Talk:Volvo 700 Series/Archive 1

Comments
Obviously the 900 series was mechaniscally similar, and the articles on the 940 and 960 were small so I boldly merged them. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 13:15, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Could the title of this page be changed to reflect that it does include both the 700/900 models?? 163.13.129.145 06:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

'''Whoa, the V90/VCC concept does NOT belong here!! 163.13.129.145 06:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)'''

Dude, I found the article easy to read when I last read it a few months ago. Unless it has been screwed by some people subsequently, I can't see why it is confusing to any readers. 72.93.31.83 17:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I have some of the factory repair manuals. Can I use them as references? I do not know about scanning some of its drawings, but I can add pictures I tookSupremeDalek 18:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC). SupremeDalek 18:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

745 crashworthiness
Are we sure about those claims on the 745's crashworthiness? (opening paragraphs). The reference links deal with the integrity of the A-pillar, and they seem to be more a discussion on the dangers of a crumple zone car colliding with a more rigid car. Even then, those references aren't good enough to support even that claim.

A look at one reference book I have mentions nothing about this problem with the 745.

GA Failed

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * 1) It is stable.
 * 2) It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * 1) Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * a Pass/Fail:

Its a pretty confusing article, some of the jargon needs to be linked and it needs a thorough copyedit. Full dates need linking, the images need captions and it needs references. What the 940/960/S90/V90 headings doing here? If they're a replacement for some of the 700 series surely they should be in the 900 series article? GA Failed for now. RHB 16:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There is no 900-series article since the 940 and 960 are based on the 740 and 760. The S/V90 are really late 960 rebadged to fit in with Volvos new naming structure. This is clearly stated in the article. --Dahlis 23:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, the main difference between a late 740/760 and the 940/960 is a new rear end, and a new inline-6 power plant. Incremental changes.

700 & 900 title
The title of the article must be changed to Volvo 700 & 900 series as wikipedia has deemed them to be in the same entry, while Volvo badged both cars separate. So both 700 & 900 must be listed as the articles title if wikipedia is to be true - Anthony. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.143.150 (talk) 19:05, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Please globalise
To read this article, you'd think that the 700 (and 900) series Volvos were barely known outside the US. In fact until recently they were a very common sight here in Britain, and there are still quite a few around. 86.143.51.58 (talk) 20:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

SE Information is really lacking.
There needs to be more information on the Special Editions, as it was more than just a badge difference as portrayed in the article. The SE versions of both the pre-89 and 90+ 740s are heavily sought after by Volvo enthusiasts and collectors. The pre-89s came with what was called the Aero-flow or AirFlow body kit. And in 1991-1992 the 740SE came with painted body styling kits and spoiler which triggered a new incentive to design sportier vehicles like it's successor the 850 T5-R/850R.D3X10N (talk) 06:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Added information
Quoting the section about the SE-models, it says: "In Sweden, the 940 SE was an ordinary non-turbo 940 with some optional extras as standard". Now that is very odd, as I do own a 940 SE, which is fitted with a light pressure turbo. sv:Jonathan_W (213.89.173.134 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 20:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC).

i´m under the impression that at least on some markets the 940SE was almost basically a 4cylinder 960. i have the brochure for the 1993 year model and the sedan (but oddly not the estate) SE has the recessed wipers although i think the 940 and not the 940 dash was used.--Lotsofmagnets (talk) 16:20, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

700 evolution into the 900.
The article as it stands is far too complimentary about the 700 series, and does not explain why it evolved into the 900 series so quickly. In the UK at least, the 700 series suffered from significant problems, to the extent that Volvo were effectively obliged to introduce something new, the 700 having become something of an embarassment. The reasons were threefold (1) the 700 series was poorly specified - it did not even come with a radio! This at a time when other manufacturers were putting a lot of effort into improving the driver appeal of their cars - as a result, many fleet cars were supplied by leasing companies who fitted very cheap radio/cassettes that didn't enhance the cars' appeal at all. (2) Reliability: the 700s fitted with traditionally-aspirated engines suffered from a lot of problems with cold/damp starting; many 700s also suffered from rust problems (some leasing companies were taking back cars at the end of their 3-year leases and finding significant rust penetration, especially in the estates' rear door after just that short time). (3) Running costs: the 700s got through tyres and exhaust systems at an unacceptable rate of knots, and replacements were not cheap - which, again, was not popular with leasing companies who were obliged to bear the cost of maintaining these cars for typically 3 years. The article should reflect some of these issues, and not just praise the 700 series. The 900 series was far better in every respect, I'll grant you (I can't recall - does the article mention the 940 "Celebration" model that appeared in 1998? If not, then it should - one of the best "value for money" cars ever shipped, certainly in the UK).Lazzeez (talk) 15:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I suspect this information is a lot of heresay. the main difference between the 700 and 900 series is the different rear window and boot design. there is no record of significant rust (there are several cars here in iceland and rust seems far from an issue and as far as i was aware all 700s were equiped with cassette players at least for the australian market. as for reliability, i recal no text stating that the 740 series suffered reliability issues. the 760 engine problems are well documented but this does not cover the alleged cold/damp start issue.--Lotsofmagnets (talk) 18:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Photos on Volvo 960/S90 section
The top photo of a bluish silver car has the caption Volvo 960 which is not quite correct; it could be a 95 or 96 960, or 97/8 S90. Similarly the lower photo captioned S90/V90 could be a 95/6 960 or 97/8 V90. How do I know? I own an S90, and spent several months looking at all straight six engined Volvo cars available for sale on the net before buying my car ( a Sept. 97 build date car). Incidentally, probably due to its boxy shape, which I however like, they command low prices in Australia. There is no other car available here that cost as much new with the same level of performance and luxury for less than double what these now sell for. I am well pleased with mine - it's a far superior animal to the two MS123 Toyota Crowns I have owned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by S90 owner (talk • contribs) 11:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

the difference between the 960 and S/V90 was only the badge so the photos don´t really matter unless they include the badge in the photo explicitly.--Lotsofmagnets (talk) 18:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Engines
The engines sections in each model section and the list at the end needs to be cleaned up as it is not consistent, confusing and at several points i suspect factually inaccurate. when was the B19 offered in the 700 series? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lotsofmagnets (talk • contribs) 18:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I added references (Lindh, Volvo: The Cars-From the 20s to the 80s) to settle this question. Best,  ⊂&#124; Mr.choppers &#124;⊃   (talk) 07:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Italian 2.0 16v turbo engine
a quick look around the net reveals that not only did it exist (i found an auction with photos of such an engine with turbo clearly written on the air intake but also that the same configuration was available for the portugese market. if anyone wants to query this i can point out the plethora of evidence i found, one of which is a brochure for the 1991 model year. --194.144.70.30 (talk) 16:12, 12 June 2010 (UTC)--Lotsofmagnets (talk) 16:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

740 infobox photo
...is actually a 760 with a 740 grille! does anyone have a picture to replace it? --Lotsofmagnets (talk) 01:47, 13 June 2010 (UTC)