Volvo S80 vs. BMW 5 series
 

I've always been a fan of the Volvo S80, but I've started to take interest in the BMW 5 series too. They seem similar in many ways, like size and luxuries and target group, but what is it that makes the S80 a superior car?

The S80 is superior to a 5 series?????

Unless the 5xx is a 1988 or older the S80 would not be superior, year for year not even close.

I'd take a BMW over an s80 any day. My mother has an s80 2.9L and it is crappy. I would never buy one. I hate to drive it too.

I love Volvos but my money is on a 550i

The beamer is sportier but it's a sardine can in a crash.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQq5hXaKLDg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ux8OR33n4RA

S60 R over both mentioned!

BMWs are a never ending black hole in the pit in your wallet.
The S80 has its problems also, well every car does.

When I wrecked my S80 I looked at a 535i. Nice car, 6spd, FAST. I started weighing the cost of ownership and the V70 T5 I chose won by far. Depending on where you are in the US, the 535i isn't good in the snow either. You may turn a few more heads and run stoplight to stoplight a little quicker with the 535i, but unless you've got money to throw around stick with the S80. As far as comfort I'd say they are near equal with a slight edge to the 5 series, but the controls are cluttered and almost confusing on the 5 series. Both have higher service costs, however the Volvo is much easier to do your own work on if thats what you're into. If you're looking to be practical go with the S80, but if you have the money and don't mind burning a lot more fuel, go after the 5 series.

my mom drives a 2001 540. It is comfy, fit and finish is excellent, the v8 pulls hard, fuel economy is about 25-26 on the highway, and with a little more than 100k on the clock its never really had any major problems. We had to replace the outer tie rods, and the computer for the transmission freaked out and had to be flashed. Aside from that she's been very satisfied using it as a daily driver. Not sure where you're located, but in southern California the 5xx series is much more popular than the s80, and they can often be found for about the same price.

The S80 offers the security of safety while the BMW offers the security knowing everyone will think your a snob. Volvo's are understated luxury and are not nearily as flashy.

I have seen alot of electrical and transmission problems with late model bmw's

I'd rather have a Honda Accord V6 Hybrid. More horsepower AND better gas mileage than the non-hybrid. When you put the pedal to the metal the gas and electric motors work together. You CAN have your cake and eat it too. ;)
http://world.honda.com/news/2004/image/4040629_1_l.jpg

and Al Gore would love you to death!

Those are GREAT CARS!!!! too bad Honda discontinued it.......though the new Insight should be cool.

... but thanks to George Bush all I can afford is a used Kia Spectra. One of the first things he did in office is eliminate overtime pay for me. Then he increased H1B visas and shipped in cheap labor from India to take the few remaining good gigs. So now high-tech is low-tech. Heck, auto mechanics get more respect than IT guys nowadays. If Al Gore ran over GW in a hybrid (or preferably a tank) I'd dance a jig of joy. :D

... and even if you don't buy into global warming, just think how much better the world would be if Halliburton and Dick Cheney went broke. That's all the incentive I need to buy a hybrid. :D

Ya it is Bush's fault you made poor choices in your life, who are you going to blame in 4 years when you still can't afford anything nice?

Didn't really want to get into politics in a Volvo forum, but here is my two cents:

Back in 1998-99 it was Bill Clinton who urged lenders to extend credit to people who would not normally be approved for mortgage loans. The peak introduction of these programs was in 1999 and 2000. Millions purchased homes that they could not normally afford, but with the appreciation in the housing market, the banks offered 5yr adjustable rate loans and other "deferred" programs. This made homes more accessible to more people and drove demand. The rise in demand drove prices up and SOME of the people with the adjustable rate loans refinanced shortly after in 2003 or so. When the adjustable rate loans were getting close to adjusting once again to the higher rate in 2007-2008, people could no longer refinance due to the slump in housing values. Millions of Americans were given loans they they simply could not afford to repay. I will blame Bush for lack of oversight in the mortgage industry, but in reality the banks should have kept an eye on their own. Mortgage brokers would approve anyone, and then sell off these loans by breaking them up and selling them as securities. We totally overproduced products and overextended credit and we all rode this wave of thinking that if we wanted something we would just buy it now and pay for it later. Eventually in this situation the bottom will fall out, and that is exactly what has just happened. Eventually the credit runs out, people consume less, jobs are lost, and it's a downward spiral. I'm 27 years old. When we purchased our first home in 2004 we bought what we could afford and nothing more with the understanding that things DO happen, and that times will not always be as good as they are now. I truly do feel sorry for those who lost money in investments. I DO NOT feel sorry for people who borrowed more than they could afford to pay back, to buy more than they needed, and are now losing their homes. If we as a country keep bailing out people who make poor decisions, when will they ever learn? When I was a toddler and I spilled my milk my mother would clean it up for me. If I spill my milk at 27, it's my responsibility to clean it up. If we don't hold people accountable for their actions how will we ever solve this problem?

Secondly, raising taxes on the rich and on corporations and cutting taxes for the other 70% of taxpayers is not a tax cut, and not a way to raise tax revenue. It's a tax shift in a way. Take corporate taxes for example: McDonalds sells a burger for $1.40 and their taxes go up. Will they let the tax increase effect their bottom line? No. They will raise their prices to cover the increase, just as they do when supply costs increase. That same burger that was $1.40 will now cost $1.43. The people who got a tax cut saving them say $240/yr will likely spend nearly all that savings in cost increases for products and services. The simple truth is that corporations don't pay taxes. They collect those taxes from consumers and pass them on to the IRS.

I'm all about starting an off-topic thread somewhere else on the forum if you're interested.

Yes start an off topic, in the off topic section. that way everyone can B***H about which idiot sgined what to piss everyone off (side note: it is also clinton's fault every F*****G time I open a manual or letter, I have to look at spanish. I am in AMERICA!).

If you have the money....Drive both the BMW and the S80. see which one fits you the best, and make your choice on that.

Good luck!