Recently my Volvo S70 was totaled. Only very minor injuries for a front and back seat passenger. The car did its job and protected us.
Now in the market for a new vechicle. Considering the Ford Freestyle 2007. The crash tests seem to be equal. A friend said that the Volvo would be safer because it has a steal cage.
The maintenance for the S70 was brutal. I would like lower maintenance bills and hope for this with the Freestyle.
However, safety for me and occupants is my primary concern. Money is an issue.
Please advise.
You do understand that you are comparing two fords?
yes and no. It is my understanding that the Volvos are built in Sweeden. Also, it is my understanding that Fords are still less expensive to maintain… Are you saying that the maintenance for Fords is equal to Volvo now and/or that the cars are bulit the same way? I am not clear on the exact realationship.
He probably just wanted to make sure you knew that Ford owned Volvo. It also means that some cars share a platform- so the base of the car is the same. Regardless, as with all premium manufacturers vs. the the non-premium, the Volvo will be more expensive to maintain. I have heard good things about the Freestyle and it’s safety ratings.
ref
the only problem i can see is you will need to get a new name to sign into this forum. i would suggest hatelovefreestyle.
what year was the S70?
how long had you had it?
it is kind of hard to compare new vs old. however volvo and bmw have a $$$$$$$$$ reputation for parts.
I was just pointing out that ford owns volvo (at the moment, until they find a buyer). I don’t know if they have owned volvo long enough to do much damage (like jag), or if the volvo’s operation is relatively independent. Personally, I would avoid any car that is associated with a domestic manufacturer or built in north america.
Fords are about equally as safe as Volvos; all cars have steel cages now. The weakest part in today’s safety equation is the driver; car safety has advanced greatly for all vehicles; you would be better off investing in a defensive driving course to maximize your overall safety.
With respect to maintenance, the Ford will cost about 50% as much to maintain as the Volvo, and be sightly more reliable. Besides being much less expenmsive to buy, the choice is really a no-brainer. Go for the Ford.
However, if you have a Volvo budget, take a look at Toyota and Honda models; they are much more reliable than Fords, and also last much longer while costing a great deal less than a Volvo.
There really is a great choice out there in safe, reliable vehicles!
It also means that some cars share a platform- so the base of the car is the same.
The Charger, Magnum and 300 all have the same platform, not sure if the Challenger shares it as well, but it just goes to show that you pay for the name plate.
“However, if you have a Volvo budget, take a look at Toyota and Honda models; they are much more reliable than Fords,”
Funny that you say that…
If you look at reliability data on Truedelta.com, the 2007 Ford Freestyle is surpassed in reliability ONLY by the following Hondas and Toyotas:
2005 Acura TL, 2003 Honda Civic, 2005 Toyota Corolla, 2006 Toyota Prius, 2008 Toyota Prius, and 2007 Toyota Yaris.
It ties the 2007 Toyota Prius, and beats all other Hondas, Toyotas, Acuras, and Lexus models they measure (the list is too long to go through here), including all of the following 07 or newer models:
2007 Acura MDX, 2007 Acura RDX, 2007 Acura TL, 2007 Honda Accord, 2008 Honda Accord, 2007 Honda Civic, 2007 Honda CRV, 2007 Honda Fit, 2007 Honda Odyssey, 2007 Honda Pilot, 2007 Honda Ridgeline, 2007 Lexus ES, 2007 Toyota Camry (4 cylinder, 6 cylinder and hybrid all, 2007 Toyota FJ Cruiser, 2007 Toyota Rav4, 2007 Toyota Sienna, and 2007 Toyota Tundra.
The 06 Freestlye shows up slightly less reliable than the 07, but still above the following 06 or newer Hondas/Toyotas:
2007 Acura MDX, 2007 Acura RDX, 2007 Acura TL, 2006 Honda Accord, 2006 Honda Civic, 2007 Honda Civic, 2007 Honda CRV, (ties the 2007 Honda Fit), 2006 Honda Odyssey, 2007 Honda Odyssey, 2006 Honda Pilot, 2007 Honda Pilot, 2006 Honda Ridgeline, 2007 Honda Ridgeline, 2007 Toyota Camry (4 cylinder and 6 cylinder, not the hybrid), 2007 Toyota FJ Cruiser, 2006 Toyota Rav4, 2007 Toyota Sienna, and 2007 Toyota Tundra.
Like it or not, the Freestyle is really proving itself to be an amazingly reliable vehicle. Your “much more reliable” crack is dated, silly, and juvenile.
“I don’t know if they have owned Volvo long enough to do much damage (like jag)…”
Actually, Jaguar is a vastly more reliable car now than before Ford took it over. If you don’t like most of the domestic cars, what about the equivalents in Europe like Fiat, Seat, and Renault? Now there’s a lousy trio for you; much worse that your dreaded trio in North America.
The Freestyle, Ford 500, and the new Taurus/Sable are loosely based on a Volvo S80 platform. Most of the mechanical parts are pure Ford, which will be more reliable and cheaper to fix than the Volvo.
“Actually, Jaguar is a vastly more reliable car now than before Ford took it over. If you don’t like most of the domestic cars, what about the equivalents in Europe like Fiat, Seat, and Renault? Now there’s a lousy trio for you; much worse that your dreaded trio in North America.”
I certainly wouldn’t own most of those either (with the possible exception of some renaults). My dad actually had a fiat 600 (similar to a seat 600) during the 70s “gas crisis,” it was fun to play with but it was a real PITA to keep running. It made my VW bug look large. Some euro cars are worse than the stuff from the “big 2-1/2,” but very few are as boring. Fortunately, most of their real junk doesn’t get exported. There are several “pre-ford” jags and volvos that I would actually buy, but I don’t buy anything associated with U.S. auto manufacturers. I complemented a guy’s very nice type E (series I) at a car show last year and his response was perfect, “At least it’s not a ford.”
I really don’t know/care if the ford/jags are “reliable” or not, would you actually buy a jag that looks like a torus (or whatever ford calls their “rental car” this year)? AFIAK, jag and volvo are both still up for sale; hopefully someone will rescue those names so they don’t go down in flames with ford. At least aston martin was finally saved by some wealthy car enthusiasts. Now if someone can just save saab from the clutches of GM before they turn them all into little plastic subarus…
Agree that INITIAL reliability of 2 Ford Products, the Fusion and the Freestyle is much better than previous Fords. Traditionally, after 5 years, US makes have twice as many prblems as Honda/Toyota/Mazda cars. Their life expectancy is also shorter. Ford Trucks (F150, Ranger) are a notable exception.
I still stand by my recommendation, but agree there is hope for Ford and GM if they keep improving their products.
You have absolutely NO proof of shorter life expectancy, do you? Or that your “twice as many problems” statement has even been relevant anytime in the past decade, do you?
I didn’t think so, because you won’t find any. Even by Consumer Reports, a 10 year old Ford is averaging just about 0.4 extra repairs (that isn’t double) over its lifetime than a 10 year old Toyota. JD Power puts Ford on par with Scion for dependability (not initial quality), and Mercury above Honda and Toyota.
Cars have improved so much that you’re splitting hairs based on brand using now irrelevant data points from the 1970s-early 90s… the variability in survey response is greater than the difference between brands. The Dodge Magnum and Chrysler 300 are listed in C.R. with a considerably bigger difference in engine reliability than the difference between the average Ford and the average Toyota. Kind of funny since they have the same engine.
This isn’t meant as a slight to Honda or Toyota…
But blanket statements that Honda or Toyota are “much more reliable” are simply NOT true.
The twice as many problems after 5 years has been exhaustively documented by both J.D.Power and Consumer Reports. Please check with them! These are, of course, collective averages, but Cosumer Reports has interesting curves for car relaiblity as it ages. I have owned some good US cars such as the old style Caprice and Impala Chevies. And there have been some poor Asian cars.
I subscribe to TruDelta, and appreciate their stats, but they don’t tell me much yet how well old cars behave. I do have Consumer Reports Car Reliability reports going back to 1974.
And those curves you’re referring to are the ones that simply do not show “double” the problems. At 10 years old, the average Toyota has hit about 65 problems per hundred, the average ford about 105 problems per hundred.
Meaning 40 problems per hundred difference, or 0.4 problems per vehicle over 10 years.
I understand it is tempting to take data at face value, but 105 is not 2x 65, and when you consider it really means 0.4 extra repairs over ten years… and then consider how inaccurate their data is for vehicles (like the Magnum and 300) that statistically MUST be the exact same in reliability (it is impossible for the engines to be different. Electronics? Sure… but not the identical engines), then you’ll see there really is no statistical difference.
Which is why jumping to some conclusion that Toyota or Honda will be “much better” is silly. The data is presented so that it looks significant, but it actually proves that the difference is nonexistant to very minor.
Sorry, I just get a little worked up over this… 
I think the best thing to do is to steer people away from true lemons (like the Ford Windstar!), but otherwise just help with suggestions of vehicles that fit their needs and desires. Trying to scare them based on statements not backed up by facts does everyone a disservice…
Shorty, I agree that the quality gap has narrowed between US and Asian manufacturers. In the hands of a dedicated driver, the difference in problems would not be as large as in the past.
Having said that, my wife’s friend has a relatively new Dodge Neon, which she faithfully tries to keep running, but incurs numerous problems it should not have.
My wife’s humble Nissan Sentra (1994) seems to be bullet-proff by comaparison.
This scenario is repeated over and over again with aging cars. So, you calls 'em as you sees 'em! Besides, I read the statistics.
Both GM and Ford have had what amounts to an almost religious conversion. They have discovered that quality and relaibility really sells, and are making determined steps to catch up.
There was one issue that puzzled me for yeras. When the rear drive large GM cars were produced, they were cooky-cutter identical, and yet the Buicks had the best reliability, followed by Olds, then Chev, and Pontiac brought up the rear. These are cars using virtually identical components.
A psychologist revealed the answer to this enigma. he said:“Watch the ads!”
Olds had Dick Van Patten tell us it sold solid family cars driven by solid, law abiding drivers who did their maintenance. Chevies were the real workhorse, and probably accummulated the most miles as fleet and commercial cars.
Buick was always stressing quiet, dignified driving styles, so sold to dignified folks.
Pontiac, on the other hand, sold anti-social machismo, and its cars were shown as kicking up dirt. So the driving style and lack of “sissy” maintenance of these cars gave Pontiac a less reliable rating.
The same could be true for the difference between the Dodge Magnum and the Chrysler 300.
This is an area Consumer Reports and JD Powers fear to tread because of possible backlash for Civil Rights activists. The truth is that certain types of people are more maintenance-oriented than others, and that does reflect later on the life and reliability of their cars.
Criag, Volvo is a moneymaker for Ford and reaches a market no other Ford product reaches. Besides, Volvo does all of Ford’s safety research and design. Ford would only sell Volvo if they had to. Volvo projects a “responsible & caring” image for Ford,for what it’s worth.
The fact that university professors, doctors concerned with safety, Ralph Nader, and several of my friends with Swedish wives have Volvos gives the marque a certain “cachet”, as the French say.
I guess I was half right (jag sold), but there have been persistent rumors that ford was trying to sell volvo as well. I was just looking at it from volvo’s point of view, having a parent company that is losing money every year is not a good position to be in. I would just hate to see ford take volvo down with them (I’m assuming ford is not long for this world). I really don’t know how much of the volvo image rubs off on ford, it seems more likely that the association with ford will damage volvo’s image (at least with their traditional market). If they do hold onto volvo, I just hope the leave the car designs alone (unlike jag, which will take years to recover from fords “influence,” if they ever do recover).