The great Volvo 300 replacement debate

[Ronnie]

I've recently changed my job to freelance which means I'm covering some serious milage. I get 25p/mile expenses, but in a 360 the way I drive on the motorway that's barely covering it...

I've been thinking about a much newer car, something with a high tech diesel, cruise control and built in sat nav. I troll ebay looking at cars, cross referencing with carsurvey.org, Parkers, Honest John and Autotrader.

I make comments to myself: "too French", "I can not become a mondeo man...", "Nice car, shame the engines fail prematurely". And at the end of the day I still think most of them are FWD trash. Finally I've settled on the idea of a new Focus, or a Honda Accord

I'm basically talking about £10000 worth of low milage second hand car, over three years this is equivalent to about £300/month. I'll save about 25/month in fuel costs, but that's still £275/month.

Pros
NCAP safety
Fuel Economy
More green
Comfort
Convieniance of modern integrated technologies
"Prestige" of a nice looking new car

Cons
FWD
Loads of money spent on a metal box on wheels
Less fun
All that stress of keeping a valuable motor on the street, leaving it in car parks etc.
Not being able to service, fix, modify it myself
I can fit cruise control (I have an unifitted aftermarket set), sat nav, and many other things to my 300 if I try hard enough

The fuel economy argument is a no go, if you factor in the cost of the car. Imagine spending £275 per month on your 300???!!! Unless you're Adam, then you don't have to imagine

The NCAP argument is the one that gets to me, because I have a little one. But then the 300 is a Volvo, be it an old one, and I always try really hard not to crash.

In summary - I'm going to stop torturing myself on ebay and stick with the 360. And now that I'm earning a bit more, actually spend some money on it.

[griffo20022]

Don't forget you'd also have increase on insurance, tax and MOT expenses too, have you factored those into the equation, stick it out dude

[Chris_C]

,... and I always try really hard not to crash.

Best quote ever!

Tbh mate, I'd imagine the thing that would swing it for me is the NCAP thing, But... is it worth looking into that though, I think all the results are published on the internet. IS a lot of pennies though....

[Ronnie]

I think I was subconsciously deeply biased towards my Volvo in my calculations - I've just realised that if I buy a car that's twice as fuel efficient I'll actually save £100 a month... If I found the right car for 3k or so I'd be better off. Back to square one.

[V6 Man]

Don't knock the Honda Accord - my parents have had Hondas for 14 years now and all the cars have ever needed is routine servicing and the odd light bulb.

The 2000MY Accord is not a bad car to be honest. My fathers is the TypeV with the 2.2 150bhp engine. It's fast (ish), economical (30-40mpg and it's an auto) and well equipped (leather, climate, full leccy pack, decent stereo etc). The only criticism is that being the high spec model the ergonomics aren't as good as a Volvo with some of the luxury features (heated seats, front fogs) having there switches placed wherever there was a space, not in a logical place. It's almost as if the high spec version was an afterthought with Honda suddenly realising they ought to offer a luxury model, rather than design a car that could be either base spec or luxury like a Volvo S/V70.

If you're looking at spending 10k or so then may I suggest a S60 or V70 P2 D5....

[classicswede]

Why no solve all your problems and keep the 360 as your everyday car. All you need is cheaper fuel.

Why no gas it?

[trabitom99]

For me, the only downsides of the 300 in your list are NCAP safety and fuel economy.

Safety

I've given this a bit of thought in the past, 'cos I've got a family too, it's funny how some priorites change when you've got a little'un trotting around Nevertheless, I've got my own theory on car safety, flawed as it may be, here it is:

The most common cause of death among UK males in 2003 was:

1. Cancer 28%
2. Heart diseases 22%
3. Stroke 9%

... and way, way down the list comes

6. Accidents 2.3%

In fact, if you're a woman, death by "accident" drops down to 9th place (1.7 %)

What I'm saying is, rather than working more hours to earn more money for a newer safer car, statistically at least you're keeping yourself alive longer by working less and going for a jog every once in a while, or stopping smoking, or cutting down on the booze. Even assuming I'm Mr Healthy-Living (which I'm not), it still makes more sense for me to invest the ten grand in my home, making my stairs more safe for example, rather than investing it in airbags for the once-in-a-month occasion when I take my family somewhere on a motorway.

Even if you count yourself in the high risk group of 15 - 34 year old males (which I guess most of us are in), you're still more likely to kill yourself (1. Suicide 20% of all deaths) than die in a "land transport accident" (2. 19.6 %).

OK, now I've disproven all those car company theories here's

Fuel economy

Either convert it to run on gas like Dai says, or just buy the cheapest, most economical car you can find as a second car to use on long journeys. The money you've saved in fuel bills will presumeably more than compensate the costs of running a second car. New cars? No way, the fuel saving from any new car just can't match its loss in value, which comes clattering down in the first few years.

As for the rest IMO they're negligible. Greenness? A large proportion of the energy a car uses in its lifetime is produced during its manufacture. Comfort? Fit some new seats from a low-mileage scrappy or drift car, think about replacing the odd seal or two. Prestige? We've all been 300 owners for too long to worry about that, eh

Maybe I'm spouting rubbish, at the end of the day, it's how much you really want to keep your 300 is what counts, if that's what you want to do, then you'll find the right reasons to keep driving it

Tom

[SteveP]

I've done the debate... it ended up in buying a 343 so I can get the 360 sorted..

[Ronnie]

Why no gas it?

Quote me!

It's a bloody good idea actually.

I'm very pleased with your safety argument, Tom - it's a good one. Never really saw it in that light. I have the disadvantage of having treated plenty of paediatric trauma in my career, and some of the Road Traffic Collision aftermaths I have seen have not been good ones. But, as the old adage goes, shit happens. And I completely agree with you on the green, comfort and prestige fronts - I just chucked them into the argument to make up the numbers.

Steve, glad I'm not the only one. In the past, in my years in the wilderness driving FWD tat (the dodge 50 still leaves me with a warm fuzzy feeling), I was always comparing my cars to 360's - "why don't all cars have cold air vents in the centre of the dash?", "I wish I could just squirt the power and fishtail it round", "Why does this car sound like it's going to explode when I floor it on the motorway?", "Why does my back hurt?" etc etc.

I think I'll be deeply unadventurous and stick to what I know.

[petefarrell360]

Good arguments Tom! And Steve, you know it made sense to get another 300, one just isn't enough! I'd stick with the 300's personally mate, I know I would say that, but having seen the damage of a couple of crashed 300's, I'd say they stand up very well to impacts. New cars and economy are a false economy. The cost and deprecication far outweights fuel saving and the crap they tell you about being green etc. I'd rather have fun and enjoy driving my 300's, despite knowing it's costing me quite a bit at the moment in fuel, but in the long run costing me far less than wasting my time with a new car that is going to lose value very quickly.

Pete

[redline]

Ronnie ,

even if you bought a second 300 to use for work and lpg'd it as Dai suggested , you would be better off than buying a modern car
( it certainly wouldent cost £10.000 )

any savings on fuel made by a newer diesel car would be by far outwighed by the initial outlay and depreciation

the only downside of using your current car is the amount of miles you would put on it commuting

[SteveP]

Buy a £500-700 turbo diesel, the money saved doing 45-50mpg can attribute to the servicing costs/360 pimpage

[SteveP]

"why don't all cars have cold air vents in the centre of the dash?"

Haha... that is so true... the 940 didn't even have this function - end up getting too bloody hot with the heater on. I don't know why other manufacturers/models don't do it!

[trabitom99]

If it was me, I probably wouldn't go down the LPG route. I can't fit it myself, and I wouldn't know whether to trust used parts, so a conversion would cost me 2400 Euros over here. Also, Putin's already said he's going to raise gas prices by 60% next year, making heating my house 30% more expensive, and who knows how long the (German) government will keep the tax on LPG as low as it is now?

If I had to start commuting over many miles tomorrow (now I do most of it by bike or by Trabant) I'd first give a 340 Diesel a go, just to say I've tried it. If I got fed up with the noise (I've been in one as a passenger, they REALLY are loud!) I'd get a base model Mercedes 190 D with 72 horsepower, maybe as an automatic. RWD, unburstable engine, comfortable, refined (for a diesel) and will go on for another half-a-century in Botswana long after you've sold it on to the friendly African car-export dealer.

Back to the safety issue, I was being kind of semi-serious Road accidents are far too common to take lightly. But nevertheless, what's the point in spending tens of thousands on NCAP safety if all you consume is burgers and pints, and you're on 60 fags a day? You might as well go and blow it all on a nice holiday in the time you've got left. Statistically speaking, of course

Tom-now-health-guru

[Chris_C]

I'd love a new car, but struggle to find any the size of the 300 that can return the milage the 300 does. I consistantly get 200+ miles to £20, even with fuel going up. The only way to get that in something modern is a TD because of all the safety kit they carry round.

I also don't like the way it's always made out cars are so much greener now. The enviromental cost of scrapping car A and making car B is huge, and likely to no be made up in the lifetime of the car (it's over 10 years from memory). Last time I looked at the CO2 charts that are being put out, my 1.7 would fit into the "B rated" catagory, which again is actually BETTER than modern stuff.

You can't tell the govement need the revenue generated from the new car economy can you.... Then again, it's not like it's the first time they have spouted rubbish.