Just returned from viewing the Volvo. A nice surprise I got was that the 
owner was a Volvo dealer mechanic, evident from the greasy blue shirt the 
the logo and local dealer's name. No proof of this but it's obviously 
well serviced: fresh coolant and oil so clean you have to hold the 
dipstick at an angle to see it. Peering underneath, there's even fresh 
grease on the endstops where the  steering hits full lock.
Full service history consists of a complete collection of invoices and 
checklists, right from the pink slip for the first oil change at 3000 to 
the last full service at 90,000, which included a cambelt change. Not the 
slightest wisp of smoke when the engine was started. Small repairs are 
also detailed: new rear discs because of scoring, new thermostat, new 
engine mount etc. General wear & tear stuff, really.

Cosmetically, it has two little dings down the nearside and one larger 
one on the front of the bonnet. These are being sorted by a dent 
specialist before I collect the car. Paint is generally excellent, 
couldn't find a scratch of any significance and there isn't any real 
stonechip damage to speak of. Just a few very light ones that virtually 
disappear when you rub the wax away. The one paintwork problem is that 
the lacquer has crazed at one side of the rear bumper. I intend to have 
this resprayed as I don't believe it will be expensive. Alloys all 
perfect except N/S front, which has been scuffed once right on the rim 
and is corroding slightly in the middle.

Inside it has a bit of wear on the very outside edge of the drivers seat, 
but much less than on the primera. The seats are firm and comfortable and 
have not sagged at all. Rest of the interior is immaculate.

On the road it would be better judged by someone with previous experience 
of the car, but all I can say is it's like driving a new car. Steering 
smooth and positive, brakes keen, clutch light to operate (although it 
engages quite sharply, I guess this is because of the power it has to 
deal with. When I went on a Ferrari drive, their clutches were similar). 
No vibrations, noises, etc. It accelerates like a rocket! Small delay for 
the turbo, then it surges forward and pins you into the seat! By far the 
most powerful car I've driven.

From the asking price of 3000, I negotiated a sale for 2750. This 
allows for the fact that the bumper could do with a respray and the tyres 
haven't much life left in them. Although they're all Pirelli P6000s (no 
skimping,then), unscuffed and evenly worn, the tread is getting rather 
low on all of them and none of them are going to get very far before I 
have to shell out on new ones.

So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with 96k? 
Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon I've got an  
excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is worth the money. 
It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and mileage. it's general 
condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)



-- 
Stuart Sharp

> From the asking price of 3000, I negotiated a sale for 2750. This
> allows for the fact that the bumper could do with a respray and the tyres
> haven't much life left in them. Although they're all Pirelli P6000s (no
> skimping,then), unscuffed and evenly worn, the tread is getting rather
> low on all of them and none of them are going to get very far before I
> have to shell out on new ones.


Sounds great, but get used to buying tyres - T5's *eat* fronts :)


> So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with 96k?
> Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon I've got an
> excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is worth the money.
> It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and mileage. it's general
> condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)


If it's been well looked after, and is in good nick, it will go for many a 
long year. My brother bought a 740 back in 1990 (a 1989 model), he still has 
it now even though it has done over 170k!

Hellraiser............>

Hellraiser wrote:


> Sounds great, but get used to buying tyres - T5's *eat* fronts :)


They don't have to...


-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

Hellraiser wrote:

>> From the asking price of 3000, I negotiated a sale for 2750. This
>> allows for the fact that the bumper could do with a respray and the
>> tyres haven't much life left in them. Although they're all Pirelli
>> P6000s (no skimping,then), unscuffed and evenly worn, the tread is
>> getting rather low on all of them and none of them are going to get
>> very far before I have to shell out on new ones.
>
> Sounds great, but get used to buying tyres - T5's *eat* fronts :)


Try and find Maxxis MA-V1's - by far the best 'budget' performance tyre I 
had on my Carlton.


>
>> So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with
>> 96k? Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon
>> I've got an excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is
>> worth the money. It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and
>> mileage. it's general condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)
>
> If it's been well looked after, and is in good nick, it will go for
> many a long year. My brother bought a 740 back in 1990 (a 1989
> model), he still has it now even though it has done over 170k!
>


Jealous now. Want to swap for a 1992 Mazda? Comes top in the reliability 
surveys ;-)

>> If it's been well looked after, and is in good nick, it will go for
>> many a long year. My brother bought a 740 back in 1990 (a 1989
>> model), he still has it now even though it has done over 170k!
>>
>
> Jealous now. Want to swap for a 1992 Mazda? Comes top in the reliability 
> surveys ;-)


Forgot to add, the original clutch lasted 150k :)

Hellraiser...........>

"PC Paul"  wrote in
news:TT8Ke.40957$FG3.8935@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk: 


> Hellraiser wrote:
>>> From the asking price of 3000, I negotiated a sale for 2750. This
>>> allows for the fact that the bumper could do with a respray and the
>>> tyres haven't much life left in them. Although they're all Pirelli
>>> P6000s (no skimping,then), unscuffed and evenly worn, the tread is
>>> getting rather low on all of them and none of them are going to get
>>> very far before I have to shell out on new ones.
>>
>> Sounds great, but get used to buying tyres - T5's *eat* fronts :)
> 
> Try and find Maxxis MA-V1's - by far the best 'budget' performance
> tyre I had on my Carlton.


OK, I'll remember that. I know that P6000s are excellent, my Primera had 
the original ones on when I bought it, but they soon wear out. A slightly 
harder wearing tyre without a lot of compromise on grip is what I'd be 
looking for. No point in buying a 240bhp car and fitting crap tyres :-)

>>
>>> So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with
>>> 96k? Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon
>>> I've got an excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is
>>> worth the money. It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and
>>> mileage. it's general condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)
>>
>> If it's been well looked after, and is in good nick, it will go for
>> many a long year. My brother bought a 740 back in 1990 (a 1989
>> model), he still has it now even though it has done over 170k!
>>
> 
> Jealous now. Want to swap for a 1992 Mazda? Comes top in the
> reliability surveys ;-)
> 
> 

Nah....I'll stick with the Volvo and repair it now and again. Ta for the 
very generous offer, though ;-)



-- 
Stuart Sharp

>> Sounds great, but get used to buying tyres - T5's *eat* fronts :)
>
> They don't have to...


No.  The car could be left on the drive.

-- 
Peter

"You're not a real UKRCMer until you've had your big end bearings go."

"AstraVanMan"  wrote in 
news:sf9Ke.964$6i5.145@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net:


>>> Sounds great, but get used to buying tyres - T5's *eat* fronts :)
>>
>> They don't have to...
> 
> No.  The car could be left on the drive.
> 


Quite right, Pete. One doesn't buy a T5 to dawdle along in whilst admiring 
the countryside. Either use it in the appropriate manner or not at all. And 
using it appropriately *will* consume rubber :-)

-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Hellraiser"  wrote in
news:3lskrdF12l362U1@individual.net: 


>>> If it's been well looked after, and is in good nick, it will go for
>>> many a long year. My brother bought a 740 back in 1990 (a 1989
>>> model), he still has it now even though it has done over 170k!
>>>
>>
>> Jealous now. Want to swap for a 1992 Mazda? Comes top in the
>> reliability surveys ;-)
> 
> Forgot to add, the original clutch lasted 150k :)
> 
> Hellraiser...........> 
> 
> 

You're really tempting me now, but I'm stubbornly sticking  with my T5 ;-)

-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96ADD7468CAA0nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

Description snipped.

>
> So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with 96k?
> Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon I've got an
> excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is worth the money.
> It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and mileage. it's general
> condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)


Congratulations.
Maybe we can all now have a bit of peace and quiet. :-)
Get back to more serious things, like how to change the pads on an Escort.

Sounds like a nice car though, even if it is FWD. :-)
Has it got traction control? I imagine it has with that sort of power.
As Hellraisers says though. It eats fronts. Well under 10k is the norm if
you tend to have a heavy foot.
As for fitting budget tyres, I certainly wouldn't fit them.
Tyres are one aspect of running costs om which I don't believe in making
compromises just to save 20-30 quid, maybe more per tyre Especially for a
relatively high performance car.
What is the point of buying a good performing car, then fitting tyres that
don't do justice to the cars capabilities, and possibly make the car less
pleasurable to drive?
The tyres on my BM cost well over 100 each. The ones on My Celica just
under that. When they need replacing the same or equally as good tyres will
be fitted.
When even good tyre costs break down to less than a penny per per mile, the
savings on budget tyres make an insignificant difference to the overall
costs of running a car.
Forget the cost. Get the best tyres for the car, and enjoy the cars
performance to it's maximum is my advice.
Mike.

In message <42f947b3$0$1296$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Mike G 
 writes


>What is the point of buying a good performing car, then fitting tyres that
>don't do justice to the cars capabilities, and possibly make the car less
>pleasurable to drive?
>The tyres on my BM cost well over 100 each. The ones on My Celica just
>under that. When they need replacing the same or equally as good tyres will
>be fitted.
>When even good tyre costs break down to less than a penny per per mile, the
>savings on budget tyres make an insignificant difference to the overall
>costs of running a car.
>Forget the cost. Get the best tyres for the car, and enjoy the cars
>performance to it's maximum is my advice.


Couldn't agree more.

Apropos of tyres, anyone know what the OEM 195/50/15 tyres on a '52 MX5 
were? I forget what was fitted to the car we're buying except that while 
they were all a premium brand (and matched), I didn't recognise them as 
an out-and-out performance tyre.

-- 
Steve Walker

Goodyear f1's work really well on that car. are expensive but the handling 
and grip are excellent. as long as you don't drive like a idiot the fronts 
will give you 5k and the rears 10k. enjoy it it is a great car

j

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96ADD7468CAA0nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with 96k?
> Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon I've got an
> excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is worth the money.
> It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and mileage. it's general
> condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)


Very nice - unless you're unlucky it should be a fine car, surprisingly
cheap to run (apart from the tyres mentioned below!) as it'll be mainly more
of the same - wear and tear and service items. Despite being fine, well put
together cars they don't seem to have the same image as their German
counterparts, which keeps prices a bit lower (it's an ill wind...) and the
turbo models are wolves in sheep's clothing. Excellent for beating boy
racers off the lights, not that anyone here would do that, of course.    ;o)

Looks like seven seaterdom is beckoning for me soon and a nice V70 or 850
would fit the bill nicely (there are a couple of nice-looking 940s on
Autotrader too but the handling, or reputed lack of, is a bit of a
concern... comments for/against anyone?).

Stu wrote:


> Small delay for the turbo,


You don't get that with a big V8.  ;)


> then it surges forward and pins you into the seat!


You do get that with a big V8.   =8)


> By far the most powerful car I've driven.


You didn't try Starship 540 then...


> From the asking price of 3000, I negotiated a sale for 2750. This 
> allows for the fact that the bumper could do with a respray and the 
> tyres haven't much life left in them. Although they're all Pirelli 
> P6000s (no skimping,then), unscuffed and evenly worn, the tread is 
> getting rather low on all of them and none of them are going to get 
> very far before I have to shell out on new ones.


Sounds good. :)

I wouldn't skimp on tyres, it's a false economy on fast cars.

Enjoy!



A

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96ADD7468CAA0nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> Just returned from viewing the Volvo. A nice surprise I got was that the
> owner was a Volvo dealer mechanic, evident from the greasy blue shirt the
> the logo and local dealer's name. No proof of this but it's obviously
> well serviced: fresh coolant and oil so clean you have to hold the
> dipstick at an angle to see it. Peering underneath, there's even fresh
> grease on the endstops where the  steering hits full lock.
> Full service history consists of a complete collection of invoices and
> checklists, right from the pink slip for the first oil change at 3000 to
> the last full service at 90,000, which included a cambelt change. Not the
> slightest wisp of smoke when the engine was started. Small repairs are
> also detailed: new rear discs because of scoring, new thermostat, new
> engine mount etc. General wear & tear stuff, really.
>
> Cosmetically, it has two little dings down the nearside and one larger
> one on the front of the bonnet. These are being sorted by a dent
> specialist before I collect the car. Paint is generally excellent,
> couldn't find a scratch of any significance and there isn't any real
> stonechip damage to speak of. Just a few very light ones that virtually
> disappear when you rub the wax away. The one paintwork problem is that
> the lacquer has crazed at one side of the rear bumper. I intend to have
> this resprayed as I don't believe it will be expensive. Alloys all
> perfect except N/S front, which has been scuffed once right on the rim
> and is corroding slightly in the middle.
>
> Inside it has a bit of wear on the very outside edge of the drivers seat,
> but much less than on the primera. The seats are firm and comfortable and
> have not sagged at all. Rest of the interior is immaculate.
>
> On the road it would be better judged by someone with previous experience
> of the car, but all I can say is it's like driving a new car. Steering
> smooth and positive, brakes keen, clutch light to operate (although it
> engages quite sharply, I guess this is because of the power it has to
> deal with. When I went on a Ferrari drive, their clutches were similar).
> No vibrations, noises, etc. It accelerates like a rocket! Small delay for
> the turbo, then it surges forward and pins you into the seat! By far the
> most powerful car I've driven.
>
> From the asking price of 3000, I negotiated a sale for 2750. This
> allows for the fact that the bumper could do with a respray and the tyres
> haven't much life left in them. Although they're all Pirelli P6000s (no
> skimping,then), unscuffed and evenly worn, the tread is getting rather
> low on all of them and none of them are going to get very far before I
> have to shell out on new ones.
>
> So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with 96k?
> Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon I've got an
> excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is worth the money.
> It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and mileage. it's general
> condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)
>


I agree. We've (mother mostly) run 2 850's and currently a 97 S70 SE over
around 150,000miles and really they're cheap as chips to run (apart from
tyres, though not especially heavy- mother is fairly steady!) due to the
reliability- buying a well cared for one in the first place, and an
experienced service-man is the key.

The 850's had minor niggles such as door check straps, rattley trim, heater
matrix bursting etc, but the S70 is far far better screwed together.
Currenly on 76k (25k with us) bought 2 yrs ago for #3700. Okay its only the
2.5 10v but it does 31-34mpg and will cruise at the ton all day, and handles
not too bad for a big barge. Cornering has to be pretty severe to get the
P6000s to squeal.

We've had the a/c recharged and a minor problem with the cooling fan sorted
and thats all the unscheduled attention its needed.

An oil change every 6months (or 5000miles) and proper 10k service every year
with a local garage who is familiar with Volvo's and they'll do a big
mileage.

You only get big bills if you leave a minor problem to develop into a
serious one. Parts are very reasonable (not quite mondeo money) from the
likes of GSF or ECP.

I wouldnt use anything other than a P6000 type or hardish compound tyre on
them, especially the Turbo's. Tyre life is greatly improved if you can
resist 'turbo'ing'  in 1st gear, also clutch life (which are expensive to
change and not for a novice / under the arches place)

And you wont find a stereo as good in anything else!

Tim..

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f947b3$0$1296$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96ADD7468CAA0nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
> 
> Description snipped.
>>
>> So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with
>> 96k? Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon
>> I've got an excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is
>> worth the money. It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and
>> mileage. it's general condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)
> 
> Congratulations.
> Maybe we can all now have a bit of peace and quiet. :-)
> Get back to more serious things, like how to change the pads on an
> Escort. 


LOL...yes it was all a bit OT, but your help & support has been greatly 
appreciated :-)

> 
> Sounds like a nice car though, even if it is FWD. :-)


It's a lovely car and a joy to drive. With the bumper repainted, it will 
pass for a lot younger than it is.


> Has it got traction control? I imagine it has with that sort of power.
> As Hellraisers says though. It eats fronts. Well under 10k is the norm
> if you tend to have a heavy foot.


No TC, actually. Wasn't standard until 2000. The spec of a Volvo is 
composed of lots of options packs, so the features vary greatly.
In any case, I'm pretty smooth at putting the power down. At least that's 
what they told me when I went for the Ferrari driving experience. My time 
in the short cone slalom competition was about 17s and this was about 3s 
faster than anyone else (about 20 drivers attended) :-)


> As for fitting budget tyres, I certainly wouldn't fit them.
> Tyres are one aspect of running costs om which I don't believe in
> making compromises just to save 20-30 quid, maybe more per tyre
> Especially for a relatively high performance car.
> What is the point of buying a good performing car, then fitting tyres
> that don't do justice to the cars capabilities, and possibly make the
> car less pleasurable to drive?


Totally agree. I've used cheap tyres once before. Never again. Totally 
ruin the experience of driving a good car. P6000s can be had for about 
75 each, but I may be tempted to go for something just a little longer 
lasting. Eagles or Potenzas, perhaps?


> The tyres on my BM cost well over 100 each. The ones on My Celica
> just under that. When they need replacing the same or equally as good
> tyres will be fitted.
> When even good tyre costs break down to less than a penny per per
> mile, the savings on budget tyres make an insignificant difference to
> the overall costs of running a car.
> Forget the cost. Get the best tyres for the car, and enjoy the cars
> performance to it's maximum is my advice.
> Mike.
> 
> 

Very good advice indeed, IMHO.

-- 
Stuart Sharp

Steve Walker  wrote in
news:6Zbzd0BV0b+CFw0k@otolith.demon.co.uk: 


> In message <42f947b3$0$1296$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net>, Mike
> G  writes
> 
>>What is the point of buying a good performing car, then fitting tyres
>>that don't do justice to the cars capabilities, and possibly make the
>>car less pleasurable to drive?
>>The tyres on my BM cost well over 100 each. The ones on My Celica
>>just under that. When they need replacing the same or equally as good
>>tyres will be fitted.
>>When even good tyre costs break down to less than a penny per per
>>mile, the savings on budget tyres make an insignificant difference to
>>the overall costs of running a car.
>>Forget the cost. Get the best tyres for the car, and enjoy the cars
>>performance to it's maximum is my advice.
> 
> Couldn't agree more.
> 
> Apropos of tyres, anyone know what the OEM 195/50/15 tyres on a '52
> MX5 were? I forget what was fitted to the car we're buying except that
> while they were all a premium brand (and matched), I didn't recognise
> them as an out-and-out performance tyre.
> 


You can bet the original tyres worked well on the car, performance brand 
or not. I've heard that Lotus spend far more time trying out different 
tyres for OEM fit on their cars than they do on tuning the suspension!

-- 
Stuart Sharp

"jamie"  wrote in
news:ddcf1e$mrt$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk: 


> Goodyear f1's work really well on that car. are expensive but the
> handling and grip are excellent. as long as you don't drive like a
> idiot the fronts will give you 5k and the rears 10k. enjoy it it is a
> great car 
> 

Thanks, Jamie. I was considering Goodyear Eagle NCT 5. F1s are only 
slightly dearer. Which is harder wearing?


-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Carl Bowman"  wrote in
news:3lu6jjF14gcm1U1@individual.net: 


> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96ADD7468CAA0nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with
>> 96k? Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon
>> I've got an excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is
>> worth the money. It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and
>> mileage. it's general condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)
> 
> Very nice - unless you're unlucky it should be a fine car,
> surprisingly cheap to run (apart from the tyres mentioned below!) as
> it'll be mainly more of the same - wear and tear and service items.
> Despite being fine, well put together cars they don't seem to have the
> same image as their German counterparts, which keeps prices a bit
> lower (it's an ill wind...) and the turbo models are wolves in sheep's
> clothing. Excellent for beating boy racers off the lights, not that
> anyone here would do that, of course.    ;o) 


Thanks. Not really interested in boy racers. You can't really get all the  
Volvos power onto the tarmac until you're up to about 30mph. Besides, if 
they want to beat me off the line, let them - I've got nothing to prove. 
Can easily overtake them further down the road, if I wish ;-)

> 
> Looks like seven seaterdom is beckoning for me soon and a nice V70 or
> 850 would fit the bill nicely (there are a couple of nice-looking 940s
> on Autotrader too but the handling, or reputed lack of, is a bit of a
> concern... comments for/against anyone?).
> 
> 

Go for an 850, this was the first big Volvo with tight handling. Reviews 
say that it's firmness was quite a shock for 'old school' Volvo drivers. 
Personally, I find the T5 very comfortable (particularly good seats) and 
an ideal compromise between comfort & handling.



-- 
Stuart Sharp

Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:jr7ps2-5uv.ln1
@florin.fluffy:


> Stu wrote:
> 
>> Small delay for the turbo,
> 
> You don't get that with a big V8.  ;)

Quite true
> 
>> then it surges forward and pins you into the seat!
> 
> You do get that with a big V8.   =8)


Also true, but I've no regrets whatsoever :-)

> 
>> By far the most powerful car I've driven.
> 
> You didn't try Starship 540 then...


Nah, the Volvo was relatively local and once I'd seen it, it was too good 
to pass over. Your BMW tips have been great, though. I'm sure they'll 
come in handy in the future (if I don't become a Volvo addict) ;-)

> 
>> From the asking price of 3000, I negotiated a sale for 2750. This 
>> allows for the fact that the bumper could do with a respray and the 
>> tyres haven't much life left in them. Although they're all Pirelli 
>> P6000s (no skimping,then), unscuffed and evenly worn, the tread is 
>> getting rather low on all of them and none of them are going to get 
>> very far before I have to shell out on new ones.
> 
> Sounds good. :)
> 
> I wouldn't skimp on tyres, it's a false economy on fast cars.
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> 

Seems like we all agree on this.

Cheers, Alistair

-- 
Stuart Sharp

>> You didn't try Starship 540 then...
>
> Nah, the Volvo was relatively local and once I'd seen it, it was too good
> to pass over. Your BMW tips have been great, though. I'm sure they'll
> come in handy in the future (if I don't become a Volvo addict) ;-)


One question - exactly what Volvo was it that you bought?  An 850?  Saloon?

I think the 850 saloons are horribly ugly things.  But at the same time, a 
great q-car.

-- 
Peter

"You're not a real UKRCMer until you've had your big end bearings go."

"Tim.."  wrote in
news:ddcvuu$1am$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96ADD7468CAA0nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> So what do you reckon? Still a bit pricey for an 8 year old car with
>> 96k? Personally, I'm felling rather pleased with myself. I reckon
>> I've got an excellent example of a performance luxury saloon that is
>> worth the money. It's a lovely car and despite it's higher age and
>> mileage. it's general condition is equal to that of my Primera :-)
>>
> 
> I agree. We've (mother mostly) run 2 850's and currently a 97 S70 SE
> over around 150,000miles and really they're cheap as chips to run
> (apart from tyres, though not especially heavy- mother is fairly
> steady!) due to the reliability- buying a well cared for one in the
> first place, and an experienced service-man is the key.


Buying a car is always risky - you can't trust anyone, but I was 
impressed with the guy's attitude, especially for a young man. No hard 
sell and he never disclosed the fact that he's a Volvo mechanic until I 
saw his clothing and asked him. He must have had the valeter give it a 
once over because it's spotlessly clean everywhere, including the wheel 
arches and engine bay!

> 
> The 850's had minor niggles such as door check straps, rattley trim,
> heater matrix bursting etc, but the S70 is far far better screwed
> together. Currenly on 76k (25k with us) bought 2 yrs ago for #3700.
> Okay its only the 2.5 10v but it does 31-34mpg and will cruise at the
> ton all day, and handles not too bad for a big barge. Cornering has to
> be pretty severe to get the P6000s to squeal.


This one has had a few wear & tear items: battery, engine mount, brake 
discs, thermostat. All have been attended to as shown by the service 
history. The only hiccup it's had was an oil leak from one of the turbo 
pipes. Obviously, this has also been sorted.

> 
> We've had the a/c recharged and a minor problem with the cooling fan
> sorted and thats all the unscheduled attention its needed.
> 
> An oil change every 6months (or 5000miles) and proper 10k service
> every year with a local garage who is familiar with Volvo's and
> they'll do a big mileage.


I'll be sticking to fully synthetic from now on, mainly for the benefit 
of the turbo.

> 
> You only get big bills if you leave a minor problem to develop into a
> serious one. Parts are very reasonable (not quite mondeo money) from
> the likes of GSF or ECP.


Yes, I'll be buying from there so I get OEM quality parts. I don't think 
that maintaining garage service history is so important at this stage of 
the car's life, but from now on I'm keeping all my receipts so that I can 
at least prove I've spent money on filters & fluids etc

> 
> I wouldnt use anything other than a P6000 type or hardish compound
> tyre on them, especially the Turbo's. Tyre life is greatly improved if
> you can resist 'turbo'ing'  in 1st gear, also clutch life (which are
> expensive to change and not for a novice / under the arches place)
> 
> And you wont find a stereo as good in anything else!
> 

Excellent. I'm not into sub-woofers and split eardrums, but I *do* 
appreciate quality sound :-)



-- 
Stuart Sharp

In message , Stu 
 writes

>Steve Walker  wrote in

>>>Forget the cost. Get the best tyres for the car, and enjoy the cars
>>>performance to it's maximum is my advice.
>>
>> Couldn't agree more.
>>
>> Apropos of tyres, anyone know what the OEM 195/50/15 tyres on a '52
>> MX5 were? I forget what was fitted to the car we're buying except that
>> while they were all a premium brand (and matched), I didn't recognise
>> them as an out-and-out performance tyre.
>>
>
>You can bet the original tyres worked well on the car, performance brand
>or not.


I'm still digging. If I find out that the tyres are a cheaper 
alternative fitted by the previous owner, I'll rotate them until they're 
evenly worn and change the lot at once.


>I've heard that Lotus spend far more time trying out different
>tyres for OEM fit on their cars than they do on tuning the suspension!


Some cars are more sensitive to tyres than others, though. My Civic 
starts to get a bit wayward towards the end of the lives of the front 
tyres; not just a loss of wet grip, but more camber-sniffing and some 
torque steer.

-- 
Steve Walker

jamie wrote:

> Goodyear f1's work really well on that car. are expensive but the
> handling and grip are excellent. as long as you don't drive like a
> idiot the fronts will give you 5k and the rears 10k. enjoy it it is a
> great car


I'd go with Conti Sport Contact 2 - I used to get 12k between visits on 
them - have swapped to Premium Contact though and get 20k now - still driven 
hard (as I'm sure Astravanman and Dervman will confirm....)


-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

Alistair J Murray wrote:


> I wouldn't skimp on tyres, it's a false economy on fast cars.


Absolutely not - although I just bought a pair of Contis online for half the 
quack foot price and got them fitted for 12 quid.

-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

Stu wrote:


> Totally agree. I've used cheap tyres once before. Never again. Totally
> ruin the experience of driving a good car. P6000s can be had for about
> 75 each, but I may be tempted to go for something just a little
> longer lasting. Eagles or Potenzas, perhaps?


P6000 are hard enough but I find them noisy  and they get very trammy as 
they wear. Mich Primacy seem to be the best for an all round performer that 
lasts long enough. Conti premium as a cheaper alternative.

-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

Stu wrote:


> Nah, the Volvo was relatively local and once I'd seen it, it was too
> good to pass over. Your BMW tips have been great, though. I'm sure
> they'll come in handy in the future (if I don't become a Volvo
> addict) ;-)


www.volvotuninguk.com

this will ensure your addiction

-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

"Stu"  wrote in message 
news:Xns96AEA56095D20nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "jamie"  wrote in
> news:ddcf1e$mrt$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk:
>
>> Goodyear f1's work really well on that car. are expensive but the
>> handling and grip are excellent. as long as you don't drive like a
>> idiot the fronts will give you 5k and the rears 10k. enjoy it it is a
>> great car
>>
> Thanks, Jamie. I was considering Goodyear Eagle NCT 5. F1s are only
> slightly dearer. Which is harder wearing?


The eagles are more hard wearing but it is the softer compound that makes 
the F1's so good. if yours is the early T5 without the traction control then 
the F1's really help eliminate wheel spin in normal hard driving.

j

"AstraVanMan"  wrote in
news:uapKe.5699$JB4.2657@newsfe6-win.ntli.net: 


>>> You didn't try Starship 540 then...
>>
>> Nah, the Volvo was relatively local and once I'd seen it, it was too
>> good to pass over. Your BMW tips have been great, though. I'm sure
>> they'll come in handy in the future (if I don't become a Volvo
>> addict) ;-) 
> 
> One question - exactly what Volvo was it that you bought?  An 850? 
> Saloon? 
> 
> I think the 850 saloons are horribly ugly things.  But at the same
> time, a great q-car.
> 

S70. Still big and ugly, but not quite as hideous as the 850. More rounded 
edges and a more rakish windscreen. I quite like the shape in a perverse 
sort of way. I've no idea why, though. In any case, it's a car best enjoyed 
from within ;-)


-- 
Stuart Sharp

>> Goodyear f1's work really well on that car. are expensive but the
>> handling and grip are excellent. as long as you don't drive like a
>> idiot the fronts will give you 5k and the rears 10k. enjoy it it is a
>> great car
>
> I'd go with Conti Sport Contact 2 - I used to get 12k between visits on 
> them - have swapped to Premium Contact though and get 20k now - still 
> driven hard (as I'm sure Astravanman and Dervman will confirm....)


Sorry, I'll deny this.  I was in Tim's car a week or two back and he drove 
like a girl.  He was, like, sticking to 70 on the motorway and everything!

-- 
Peter

"You're not a real UKRCMer until you've had your big end bearings go."

AstraVanMan wrote:

>>> Goodyear f1's work really well on that car. are expensive but the
>>> handling and grip are excellent. as long as you don't drive like a
>>> idiot the fronts will give you 5k and the rears 10k. enjoy it it is
>>> a great car
>>
>> I'd go with Conti Sport Contact 2 - I used to get 12k between visits
>> on them - have swapped to Premium Contact though and get 20k now -
>> still driven hard (as I'm sure Astravanman and Dervman will
>> confirm....)
>
> Sorry, I'll deny this.  I was in Tim's car a week or two back and he
> drove like a girl.  He was, like, sticking to 70 on the motorway and
> everything!


Previous experiences???

Actually, I think you may not have been in my car when Angela hasn't been in 
it and I've been keeping it semi-sane. Think about it this way - you've been 
in a diesel van with me driving, now translate the throttle and brake 
movements to the Volvo...


-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

"Tim S Kemp"  wrote in news:R4CdndqH6Pk7qWffRVn-
2A@karoo.co.uk:


> Stu wrote:
> 
>> Nah, the Volvo was relatively local and once I'd seen it, it was too
>> good to pass over. Your BMW tips have been great, though. I'm sure
>> they'll come in handy in the future (if I don't become a Volvo
>> addict) ;-)
> 
> www.volvotuninguk.com
> 
> this will ensure your addiction
> 

Crikey! Some scary power upgrades available there, some of them perhaps a 
bit much for a FWD car. ECU remap looks tempting but I don't think I'll be 
bothering with that sort of thing. I know that 98RON is recommended for a 
stock T5, but I wouldn't want to make it dependent on it. 95 is dear 
enough, ATM!


-- 
Stuart Sharp

Stu wrote:


>> www.volvotuninguk.com
>>
>> this will ensure your addiction
>>
> Crikey! Some scary power upgrades available there, some of them
> perhaps a bit much for a FWD car. ECU remap looks tempting but I
> don't think I'll be bothering with that sort of thing. I know that
> 98RON is recommended for a stock T5, but I wouldn't want to make it
> dependent on it. 95 is dear enough, ATM!


Post upgrade they can use 95 - mine often has to - but you really notice the 
difference! Thing to remember though is that I get 10% more miles out of 97 
/ 98 RON, but it costs 7% more...



-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

"Tim S Kemp"  wrote in
news:aOWdnRilrPHX3GffRVn-jw@karoo.co.uk: 


> Stu wrote:
> 
>>> www.volvotuninguk.com
>>>
>>> this will ensure your addiction
>>>
>> Crikey! Some scary power upgrades available there, some of them
>> perhaps a bit much for a FWD car. ECU remap looks tempting but I
>> don't think I'll be bothering with that sort of thing. I know that
>> 98RON is recommended for a stock T5, but I wouldn't want to make it
>> dependent on it. 95 is dear enough, ATM!
> 
> Post upgrade they can use 95 - mine often has to - but you really
> notice the difference! Thing to remember though is that I get 10% more
> miles out of 97 / 98 RON, but it costs 7% more...
> 
> 

Good point - I hadn't thought about the economy improvements of optimax 
and the like. So an engine with the  remapped ECU can use 95 safely? In 
that case, what does this statement mean? :

"* The 280 bhp upgrade is a budget upgrade, which will run ok on 95 RON"

I took that as meaning that the 330bhp upgrade *does* require 98. Am I 
wrong?



-- 
Stuart Sharp

Stu wrote:


> "* The 280 bhp upgrade is a budget upgrade, which will run ok on 95
> RON"
>
> I took that as meaning that the 330bhp upgrade *does* require 98. Am I
> wrong?


no, it means the 330bhp upgrade runs poorly on 98, the 280 does 280bhp on 95 
ron.


-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

>>> I'd go with Conti Sport Contact 2 - I used to get 12k between visits
>>> on them - have swapped to Premium Contact though and get 20k now -
>>> still driven hard (as I'm sure Astravanman and Dervman will
>>> confirm....)
>>
>> Sorry, I'll deny this.  I was in Tim's car a week or two back and he
>> drove like a girl.  He was, like, sticking to 70 on the motorway and
>> everything!
>
> Previous experiences???
>
> Actually, I think you may not have been in my car when Angela hasn't been 
> in it and I've been keeping it semi-sane. Think about it this way - you've 
> been in a diesel van with me driving, now translate the throttle and brake 
> movements to the Volvo...


That's right.  Tim drives like he stole whatever it is he's driving.  Or 
like the 100 excess on a hire vehicle is a quest to get the best VFM for 
his 100 :-)

-- 
Peter

"You're not a real UKRCMer until you've had your big end bearings go."

"Tim S Kemp"  wrote in
news:5pmdnXWSBIDG2GffRVn-jw@karoo.co.uk: 


> Stu wrote:
> 
>> "* The 280 bhp upgrade is a budget upgrade, which will run ok on 95
>> RON"
>>
>> I took that as meaning that the 330bhp upgrade *does* require 98. Am
>> I wrong?
> 
> no, it means the 330bhp upgrade runs poorly on 98, the 280 does 280bhp
> on 95 ron.
> 
> 


So there's no danger of engine damage caused by detonation etc if using 95, 
just poor performance?

I find the claim of improved economy as well as performance hard to 
swallow. One would think that the manufacturer has designed the mapping for 
best economy with a safe power level. How can they extract more power and 
improve economy at the same time?

-- 
Stuart Sharp

Stu wrote:


> So there's no danger of engine damage caused by detonation etc if
> using 95, just poor performance?


Pretty much - you can feel the hesitation as you give it full beans on 95.


> I find the claim of improved economy as well as performance hard to
> swallow. One would think that the manufacturer has designed the
> mapping for best economy with a safe power level. How can they
> extract more power and improve economy at the same time?


They map for poor fuel quality etc. Also they often map to keep within 
various euro tax breaks, or keep emissions below a certain level.


-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

<snip>

Welcome to the club! I have a 1995 850 T5 Estate and love it! They're *very* 
quick, handle well for a big girl, and are reliable. Parts are suprisingly 
cheap from places like German & Swedish. They are kinda thirsty if your 
right foot is frequently heavy, mine returns about 27mpg on average! I've 
got low 40's on a run being very granny-like though.

Fire any T5 questions my way, I may be able to help. If the A/C does not 
work on your car I can help on that, having fixed my system myself :-).

Alan.

"Alan"  wrote in
news:QPEKe.3016$4y6.297@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net: 


> <snip>
> 
> Welcome to the club! I have a 1995 850 T5 Estate and love it! They're
> *very* quick, handle well for a big girl, and are reliable. Parts are
> suprisingly cheap from places like German & Swedish. They are kinda
> thirsty if your right foot is frequently heavy, mine returns about
> 27mpg on average! I've got low 40's on a run being very granny-like
> though. 
> 
> Fire any T5 questions my way, I may be able to help. If the A/C does
> not work on your car I can help on that, having fixed my system myself
> :-). 
> 
> Alan. 
>

Thanks, Alan. A/C works fine at the moment but may need re-gassing before 
long because it seemed to take a couple of minutes to get really cold. 
The system is obviously different from my Primera, which produces a hiss 
when it fires up. With the Volvo, all I heard was a positive click.

40mpg sounds very impressive for a run in one of these. I presume that it 
was not at 70mph, though. I'd be interested to know what I'll get at 70-
80 as I've got a trip down into Wales coming up shortly and would like to 
make an estimate of the fuel cost.

Cheers,


-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AFA2A8BA20Dnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

A/C works fine at the moment but may need re-gassing before

> long because it seemed to take a couple of minutes to get really cold.


If it gets really cold after a couple of minutes, I doubt it needs
regassing. Regassing is usually necessary when the air is not as cold as it
should be. As gas is lost the air temperatures gradually get higher until
the system shuts itself down.
The best check is to measure the output temperature at an air vent, and to
compare it against the recommended figures for similar a/c systems.
The time between switching on and delivery, doesn't tell you anything about
the health of the system IMO.
Mike.

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AFA2A8BA20Dnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "Alan"  wrote in
> news:QPEKe.3016$4y6.297@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net:
>
> > <snip>
> >
> > Welcome to the club! I have a 1995 850 T5 Estate and love it! They're
> > *very* quick, handle well for a big girl, and are reliable. Parts are
> > suprisingly cheap from places like German & Swedish. They are kinda
> > thirsty if your right foot is frequently heavy, mine returns about
> > 27mpg on average! I've got low 40's on a run being very granny-like
> > though.
> >
> > Fire any T5 questions my way, I may be able to help. If the A/C does
> > not work on your car I can help on that, having fixed my system myself
> > :-).
> >
> > Alan.
> >
> Thanks, Alan. A/C works fine at the moment but may need re-gassing before
> long because it seemed to take a couple of minutes to get really cold.
> The system is obviously different from my Primera, which produces a hiss
> when it fires up. With the Volvo, all I heard was a positive click.


If the compressor is cycling in and out before interior temp reaches what
you have told it, then it needs gassing.

If it engages and stays engaged for a goodly while, then its okay.


>40mpg sounds very impressive for a run in one of these. I presume that it
> was not at 70mph, though. I'd be interested to know what I'll get at 70-
> 80 as I've got a trip down into Wales coming up shortly and would like to
> make an estimate of the fuel cost.


On the motorway our 2.5 will do 34mpg according to the computer at a steady
85 (cruise on) It actually does less to the gallon at 70 for some reason!

Tim..

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42fb86e2$0$1295$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96AFA2A8BA20Dnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
> 
> A/C works fine at the moment but may need re-gassing before
>> long because it seemed to take a couple of minutes to get really
>> cold. 
> 
> If it gets really cold after a couple of minutes, I doubt it needs
> regassing. Regassing is usually necessary when the air is not as cold
> as it should be. As gas is lost the air temperatures gradually get
> higher until the system shuts itself down.
> The best check is to measure the output temperature at an air vent,
> and to compare it against the recommended figures for similar a/c
> systems. The time between switching on and delivery, doesn't tell you
> anything about the health of the system IMO.
> Mike.
> 
> 

Righto, Mike. After 5 mins of driving I noticed the cabin getting very 
cold and that is when I noticed I'd left it on, so it does work. Don't 
need a thermometer to tell it's cold enough once it gets going. Due to 
it's age, it's quite likely that it's had a regas. I'll scour the service 
history for one.



-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Tim.."  wrote in
news:ddg3oe$frl$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96AFA2A8BA20Dnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> "Alan"  wrote in
>> news:QPEKe.3016$4y6.297@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net:
>>
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> > Welcome to the club! I have a 1995 850 T5 Estate and love it!
>> > They're *very* quick, handle well for a big girl, and are reliable.
>> > Parts are suprisingly cheap from places like German & Swedish. They
>> > are kinda thirsty if your right foot is frequently heavy, mine
>> > returns about 27mpg on average! I've got low 40's on a run being
>> > very granny-like though.
>> >
>> > Fire any T5 questions my way, I may be able to help. If the A/C
>> > does not work on your car I can help on that, having fixed my
>> > system myself 
>> > :-).
>> >
>> > Alan.
>> >
>> Thanks, Alan. A/C works fine at the moment but may need re-gassing
>> before long because it seemed to take a couple of minutes to get
>> really cold. The system is obviously different from my Primera, which
>> produces a hiss when it fires up. With the Volvo, all I heard was a
>> positive click. 
> 
> If the compressor is cycling in and out before interior temp reaches
> what you have told it, then it needs gassing.
> 
> If it engages and stays engaged for a goodly while, then its okay.


It seemed to stay engaged for a while (or at least until I got in and 
went for a drive). It isn't a climate model so you don't 'tell it' the 
temperature, you just compenste manually via the heater matrix and blower 
speed control.

> 
>>40mpg sounds very impressive for a run in one of these. I presume that
>>it 
>> was not at 70mph, though. I'd be interested to know what I'll get at
>> 70- 80 as I've got a trip down into Wales coming up shortly and would
>> like to make an estimate of the fuel cost.
> 
> On the motorway our 2.5 will do 34mpg according to the computer at a
> steady 85 (cruise on) It actually does less to the gallon at 70 for
> some reason! 
> 
> Tim..
> 
> 

Clearly the increase in efficiency from the higher engine speed outweighs 
the extra power required to overcome the added air resistance. The 
Primera was never like this, more like "faster you cruise, more gas you 
use." It would do 40mpg at a steady 70 but wouldn't have managed 34mpg at 
85.



-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AFA2A8BA20Dnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "Alan"  wrote in
> news:QPEKe.3016$4y6.297@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net:
>
> > <snip>
> >
> > Welcome to the club! I have a 1995 850 T5 Estate and love it! They're
> > *very* quick, handle well for a big girl, and are reliable. Parts are
> > suprisingly cheap from places like German & Swedish. They are kinda
> > thirsty if your right foot is frequently heavy, mine returns about
> > 27mpg on average! I've got low 40's on a run being very granny-like
> > though.
> >
> > Fire any T5 questions my way, I may be able to help. If the A/C does
> > not work on your car I can help on that, having fixed my system myself
> > :-).
> >
> > Alan.
> >
> Thanks, Alan. A/C works fine at the moment but may need re-gassing before
> long because it seemed to take a couple of minutes to get really cold.
> The system is obviously different from my Primera, which produces a hiss
> when it fires up. With the Volvo, all I heard was a positive click.
>
> 40mpg sounds very impressive for a run in one of these. I presume that it
> was not at 70mph, though. I'd be interested to know what I'll get at 70-
> 80 as I've got a trip down into Wales coming up shortly and would like to
> make an estimate of the fuel cost.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> -- 
> Stuart Sharp


Stu,

I achieved that figure on a 300 mile drive doing lots of 50-60 mpg cruising
on flat roads, with few changes in speed or many stops. On a typical 50 mile
run doing *cough* 70 mph low to mid 30's are more typical. Factor this for
your Wales trip and you should not be dissapointed.

Alan.

"Alan"  wrote in
news:ooqss2-ta8.ln1@mercury.tcm.vispa.net.uk: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96AFA2A8BA20Dnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> "Alan"  wrote in
>> news:QPEKe.3016$4y6.297@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net:
>>
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> > Welcome to the club! I have a 1995 850 T5 Estate and love it!
>> > They're *very* quick, handle well for a big girl, and are reliable.
>> > Parts are suprisingly cheap from places like German & Swedish. They
>> > are kinda thirsty if your right foot is frequently heavy, mine
>> > returns about 27mpg on average! I've got low 40's on a run being
>> > very granny-like though.
>> >
>> > Fire any T5 questions my way, I may be able to help. If the A/C
>> > does not work on your car I can help on that, having fixed my
>> > system myself 
>> > :-).
>> >
>> > Alan.
>> >
>> Thanks, Alan. A/C works fine at the moment but may need re-gassing
>> before long because it seemed to take a couple of minutes to get
>> really cold. The system is obviously different from my Primera, which
>> produces a hiss when it fires up. With the Volvo, all I heard was a
>> positive click. 
>>
>> 40mpg sounds very impressive for a run in one of these. I presume
>> that it was not at 70mph, though. I'd be interested to know what I'll
>> get at 70- 80 as I've got a trip down into Wales coming up shortly
>> and would like to make an estimate of the fuel cost.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Stuart Sharp
> 
> Stu,
> 
> I achieved that figure on a 300 mile drive doing lots of 50-60 mpg
> cruising on flat roads, with few changes in speed or many stops. On a
> typical 50 mile run doing *cough* 70 mph low to mid 30's are more
> typical. Factor this for your Wales trip and you should not be
> dissapointed. 
> 
> Alan.
> 
> 

Even so, seems very impressive for mpg in real life conditions with such 
a powerful engine.

I assume that your bad chest means that you're talking of a *flexible* 
70mph ;-)

What do you think of using Optimax or similar high octane fuel? Does it 
improve your mpg as others say?


-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AFE4B02B9nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "Alan"  wrote in
> news:ooqss2-ta8.ln1@mercury.tcm.vispa.net.uk:
> >> 40mpg sounds very impressive for a run in one of these. I presume
> >> that it was not at 70mph, though. I'd be interested to know what I'll
> >> get at 70- 80 as I've got a trip down into Wales coming up shortly
> >> and would like to make an estimate of the fuel cost.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Stuart Sharp
> >
> > Stu,
> >
> > I achieved that figure on a 300 mile drive doing lots of 50-60 mpg
> > cruising on flat roads, with few changes in speed or many stops. On a
> > typical 50 mile run doing *cough* 70 mph low to mid 30's are more
> > typical. Factor this for your Wales trip and you should not be
> > dissapointed.
> >
> > Alan.
> >
> >
> Even so, seems very impressive for mpg in real life conditions with such
> a powerful engine.
>
> I assume that your bad chest means that you're talking of a *flexible*
> 70mph ;-)
>
> What do you think of using Optimax or similar high octane fuel? Does it
> improve your mpg as others say?


I suggest you try it for yourself.
Personally I don't believe the gain in mpg, if any, will justify it's higher
price.
My Celica turbo runs marginally better on Optimax. Being an import it's set
up to run on 100 Octane, which is still available in Japan, so the 98 of
Optimax is nearer it's optimum fuel, but in any case I tend to use whatever
performance the fuel gives me, so any increase in mpg Optimax might give is
lost, under my right foot. :-)
Mike.

Mike G wrote:


> My Celica turbo runs marginally better on Optimax. Being an import
> it's set up to run on 100 Octane, which is still available in Japan,
> so the 98 of Optimax is nearer it's optimum fuel, but in any case I
> tend to use whatever performance the fuel gives me, so any increase
> in mpg Optimax might give is lost, under my right foot. :-)


That does happen...

-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

"Tim S Kemp"  wrote in news:cf-dnahIA8CizmHfRVn-
hw@karoo.co.uk:


> Mike G wrote:
> 
>> My Celica turbo runs marginally better on Optimax. Being an import
>> it's set up to run on 100 Octane, which is still available in Japan,
>> so the 98 of Optimax is nearer it's optimum fuel, but in any case I
>> tend to use whatever performance the fuel gives me, so any increase
>> in mpg Optimax might give is lost, under my right foot. :-)
> 
> That does happen...
> 


What I'd really like to know is can I expect better mpg if I don't use the 
extra performance it offers. If I was going on a long trip, I would not 
spend the extra on Optimax just for a bit more performance. If however, I 
can expect better mpg with steady driving, then I will use it all the time. 
It would make sense as I'd have a choice of more performance or better 
economy.

-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96B05F327D64Fnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "Tim S Kemp"  wrote in news:cf-dnahIA8CizmHfRVn-
> hw@karoo.co.uk:
>
> > Mike G wrote:
> >
> >> My Celica turbo runs marginally better on Optimax. Being an import
> >> it's set up to run on 100 Octane, which is still available in Japan,
> >> so the 98 of Optimax is nearer it's optimum fuel, but in any case I
> >> tend to use whatever performance the fuel gives me, so any increase
> >> in mpg Optimax might give is lost, under my right foot. :-)
> >
> > That does happen...
> >
>
> What I'd really like to know is can I expect better mpg if I don't use the
> extra performance it offers. If I was going on a long trip, I would not
> spend the extra on Optimax just for a bit more performance. If however, I
> can expect better mpg with steady driving, then I will use it all the
time.
> It would make sense as I'd have a choice of more performance or better
> economy.


As I indicated in my previous post. I would expect a marginal increase in
mpg, but Optimax can be as much as 10% dearer than super, so unless the
reduction in fuel consumption is greater than that, which I suspect it wont
be, it's not worth using it economically. All you can do is carefully check
it yourself.
I don't think anyone can tell you the result of using it in your particular
car.
Results might be better if the car has an adaptive, or 'learning' ECU.
Even so, in some cars it appears to make no difference at all.
Mike.

Stu wrote:

> "Tim S Kemp"  wrote in
> news:cf-dnahIA8CizmHfRVn- hw@karoo.co.uk:
>
>> Mike G wrote:
>>
>>> My Celica turbo runs marginally better on Optimax. Being an import
>>> it's set up to run on 100 Octane, which is still available in Japan,
>>> so the 98 of Optimax is nearer it's optimum fuel, but in any case I
>>> tend to use whatever performance the fuel gives me, so any increase
>>> in mpg Optimax might give is lost, under my right foot. :-)
>>
>> That does happen...
>>
>
> What I'd really like to know is can I expect better mpg if I don't
> use the extra performance it offers. If I was going on a long trip, I
> would not spend the extra on Optimax just for a bit more performance.
> If however, I can expect better mpg with steady driving, then I will
> use it all the time. It would make sense as I'd have a choice of more
> performance or better economy.


You'll get better MPG all the time. Try it and see, spend a month of mixed 
driving on regular, then a month using only Esso super and Optimax (BP 
ultimate seems a bit variable)

-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

Mike G wrote:


> As I indicated in my previous post. I would expect a marginal
> increase in mpg, but Optimax can be as much as 10% dearer than super,
> so unless the reduction in fuel consumption is greater than that,
> which I suspect it wont be, it's not worth using it economically. All
> you can do is carefully check it yourself.
> I don't think anyone can tell you the result of using it in your
> particular car.
> Results might be better if the car has an adaptive, or 'learning' ECU.
> Even so, in some cars it appears to make no difference at all.
> Mike.


Every station I've been to is 6p/l more for optimax / super, which is way 
under 10%.



-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

"Tim S Kemp"  wrote in
news:RKidnRQLUaK-UWHfRVn-rw@karoo.co.uk: 


> Stu wrote:
>> "Tim S Kemp"  wrote in
>> news:cf-dnahIA8CizmHfRVn- hw@karoo.co.uk:
>>
>>> Mike G wrote:
>>>
>>>> My Celica turbo runs marginally better on Optimax. Being an import
>>>> it's set up to run on 100 Octane, which is still available in
>>>> Japan, so the 98 of Optimax is nearer it's optimum fuel, but in any
>>>> case I tend to use whatever performance the fuel gives me, so any
>>>> increase in mpg Optimax might give is lost, under my right foot.
>>>> :-) 
>>>
>>> That does happen...
>>>
>>
>> What I'd really like to know is can I expect better mpg if I don't
>> use the extra performance it offers. If I was going on a long trip, I
>> would not spend the extra on Optimax just for a bit more performance.
>> If however, I can expect better mpg with steady driving, then I will
>> use it all the time. It would make sense as I'd have a choice of more
>> performance or better economy.
> 
> You'll get better MPG all the time. Try it and see, spend a month of
> mixed driving on regular, then a month using only Esso super and
> Optimax (BP ultimate seems a bit variable)
> 

OK, I'll give it a go. Super is currently 97.9p/l at the local garage :-(


-- 
Stuart Sharp

Stu wrote:


> OK, I'll give it a go. Super is currently 97.9p/l at the local garage
> :-(


Is regular 91.9 or lower?

As I mentioned, all the ones I've been to have been a flat 6p dearer.

-- 
re-configure the solar matrix in parallel for endothermic propulsion

"Tim S Kemp"  wrote in message
news:G_KdnZXWUsTGUWHfRVn-rQ@karoo.co.uk...

> Mike G wrote:
>
> > As I indicated in my previous post. I would expect a marginal
> > increase in mpg, but Optimax can be as much as 10% dearer than super,
> > so unless the reduction in fuel consumption is greater than that,
> > which I suspect it wont be, it's not worth using it economically. All
> > you can do is carefully check it yourself.
> > I don't think anyone can tell you the result of using it in your
> > particular car.
> > Results might be better if the car has an adaptive, or 'learning' ECU.
> > Even so, in some cars it appears to make no difference at all.
> > Mike.
>
> Every station I've been to is 6p/l more for optimax / super, which is way
> under 10%


It is, but when I topped up my Celica last friday. Optimax was over 9p more
per litre.
Mike.

"Tim S Kemp"  wrote in 
news:TvOdnZ2dnZ0ifGfdnZ2dnYVFYd-dnZ2dRVn-zp2dnZ0@karoo.co.uk:


> Stu wrote:
> 
>> OK, I'll give it a go. Super is currently 97.9p/l at the local garage
>> :-(
> 
> Is regular 91.9 or lower?
> 
> As I mentioned, all the ones I've been to have been a flat 6p dearer.
> 


Regular is 90.9 IIRC. Varies slightly from garage to garage, though. That 
was the local Texaco.

-- 
Stuart Sharp