Talk:Volvo 700 Series

Split
I propose splitting this article into at least two, maybe more separate articles.

Volvo 700 series Volvo 900/90 series

Or maybe separate articles for all:

Volvo 740 Volvo 760 Volvo 780 Volvo 940 Volvo 960 Volvo S90/V90

I believe that there is already enough material for such a split to make sense, with the possible exclusion of the S90/V90 which could be subsumed into the Volvo 960 article.  ⊂&#124; Mr.choppers &#124;⊃  (talk) 18:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Please do. I would split the articles as follow:


 * Volvo 700 series
 * Volvo 900 series


 * For the 900 series, do we really need to have the "/90" appended to the end? We don't have an article titled "Mitsubishi Pajero/Montero/Shogun", because the lead and infobox "also known as" field ensures these alternative names are clearly noted. Separating by engine also seems a bit pointless as car does not really change all that much from a 740 to a 760, only the engines/transmissions which have separate articles. OSX (talk • contributions) 07:04, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe 700 series and different page to 900 series, but do we have enough material for separate articles at this moment, this page is now quite short, only that specification listing in the end makes this article look long... -- >Typ932 T&middot;C 08:21, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the '90' isn't really necessary I suppose. The differences are fairly superficial anyhow. As for length, I reckon 32kb is enough material to split a page, and it really seems rather contrived to have so many cars in a single article.  ⊂&#124; Mr.choppers &#124;⊃   (talk) 13:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)


 * i was the person who combined the articles originally. there was simply not enough written about the cars to justify keeping them separate. the 700 series was well written and the 900 was a short stub. at the time i was hesitant but realistically i don´t see the need for 2 separate articles as the 700 and 900 cars are extremely similar. i would even consider the possibility of combining the 7 and 9 sections as by the time of the changeover the only real difference was the boot of the sedans (the estates are pretty much identical.) no, at this stage i can´t support splitting the aricles up. --Lotsofmagnets (talk) 13:45, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * also, as you can see from your own list the redirect handles the content quite well--Lotsofmagnets (talk) 13:46, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't feel that the redirects work very well, if I'm looking for something on the Volvo 940 I'd feel a bit at a loss if I was redirected to the top of this page. Some anchors and pipelinks could fix that, of course. However, the article is currently up to 32kb, which is when splitting becomes recommended by Wikipedia. Also, the difference between these two cars:

Is rather thorough. Different engines, suspension, very different names, sharing only some of the centre of the body as far as what is visible. Other articles on cars that have much more in common receive separate articles, such as the Ford Laser/Meteor (the Meteor has a trunk), Opel Astra/Vauxhall Astra and Belmont (Vauxhall badging, Belmont had a trunk). The difference between a late V90 and an early 760 is very deep, and while the change was very gradual, I feel that the dividing line is best drawn between the 700 and 900. Another issue is the links to other language pages, which currently seem to operate at random:

de:Volvo Serie 700 fr:Volvo 960 it:Volvo Serie 700 nl:Volvo V90 ja:ボルボ・740 pt:Volvo 700 Series fi:Volvo 940 sv:Volvo V90 (redirects to Volvo 960)

This is a natural outcome of the English language page being the only one that lumps together this entire range of models in a single article. I usually look toward the German pages for clarity and logic (national stereotypes are wonderful), and they do divide into two articles on the same lines as proposed here. All the best,  ⊂&#124; Mr.choppers &#124;⊃   (talk) 16:32, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

The volvo in the picture to the right in the 940 section is actuallty a 740. 940 never had the plastic trim around the headlights, only 740 did. You should change that picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.209.105.216 (talk) 15:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I support the split. The 740 and 940 shared many similar interior features but in terms body they were very different. For example note the "D" pillar, the 740s had a straight drop to meet the rear side panels. The 940s had a more angular "D" pillar that dropped to a solid 90 degree angle and a rounded trunk lid/rear end. The 940/960s had significant engine upgrades also, such as "coil over ignition" and higher output engines (B6304). Personally I think they deserve two separate articles. In my opinion it would be like lumping the 140 and 200 series together. Essentially they were the same cars from the “A” pillar onward but were marketed and sold as different models nonetheless. - NFJB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nfjb (talk • contribs) 05:20, 16 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Split has been done - Volvo 900 Series & Volvo 700 Series. I have checked redirects, and also interwiki links, but it's worth checking them again, as I made a mistake with the titles as I hadn't realised that the term "series" was used in lower case in the article yet capitalised in the title. The text will also need careful checking and amending, as it was a fairly crude split.  SilkTork  *Tea time 22:36, 5 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Excellent! I guess I should have done it a long time ago, instead of wasting all of my energy on discussing it. I will check for more links to proper articles on other language pages.  ⊂&#124; Mr.choppers &#124;⊃   (talk) 14:00, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Volvo 780 link update
Now that there is a standalone article for Volvo 262C, I updated the link from Volvo 200 Series to Volvo 262C just to keep this article up to date. I intended for that to be a good edit.--Kevjgav (talk) 19:35, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Proposed split for Volvo 780
I would like a show of hands to tell me who agrees and who disagrees with my thought. Because there is a standalone article for Volvo 262C, I think there should also be one for the 780, but again I would like to know who agrees and who disagrees and for each user to explain.--Kevjgav (talk) 01:52, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * In that case you should go all the way and split off the 740's and 760's as well, otherwise the situation becomes ambiguous. Most other WPs have separate articles. --Midas02 (talk) 02:21, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I missed the split conversation for the 262 but would have opposed it. Perhaps a separate page for the 260 series as a whole, but not for the 262. 780 is a better candidate for a split as it has an entirely different body and a completely different history.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  02:50, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

@Midas02 and Mr.choppers-In Talk:Volvo 262C I've suggested that the article be deleted and merged into Volvo 200 Series. I changed my mind about the 780. In Talk:Volvo 140 Series I even proposed the idea for a Volvo 100 Series article by merging Volvo 164 into the 140 Series article.--Kevjgav (talk) 01:21, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up. I still support splitting off the 780, its bodywork is entirely unique and its development history (=most of the article content) is almost entirely separate from the saloons and estates.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  02:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Volvo's first prestige car
I'm not sure why it says the 760 was Volvo's first attempt at a prestige car. I know that they made prestige cars prior to the 760, such as the Volvo 164 and Volvo 262C, both of which were very obviously intended to be in the luxury niche. I'm starting a discussion here and have added maintenance tags regarding that as a disputed statement.--2601:153:800:8308:3813:9EF8:FA5A:C703 (talk) 09:06, 9 March 2018 (UTC)