[MQTGSR]

i don't think gm > all. i just think you look down on other comparable products because you like your car. "Oh i hate new cars because it doesn't drive like my volvo", "i hate gm because my volvo is awesome and better made". and when it was new is a valid argument since you are talking about comparable gm's from the same generation. your car is in no way shape or form special impressive nor was it leagues of ahead of anything at anytime other than being overpriced to fix(when new) much like my current bmw. i do understand your love for your car but i feel like you have a tendency to think it's better than what it really is...as much as you make fun of it for being an overweight fwd pig (no it being turbo doesn't make up for anything except increased understeer.

but i do just like fucking with you and i know you like fucking with me.

i've just never had a love for volvo's and b16's......

my car suites my criteria, fwd, cheap aftermarket, kind of ugly(nobody fucks with it or wants to steal it) and great on gas.

My current car isn't why I dislike GM. If money wasn't a problem in 96 and I was looking at a family sedan, I see no reason why you wouldn't want an R. Only thing cooler would be a 3 series. But, if you have a wife/kids involved I'd take the volvo just from the safety standpoint. Its not "ahead" of anything, but for its time, it was a fairly unique piece, hell, performance luxury sedan's were in their fledgeling days back then, they weren't all over the market like they are today, and the motor is an odd ball. Hell the whole layout and some of the ergonomics, while different, aren't bad. Example, the placement of the door handles.

I do have some bias, yes, I love the car to death. Is it the best car out there, no, I don't think I've ever overstated the cars abilities. Its fairly quick, well now anyways, its a whale in the corners, built like a house, and its like driving my livingroom around with a turbo attached. In town, my mpg kinda blows, but thats probably due to me staying in boost when I can, lol, and for me, its always been dependable,and cheap to fix.

I think for a family 4 door, in its time, you'd be hard pressed to find a car that offers a balance of everything it does/did. Thats the point I'm trying to make. I guess I have a hard time seeing why anyone would prefer a Honda Accord to an upscale euro sedan given the choice. The reason most of us go with japeneese products/domestic products is because of money.

For the price, you can't beat the quality and reliability. But assuming everyone had $ you'd see a lot more 3 series/C class ect. rolling around. Keep in mind those are the cars it would be best to compare the 850 to.

 

[Darkness]

blah blah blah i'm not even gonna attempt to read that. i still love you though

 

[D14A4 Guy]

i don't think gm > all. i just think you look down on other comparable products because you like your car. "Oh i hate new cars because it doesn't drive like my volvo", "i hate gm because my volvo is awesome and better made". and when it was new is a valid argument since you are talking about comparable gm's from the same generation. your car is in no way shape or form special impressive nor was it leagues of ahead of anything at anytime other than being overpriced to fix(when new) much like my current bmw. i do understand your love for your car but i feel like you have a tendency to think it's better than what it really is...as much as you make fun of it for being an overweight fwd pig (no it being turbo doesn't make up for anything except increased understeer.

but i do just like fucking with you and i know you like fucking with me.

i've just never had a love for volvo's and b16's......
my car suites my criteria, fwd, cheap aftermarket, kind of ugly(nobody fucks with it or wants to steal it) and great on gas.

What about a B16 in a Volvo? :ninja

 

[MQTGSR]

:lol

 

[Darkness]

just saw accord vs upscale euro.....umm premium accord is comparable to volvo shoe box on wheels. now there is really nothing separating "upscale" euro vs up scale anything. every car now comes with navi, heated seats, leather, tcs, abs, 4 wheel discs, power everything, blue tooth, etc.....only thing you get with euro is higher repair bills and lack of most reasonable reliability...even in the 2000's

and euro accords had 200 hp+ and awd. euro cars offer a name. hell i think a 90's integra had most of the feature your car has lol. i think the only thing you get by leg humping a euro car is decreased penis size and diminished testicular fortitude

 

[D14A4 Guy]

Every one needs to Buy a Fiat and be done with it.
Mine is unbelivable with the Veriable vane turbo, I mean a diesel 2litre 47mpg and 165bhp, with no lag at all and peak torque at 1700rpm!

 

[Darkness]

i would if they sold good cars in america

 

[MQTGSR]

just saw accord vs upscale euro.....umm premium accord is comparable to volvo shoe box on wheels. now there is really nothing separating "upscale" euro vs up scale anything. every car now comes with navi, heated seats, leather, tcs, abs, 4 wheel discs, power everything, blue tooth, etc.....only thing you get with euro is higher repair bills and lack of most reasonable reliability...even in the 2000's

and euro accords had 200 hp+ and awd. euro cars offer a name. hell i think a 90's integra had most of the feature your car has lol. i think the only thing you get by leg humping a euro car is decreased penis size and diminished testicular fortitude

I'm not talking about "New" accords. I'm comparing a 96 accord to mine, or to a 96 3 series ect.

Granted today, things are a lot different, and everything your saying I agree with. And no, my teg didn't have a lot of the features the volvo has. But that was also a superb car and didn't disappoint either.

 

[Darkness]

I'm not talking about "New" accords. I'm comparing a 96 accord to mine, or to a 96 3 series ect.

Granted today, things are a lot different, and everything your saying I agree with. And no, my teg didn't have a lot of the features the volvo has. But that was also a superb car and didn't disappoint either.

lies

 

[soldiermanny]

I think for a family 4 door, in its time, you'd be hard pressed to find a car that offers a balance of everything it does/did. Thats the point I'm trying to make. I guess I have a hard time seeing why anyone would prefer a Honda Accord to an upscale euro sedan given the choice. The reason most of us go with japeneese products/domestic products is because of money.

For the price, you can't beat the quality and reliability. But assuming everyone had $ you'd see a lot more 3 series/C class ect. rolling around. Keep in mind those are the cars it would be best to compare the 850 to.

^i would rather get this! granted this model came out in 97 the generation before still wasnt so bad. and they started at $35k at its time and was equiped with 2jz at that. and the euro got the twin turboz!!! and went all the way up to 4.0liter v8! not to mention rwd. just sayin....

 

[Darkness]

^i would rather get this! granted this model came out in 97 the generation before still wasnt so bad. and they started at $35k at its time and was equiped with 2jz at that. and the euro got the twin turboz!!! and went all the way up to 4.0liter v8! not to mention rwd. just sayin....

volvo was a glorified rock before ford "improved" them lol i still see nothing substantial separating an accord from an 850 other than a turbo.

 

[MQTGSR]

it would be more fair to compare a reg. 850 base to an accord. In which, yes, both cars are fairly comprable. But the volvo is has improved safety, and better fit and finish on the accord in my eyes after being in both. However, the accord is more economical/cheaper.

that car is RWD? Is that a GS or something? Personally, I think they're fuggly. But other than that, you cant go wrong with a 2jz. I like the older GS300 or whatever the coupe thing is lexus had in the 90's. That US marine has one on here, and that thing is sexxy!

 

[Darkness]

it would be more fair to compare a reg. 850 base to an accord. In which, yes, both cars are fairly comprable. But the volvo is has improved safety, and better fit and finish on the accord in my eyes after being in both. However, the accord is more economical/cheaper.

that car is RWD? Is that a GS or something? Personally, I think they're fuggly. But other than that, you cant go wrong with a 2jz. I like the older GS300 or whatever the coupe thing is lexus had in the 90's. That US marine has one on here, and that thing is sexxy!

all opinions not reality :lmao

face it. overpriced shoebox ftl

 

[MQTGSR]

I really don't think its an opinion. The volvo has better steel, galvanized at that, so it won't "honda rot" , its overbuilt like a mofo, and the interior materials are of equal or better than what you would find in a Honda, and you get more features as standard. 850's had AC, power windows and locks, seats, electronic climate control and heated seats, keyless entry and cruise as std. The accord does not. However, a base 850 was You're opinion then is that an accord is built better overall than a volvo, where are you're facts there? hmm?

If they were so overpriced and stupid how come so many were sold and are still on the road to this day?

You're just as opinionated as I am here if thats gonna be your argument now. What facts do you have that the 850 is built no better than your run of the mill econobox? The construction and materials and ride quality are on par with anything of 90's vintage from BMW, benz or lexus.

 

[D14A4 Guy]

I really don't think its an opinion. The volvo has better steel, galvanized at that, so it won't "honda rot" , its overbuilt like a mofo, and the interior materials are of equal or better than what you would find in a Honda, and you get more features as standard. 850's had AC, power windows and locks, seats, electronic climate control and heated seats, keyless entry and cruise as std. The accord does not. However, a base 850 was You're opinion then is that an accord is built better overall than a volvo, where are you're facts there? hmm?

If they were so overpriced and stupid how come so many were sold and are still on the road to this day?

You're just as opinionated as I am here if thats gonna be your argument now. What facts do you have that the 850 is built no better than your run of the mill econobox? The construction and materials and ride quality are on par with anything of 90's vintage from BMW, benz or lexus.

Should be good for at least 2.5 million miles
Volvo is in the guinnes book of records for most miles . . .
http://www.worldcarfans.com/10606206840/25-million-mile-volvo-40th-anniversary

 

[Darkness]

so base vs base they are even. Premium vs Premium even. premium accords cam with 200 hp and optional awd and leather.

their are so many sold because people by for the sake of a name without and real know how behind what they are getting for their money. same reason people buy 200 dollar pair of jeans with the name of a homogay designer vs other brands with the same if not better build quality

most of your argument is based around what it does for you vs what it is does in comparison to the competition. and did i say it was on the same level as a cavalier? nope sure didn't. it doesn't really stand out other than name and inflated price. interior looks cheap and cluttered especially for 36K in 1996. you compared it to japanese cars in the same class saying that it was better quality which it isn't lol, they are on par. a 1993 camry had the same if not more overall build quality. how do you admit that the base 850 was on par with the base accord but then deny it down the road? :lmao and importing parts for them at the time was astronomical in comparison to lets say.....idk and accord. saab's, bimmers, audi's vdubs, were all the same. overpriced and people paid for a name=fact. there is a reason that most of the euro cars you're talking about are nothing more than cheap taxis over seas.

 

[soldiermanny]

it would be more fair to compare a reg. 850 base to an accord. In which, yes, both cars are fairly comprable. But the volvo is has improved safety, and better fit and finish on the accord in my eyes after being in both. However, the accord is more economical/cheaper.

that car is RWD? Is that a GS or something? Personally, I think they're fuggly. But other than that, you cant go wrong with a 2jz. I like the older GS300 or whatever the coupe thing is lexus had in the 90's. That US marine has one on here, and that thing is sexxy!

yup, gs. the one pictured is the gs400 that came with the v8. which is a beast! 300hp/310lb-ft. the gs300 came with the 2jz. and fuggly? you need your eyes checked man. lol here's a 94 gs300. 2jz 226hp/210lb-ft. ballin!:number1

the sc300

 

[MQTGSR]

on par features wise, and performance (acceleration, cornering ect.) But comfort and build quality there is a noticeable difference.

Fuck it tho, I just got a new job, I'm not in the mood to argue, I'm in a mood to celebrate by driving my apparently overpriced shitty car and having a lot of fun than I EVER would in an accord or a 93 camery or whatever laundry list of cars you'll give me that is supposedly better made/better car. :lol

 

[MQTGSR]

ah the SC is what I meant. imo, I dont care for the styling on the GS, but then again, no one gets my taste tho, so I guess w/e

 

[Darkness]

on par features wise, and performance (acceleration, cornering ect.) But comfort and build quality there is a noticeable difference.

Fuck it tho, I just got a new job, I'm not in the mood to argue, I'm in a mood to celebrate by driving my apparently overpriced shitty car and having a lot of fun than I EVER would in an accord or a 93 camery or whatever laundry list of cars you'll give me that is supposedly better made/better car. :lol

sure about that?

pretty crazy for there to be a $15,000 end all price difference and still lose out in overall rating.