates the 2005, but the 2005 is the 2.4i non-turbo so no surprises here.

The 2005 is a sleek looking vehicle. Rode terrific, feel at home right away in the drivers seat although the interior feels a little smaller, more confined. The trunk opening is like a tunnel though, both attributable to that sleek sloping roof line.

Anyhow can probably get the 2001 for ~$8k, minus $2k for my 850. 2001 S40 has ~90k on it and is clean, little concerned about the reliability/longevity.

Can get the 2005 for $13k, minus $2k for my 850. 2005 S40 has 67k on it and is real clean.

Little concerned they both may be a little small for me, although I did look at an S60, while the front seating feels bigger than the S40, the rear seating doesn't seem much better.

Anyhow, haven't made up my mind yet or if I even want to bite the bullet. Debating whether or not to keep my 850 or not. If you're interested posted some questions to the 850 forum related to this.
https://volvoforums.com/m_90210/mpag..._/tm.htm#90210

 

I have the S60. It is a little larger than the S40. By the way, who cares about the rear seat.