Volvo sold to China

Marlow

Looks like, that not only Saab is out, but Volvo has been sold to chinese car-manufacturer Geely.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5g564F328QGCf2HUt95ps7JDyrklg

/M

biko

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

enda1

Japs took about 40 years to become global auto powers. Koreans 20 years, Chinese only about 5!

Things happen so quickly these days and the route to entry is so much easier with globalisation and bilateral trade agreements lowering barriers.

Wonder what will happen to the brands? How long till China really starts producing some exciting cars?

Interesting times.

enda1

LIGHTNING wrote: »

But the difference was that when the Jap cars came over they were better than most european & american cars on the market. The same cannot be said for the Chinese cars!

Not initially. The first exports of Toyota for example were to the US market and they were a disaster! It took many years before they gained credibility. They had to learn about quality and efficient production from Ford and GM, but the point is that eventually they overtook them. Eventually China will overtake in particular the German OEM's. It is just not ultimately sustainable to manufacture cars in the first world.

Where first world will help is in technical centres, high end tier 1 suppliers, holding companies, financing etc.

Marlow

LIGHTNING wrote: »

The same cannot be said for the Chinese cars!

No. But the japs didn't buy car companies world-wide left, right and center either.

The chinese seem to try to get some of the established brands and maybe some of the engineering they lack.

/M

Marlow

enda1 wrote: »

Eventually China will overtake in particular the German OEM's.

I wouldn't necessary agree here. In the lower end of the market maybe, but that's dominated by japanese, korean, french, etc.

If you look at the market and specificly the american market, the german OEMs still dominate the top end of the market. The japanese have made it in there in the 40 years, but they haven't been able to dominate it.

/M

enda1

Marlow wrote: »

I wouldn't necessary agree here. In the lower end of the market maybe, but that's dominated by japanese, korean, french, etc.

If you look at the market and specificly the american market, the german OEMs still dominate the top end of the market. The japanese have made it in there in the 40 years, but they haven't been able to dominate it.

/M

True.

In terms of the masses though, the low to medium end is where the absolute vast majority of the market is.

We'll see though, I think none the less positive for the consumer. the cost base will be drasticly lowered with potential for much lowered prices to follow.

Mc Love

Never even heard of Geely!

galwaytt

..that's sad.

I still can't figure out how, or why, the Swedish govt, a socialist society, are quite happy to see their indigenous company's - Saab and Volvo, get closed/flogged off to outside interests as, ultimately, they will disappear. It's more than just the 10'000's of jobs on the ground directly, 'cos, like the family jewels, eventually you'll get to the position where you'll having nothing left to sell: and then what ? What will Sweden fall back on then ? Cheese, anyone... ? ..

Marlow

That's because they are busy having meetings, waiting for the problem to disappear. The swedish way of dealing with problems.

/M

thorpe

Just a quick question, does the sale of the Volvo from GM include the sale of the Volvo Truck department to the chinese also or is it seperate.

Marlow

thorpe wrote: »

Just a quick question, does the sale of the Volvo from GM include the sale of the Volvo Truck department to the chinese also or is it seperate.

Volvo trucks is not owned by Ford. And GM doesn't own Volvo either

The Volvo brand is shared between the original Volvo who still manufactures everything else than cars (Trucks, Heavy machinery) and Ford, who bought Volvo Cars and now sold that to Geely. You can read up on it on Wikipedia

/M

Saab Ed

enda1 wrote: »

Japs took about 40 years to become global auto powers. Koreans 20 years, Chinese only about 5!

Things happen so quickly these days and the route to entry is so much easier with globalisation and bilateral trade agreements lowering barriers.

Wonder what will happen to the brands? How long till China really starts producing some exciting cars?

Interesting times.

Lets not forget that throwing money at something is'nt always the answer, you need to know what you're doing both at the technology end and with brand management. Also all the number crunchers will tell you that long term its far better to start a car brand and build in accordance to demand and market forces i.e Lexus , Acura, Hyundai rather than pump money at something that already has an image i.e BMW/ Rover, GM/ Saab, Ford/ Jaguar . If the worlds largest car maker didnt know what to do with a semi prestige car brand like Saab over the course of 20 years , a time when there was never greater demand for premium products , then what hope have the Chinese.

enda1

Saab Ed wrote: »

Lets not forget that throwing money at something is'nt always the answer, you need to know what you're doing both at the technology end and with brand management. Also all the number crunchers will tell you that long term its far better to start a car brand and build in accordance to demand and market forces i.e Lexus , Acura, Hyundai rather than pump money at something that already has an image i.e BMW/ Rover, GM/ Saab, Ford/ Jaguar . If the worlds largest car maker didnt know what to do with a semi prestige car brand like Saab over the course of 20 years , a time when there was never greater demand for premium products , then what hope have the Chinese.

They didn't buy Saab, neither brand nor company. They bought the IP to some projects, 93 and 95.

Its only Geely who bought the brand.

We'll see which strategy is successful.

The Chinese have lots of hope. I'm far more enthusiastic about them than GM anyway. GM are a labourious monolith which is stuck in its old fashioned ways. The Chinese will quickly innovate and cost cut.
The two strategies which the industry is crying out for.

pyramuid man

Well hopefully they will learn about building decent and safe cars for the european and US markets.

This may be the step needed to bring them up to date with safety and the rest of the world.

Marlow

Saab Ed wrote: »

rather than pump money at something that already has an image i.e BMW/ Rover

BMW bought Rover to get Mini and a few of the things that the high end Landy's have and then sold what they didn't need again. It's a bit different, than with GM/Saab, Ford/Volvo.

As for the chinese, they are new to the market, so they will have different approaches.

/M

Saab Ed

enda1 wrote: »

The Chinese have lots of hope. I'm far more enthusiastic about them than GM anyway. GM are a labourious monolith which is stuck in its old fashioned ways. The Chinese will quickly innovate and cost cut.
The two strategies which the industry is crying out for.

"Chinese" and "innovate" in the same sentence, now thats a new one on me. The Chinese dont inovate they copy and badly at that.

PS I never said they bought Saab.

VolvoMan

Ford ruined them anyway.

maidhc

VolvoMan wrote: »

Ford ruined them anyway.

I think the myth dispelling NCAP did to be honest.

Mailman

VolvoMan wrote: »

Ford ruined them anyway.

Yeah, shame on Ford for giving them the Focus chassis and running gear.:rolleyes:

Pdfile

cant wait to see the new wreaks they make, but most of volvos engines atm are ford... so where's the standing on that ??

will they use the good old engines or the ****e ford ?

Marlow

Pdfile wrote: »

cant wait to see the new wreaks they make, but most of volvos engines atm are ford... so where's the standing on that ??

will they use the good old engines or the ****e ford ?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Volvo never really build their own engines for cars. Well, the 5-cylindre was more or less a Volvo development, but they even got outside help for that.

If you take the V6 in the 260 and 760 petrols for example, that was a Renault motor. If you take the straight 6 2.4 diesel in the 260 and 760, that was the same McPherson engine, that's sitting in VW LT vans from the 70's and up to the point, where VW LT started sharing chassis with the Mercedes Sprinter.

My first car was actually a VW LT31 from '86 and when I needed some replacement parts, I basically took the injector and various other stuff from a Volvo 260 diesel engine, that I bought for spares. The only difference on that engine was the diesel accellerator, which was manual in the LT and driven by a membrane connected into the cooling system in the Volvo. Beyond that it was the exact same engine.

Same goes for all the 4-cylindre engines: borrowed and bought wherever they could.

Volvo has had it's excellence in being a pioneer in safety and being extremely rigid cars. That's about it.

So, if it's Ford, Renault, McPherson or what the f*ck, that's sitting under the bonnet is not going to make a difference to before.

/M

245

Marlow wrote: »

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Volvo never really build their own engines for cars. Well, the 5-cylindre was more or less a Volvo development, but they even got outside help for that.

If you take the V6 in the 260 and 760 petrols for example, that was a Renault motor.
/M

Volvo designed and built their own engines from 1927. Their B16/B18/B20/B21/B23 range of engines were all renowned for being capable of huge mileages (routinely in excess of 300,000 miles and often in excess of 500,000 without a rebuild).

The PRV engine was not a Renault engine - it was designed and built by a consortium jointly and equally owned by Peugeot, Renault and Volvo.

Mailman

Volvo generally didn't build their own engines for the last few decades. With Volvo all along it was the first thing I'd check when ever a new Volvo car was released to market.
Sometimes it was a good thing - latest Focus engines. Sometimes bad - ancient Renault lumps.

Saab Ed

Marlow wrote: »

. If you take the straight 6 2.4 diesel in the 260 and 760, that was the same McPherson engine,

Cough* Perkins Engine * Cough

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_LT

Also only the small 4 cylinder Volvo engines were borrowed .....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_B23_engine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_B230_engine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_740

Marlow

Saab Ed wrote: »

Cough* Perkins Engine * Cough

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_LT

Thanks for the correction. I always mix the two up.

Anyhow, while Volvo might have developed some of their own machines, there's a lot of'em that are running on borrowed engines, so you always had to check. Pre-Ford or after Ford bought them.

/M

JayeL

The European car companies should have started amalgamating years ago, the writing's been on the wall for a while. They need to start asap - otherwise, there won't be a European car industry to speak of outside of Germany.

The French and Italians are more or less hopeless and wouldn't exist without their home markets' unwavering loyalty. Despite appearances, Fiat's takeover of Chrysler will be the AOL Time Warner of the motor industry and Renault are too overweight and old-fashioned to sustain a Japanese interest that's bigger than them (Nissan) and a Korean interest that's infintessimally-small (Samsung Motor). And when was the last time either sold anything in the US, the world's biggest car market (for now; China will pass it out this year).

The sad thing with Volvo, however, is that they shouldn't be in this position. Volvo have moved with the times, they've never stopped trying new things and re-interpreting themselves. I would contend that they abandoned the safe, dependable European family car market to the likes of Skoda in search of some kind of compact luxury segment, which wasn't entirely wise. But the XC90 was a masterstroke (as is the XC60) and they made the most of Ford's input. Ford even ended up using one of their engines in the Focus ST and some of their parts in Aston Martins (the satnav screen, if memory serves me) - unthinkable when they took over Jaguar!

The problem was that they were always too small. Volvo should've taken a leap in the 90s and set up a US factory, bringing production closer to their biggest market and eliminating the krona-dollar exchange rate element. Nokia, for example, could've made a quick buck by selling out in the mid-90s to Sony or something - but instead, they decided to adjust their business model, get big quickly and consolidate their success every year. If 850s were pouring out of an American plant and an MPV followed before the end of the 90s, they could've cleaned up. They could even have been looking at setting up a Chinese plant by now!

The Volvo name means a lot in the USA - that's all Geely want and now they'll make a fortune by prostituting the Volvo badge on pieces of badly-made crap, built on a smoggy industrial estate on the edge of Hangzhou by workers on $20 a week - they'll just be fridges on wheels to this crowd. And Saab is gone too - this is the worst Christmas ever!

VolvoMan

Mailman wrote: »

Yeah, shame on Ford for giving them the Focus chassis and running gear.:rolleyes:

You only have to look at the current S80/V70 and compare them to the previous models to see what a negative influence Ford has had on the brand.

Ford platforms haven't seemed to benefit Volvo anyway. Every Ford-based model launched in recent years has been slated for its ride/handling. You will also see, that in return for the Focus and Mondeo platforms, Ford have used themselves the P2 platform that underpinned the S60, V70, S80 and current XC90 for a lot of their US range.

Volvo as an acquisition has proved to be very beneficial for Ford, as most of their range today wouldn't be as good as it is without their help and engineering contribution. Whereas the likes of Jaguar and Land Rover were complete basket cases when Ford swallowed them, Volvo have given more technology to Ford than Ford have in fact to them. Both Volvo and Mazda should really be given most of the credit for getting Ford Motor Company where they are today.

Mailman wrote: »

Volvo generally didn't build their own engines for the last few decades. With Volvo all along it was the first thing I'd check when ever a new Volvo car was released to market.
Sometimes it was a good thing - latest Focus engines. Sometimes bad - ancient Renault lumps.

I don't know where all this rubbish is coming from that Volvo bought in engines. The only units I can think off the top of my head were diesel units and Renault engines used in the 300/400 series, which were really more DAF cars than Volvo.

In the last generation S40/V40, the petrol engines were four cylinder versions of the 5 and 6 cylinder versions used in bigger models. These were all built in Skovde, Sweden and the only outside involvement in their development was some engineering consultancy work by Porsche. What you will find in today's Focus ST and RS are in fact descendants of this unit, which Ford pinched out of the Volvo parts bin.

The Volvo B200 series was another engine used from the 1960's Amazon right up to the 900 series, when it finished production in 1998. This unit has powered the majority of Volvo cars right up until the 850 and was one hundred per cent developed by Volvo.

Unlike SAAB, who bought in Triumph engines rather than building their own units, about three quarters of the engines Volvo used over the years have been their own. I don't see how because Volvo bought a diesel engine at a time when very few cars were powered by the fuel means that they bought in nearly all of their engines.

245

VolvoMan wrote: »

The Volvo B200 series was another engine used from the 1960's Amazon right up to the 900 series, when it finished production in 1998. This unit has powered the majority of Volvo cars right up until the 850 and was one hundred per cent developed by Volvo.

I'm in a particularly pedantic mood today so I have to point out that the B20 and B200 series were different engines, the B20 being pushrod and the B200 being OHC. The Amazon wasn't supplied with the B200 series engine.

Both were as you say 100% Volvo and were capable of intersteallar mileage

peasant

Saab Ed wrote: »

Cough* Perkins Engine * Cough

Still wrong

Volkswagen reacted quickly; from August 1978, the Perkins engine was replaced with one of their own diesel engines that had proved successful on the Volkswagen Golf - while adding two more cylinders. The Golfs' 1.6 litre four-cylinder engine became the D24 2.4 litre six-cylinder, delivering 55 kilowatts (75 PS; 74 bhp). Unlike other diesel engines in this performance class, the assembly stood out for its balanced vibration behaviour and pleasing acoustics. The engine worked so convincingly that Volvo adopted it for the Volvo 200 series, and were therefore able to offer the first passenger car with a six-cylinder diesel engine

.

VolvoMan

245 wrote: »

I'm in a particularly pedantic mood today so I have to point out that the B20 and B200 series were different engines, the B20 being pushrod and the B200 being OHC. The Amazon wasn't supplied with the B200 series engine.

Both were as you say 100% Volvo and were capable of intersteallar mileage

I'm not an expert on anything pre-1980's so I stand corrected.

245

VolvoMan wrote: »

I'm not an expert on anything pre-1980's so I stand corrected.

I'm not an expert on anything post-1980's Volvowise - my newest Volvo is 1977 so feel free to correct me on any Volvo matters involving that new-fangled front wheel drive setup

sceptre

Saab Ed wrote: »

"Chinese" and "innovate" in the same sentence, now thats a new one on me. The Chinese dont inovate they copy and badly at that.

Funny, that's precisely what used to be said about the Japanese, in particular using the example of them borrowing their written language from China.

Anyone for gunpowder, a compass, paper or the printing press? Last few now, they'll be gone after Christmas.

I'm pretty sure the Chinese can relearn innovation and invention. There are quite a few of them.

Saab Ed

JayeL wrote: »

.

The French and Italians are more or less hopeless and wouldn't exist without their home markets' unwavering loyalty. Despite appearances, Fiat's takeover of Chrysler will be the AOL Time Warner of the motor industry and Renault are too overweight and old-fashioned to sustain a Japanese interest that's bigger than them (Nissan) and a Korean interest that's infintessimally-small (Samsung Motor). And when was the last time either sold anything in the US, the world's biggest car market (for now; China will pass it out this year).

In fairness to the French and Italians they have been clever about going forward. Renualt did take the controling stake in Nissan which gave them access to th US and Asia without having to sell Renaults. It also gave them Infiniti , Samsung and lets not forget Dacia. Now on their own none are total world beaters but together you make the 4th or 5th biggest car company in the world, not exactly hopeless. As for the Italians , the only reason they are still here is because folk are not happy to buy something with a Fiat badge on it but they'll sure buy the same product with another badge on the grille. Examples: Fiat engines are in Fiats, Saabs, Fords, Opel/Vauxhalls, Suzuki, Renaults, Ivecos and probably more but I cant think of them. Also Fiat make just about everything you dont see in a car so chances are what ever you are driving probably has a high percentage of Italian designed or made bits under the bonnet. As regards PSA , their shares are one of the few that didnt fall in huge amounts due to their healty bank balance and non exposure to declining markets. Enough said really. Now wasnt it Toyota that posted a multi billion dollar loss this year :D

Mailman

VolvoMan wrote: »

I don't know where all this rubbish is coming from that Volvo bought in engines.

You won't win over me to your side of the argument like that.

I remember as a teenager being in Mechanic's garage and correcting his misconception that the engine he was working on was a Volvo engine by pointing out to him the VW mark on the casting of the engine block.

Their mass market cars use other peoples engines for the most part; that's not a negative or positive statement and shouldn't be construed as either.

VolvoMan

Mailman wrote: »

I remember as a teenager being in Mechanic's garage and correcting his misconception that the engine he was working on was a Volvo engine by pointing out to him the VW mark on the casting of the engine block.

But you were making it out as if they rarely ever used their own engines. That was more than likely a VW diesel engine which was one of the few units they bought in.

Mailman

VolvoMan wrote: »

But you were making it out as if they rarely ever used their own engines. That was more than likely a VW diesel engine which was one of the few units they bought in.

I would expect that in volume terms on their cars(not just their flagship models) over the last 20 years engines from other manufacturers have accounted for the greater part of their sales.
Cars of a certain size will not sell without a diesel variant in mainland europe and Volvo use other manufacturers Diesel engines.
VW, PSA, Renault, Mitsubishi and Ford have provided motive power for a large proportion of their cars.
You can get all sentimental about the T5 engines but they represent a minority of the entire fleet.

VolvoMan

Mailman wrote: »

I would expect that in volume terms on their cars(not just their flagship models) over the last 20 years engines from other manufacturers have accounted for the greater part of their sales.
Cars of a certain size will not sell without a diesel variant in mainland europe and Volvo use other manufacturers Diesel engines.
VW, PSA, Renault, Mitsubishi and Ford have provided motive power for a large proportion of their cars.
You can get all sentimental about the T5 engines but they represent a minority of the entire fleet.

It's obvious you're just purely speculating here. Every car Volvo has produced since the 400 series finished production has used Volvo engines. They also have had their own diesel engine for eight years now with the D5 unit.

I'll list two engines Volvo have used in recent years that haven't been their own - the 1.8 GDi which was a Mitsubishi unit, and the 1.9 litre turbodiesel which was a Renault unit. Every single other unit has been their own.

Mailman

Feck off you bluffer.
The S40 range is powered by Ford/Mazda Duratec engines for the most part and the Diesel S40s are PSA units.

pajo1981

JayeL wrote: »

The French and Italians are more or less hopeless and wouldn't exist without their home markets' unwavering loyalty. Despite appearances, Fiat's takeover of Chrysler will be the AOL Time Warner of the motor industry and Renault are too overweight and old-fashioned to sustain a Japanese interest that's bigger than them (Nissan) and a Korean interest that's infintessimally-small (Samsung Motor). And when was the last time either sold anything in the US, the world's biggest car market (for now; China will pass it out this year).

The EU is the worlds largest car market and has been for sometime now.

The EU's biggest selling car is the Peugeot 207 and was the 206 before that. The Irish Car of the Year award went this year to the Peugeot 3008 and last year to the Citroen C5 - also, last year the C5 won German car of the year and came second in Japan (winning import of the year). Not bad for a hopeless nation...

Also, Carlos Ghosn (CEO Renault) is herald as a hero in Japan for saving Nissan, and even has a character in comic in his honour.

maidhc

VolvoMan wrote: »

I'll list two engines Volvo have used in recent years that haven't been their own - the 1.8 GDi which was a Mitsubishi unit, and the 1.9 litre turbodiesel which was a Renault unit. Every single other unit has been their own.

And both were fitted to a tarted up Mitsubishi Carisma!

colm_mcm

From the top of my head, the 1.8f engine in the S40 and C30 is Ford, as is the 1.6 petrol. the 1.6d is a PSA unit, the 2.0 is Ford too.

The 2.5 5 sylinder is also Ford, the diesel in the old S40 was Renault as was the 1.6 petrol and the 1.9d. the 1.8i is Mitsubishi

VolvoMan

Mailman wrote: »

Feck off you bluffer.
The S40 range is powered by Ford/Mazda Duratec engines for the most part and the Diesel S40s are PSA units.

No need to get so personal, mate.

The current S40 was produced by Ford, so therefore uses some Ford engines. They are hardly what you would call 'bought in'.

colm_mcm wrote: »

The 2.5 5 sylinder is also Ford, the diesel in the old S40 was Renault as was the 1.6 petrol and the 1.9d. the 1.8i is Mitsubishi

Any 5 cylinder in the Ford range is Volvo, ask around anywhere, research it on Wikipedia. They just rebranded it Duratec. Volvo are probably one of the few remaining producers of 5 cylinder engines in the industry today.

The 1.6 litre petrol in the old S40 was also Volvo. The only non-Volvo units in the old S40 were the GDi and the diesel engines.

Mailman

VolvoMan wrote: »

The only non-Volvo units in the old S40 were the GDi and the diesel engines.

You mean the engines that would have been the largest sellers i.e. the most fuel efficient petrol and diesel engines.

Tragedy

Mailman wrote: »

You mean the engines that would have been the largest sellers i.e. the most fuel efficient petrol and diesel engines.

I think the 2litre turbo outsold the 1.8 in the UK. Could be wrong though!

Tbh, you just sound a bit peeved now that you were mostly wrong.

Mailman

Thing is I'm not mostly wrong and I'm not peeved.

Tragedy

Mailman wrote: »

Thing is I'm not mostly wrong and I'm not peeved.

"Volvo generally didn't build their own engines for the last few decades. With Volvo all along it was the first thing I'd check when ever a new Volvo car was released to market.
Sometimes it was a good thing - latest Focus engines. Sometimes bad - ancient Renault lumps."

Wrong.

"I would expect that in volume terms on their cars(not just their flagship models) over the last 20 years engines from other manufacturers have accounted for the greater part of their sales.
Cars of a certain size will not sell without a diesel variant in mainland europe and Volvo use other manufacturers Diesel engines.
VW, PSA, Renault, Mitsubishi and Ford have provided motive power for a large proportion of their cars.
You can get all sentimental about the T5 engines but they represent a minority of the entire fleet. "
Wrong(5 cylinder engines made up the vast vast proportion of S60, V70 and S80 sales).

And you do come across as being peeved

Mailman

Tragedy wrote: »

Wrong(5 cylinder engines made up the vast vast proportion of S60, V70 and S80 sales).

And you do come across as being peeved

As with BMW the smaller vehicles make up they sales that the flagship models create the demand for.
S60 has a 1.6 litre engine.
3.2 litre and 4.4 V8 are ford or ford/yamaha designs that have application elsewhere and are built in Ford factories.
S40/V50/C30 accounted for over 150K of their sales in '08 and they are mostly ford or PSA engined.

Do you want to start talking about Volvo engines?
I was shocked at just how unrefined the 2.4 litre Diesel was in my Brother's XC90. Expensive car ruined by it's engine.

VolvoMan

Mailman wrote: »

You mean the engines that would have been the largest sellers i.e. the most fuel efficient petrol and diesel engines.

The 1.8 litre petrol four cylinder was the volume seller in the S40. The GDi was only sold for a short while alongside that engine and proved to be a disaster.

Mailman wrote: »

As with BMW the smaller vehicles make up they sales that the flagship models create the demand for.
S60 has a 1.6 litre engine.
3.2 litre and 4.4 V8 are ford or ford/yamaha designs that have application elsewhere and are built in Ford factories.

The S80 is what you're thinking of that has the 1.6 litre diesel engine. The S60 is a totally different car altogether.

The 3.2 litre straqight 6 is a Volvo engine, while the V8 is a modified Yamaha engine that was previously used in the Ford Taurus. It's quite good too, if the new Noble M600 is anything to go by.

Tragedy

Mailman wrote: »

As with BMW the smaller vehicles make up they sales that the flagship models create the demand for.

You're thinking of ireland, not worldwide. I don't think they even sell the s40/v50 in the states.

S60 has a 1.6 litre engine.

No it doesn't, smallest is a 5 cylinder volvo 2.0 low pressure turbo pushing out 180bhp. Not bad for the base engine!

3.2 litre and 4.4 V8 are ford or ford/yamaha designs that have application elsewhere and are built in Ford factories.

As stated, 3.2l is a volvo straight 6. the 4.4 v8 is a fairly new introduction to the s80.

S40/V50/C30 accounted for over 150K of their sales in '08 and they are mostly ford or PSA engined.

The range topping engines in all of those are volvo 5 cylinders, hardly "Volvo generally didn't build their own engines for the last few decades."
When you factor in S60/V70/S80/XC70/XC90, the opposite is true with the volume sellers all being Volvo engines.

Do you want to start talking about Volvo engines?
I was shocked at just how unrefined the 2.4 litre Diesel was in my Brother's XC90. Expensive car ruined by it's engine.

The D5 got fairly good reviews, to the best of my knowledge, it wasn't any less refined than the majority of diesel engines when it was in production - and produced a lot more power+torque than most.(the S60 D5 got kudos in reviews for the induction roar of the diesel making it sound sportier, believe it or not)

Mailman

Tragedy wrote: »

You're thinking of ireland, not worldwide.



As stated, 3.2l is a volvo straight 6. the 4.4 v8 is a fairly new introduction to the s80.

The D5 got fairly good reviews, to the best of my knowledge, it wasn't any less refined than the majority of diesel engines when it was in production - and produced a lot more power+torque than most.(the S60 D5 got kudos in reviews for the induction roar of the diesel making it sound sportier, believe it or not)

3-series is in top 10 sellers in UK. I don't work off sales in Ireland. Flagship models make sales for bread and butte models for premium car manufacturers. This has always been the case.

That 3.2 is a Ford engine designed partially in sweden, manufactured in a Ford plant and used elsewhere in LandRover product.

That Diesel is a horrible thing. You have heard positive reviews and I've heard negative reviews and had first hand experience of it in an XC90. My brother disliked it so much he traded it in very soon after buying it new.