Mazda6 or Volvo S40 diesels?

Nuttzyy

basically, which is the better of the 2 cars and makes the best purchase?

Can anyone tell me which engine is exactly in the S40, 2002 - 2004 models, i heard someone saying the 1.9Tdi which has 115bhp apparently, is a Renault engine? If it resembles anything like the Laguna are you better off staying clear?
And when i googled for some info that said the S40 has the same diesel engine as some Fords and Peugeots? I think that was the new S40 though, but that seems like an awful variety of engines.

Also, I assume the Mazda is more straight forward and has a Mazda engine? Its a 2litre turbo diesel, anyone here have experience of this engine/car? Again, around the 2002 - 2004 years. The Mazda6 looks very well in black with the standard spoiler and alloys and fogs, but there isnt a lot of diesels on carzone, i thought the diesel would have been the most common model.

The spec on both these cars seems pretty decent, leather, air con etc seems pretty common on the majority.

Are there any other issues worth noting on either of these cars besides the engines, any little issues with electrics or that. And if the S40 has a renault engine would the car share some of the Laguna electrics that seem to plague the lagunas with problems, or would the only renault thing be the engine?

Are these engines handy to service, like any other diesel or have they any new fancy awkward stuff to consider.

All opinions appreciated, negitive and positive.

GERMAN ROCKS

renaults engines are actually excellent its the electrics can be a bit funny. all engines nowadays are pretty much bullet proof.
i would go with a volvo at the end of the day as its a volvo. its better when you tell friends you got a volvo than an common jopsoap mazda

Esel

GERMAN ROCKS wrote: »

i would go with a volvo at the end of the day as its a volvo. its better when you tell friends you got a volvo than an common jopsoap mazda

My friends might laugh at me.

OP: look them both up on http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/index.htm

bazz26

GERMAN ROCKS wrote: »

i would go with a volvo at the end of the day as its a volvo. its better when you tell friends you got a volvo than an common jopsoap mazda

That S40 shares it's underpinings with the Mitsubishi Carisma. Don't forget to tell your friends that too if you let them decide your car for you!

OP, Mazda 6 is much better in build quality, ride, handling and reliablity.

colm_mcm

anyone in the know will tell you that an S40 is a tarted up Mitsubishi Carisma/Ford Focus, and nothing to get excited about.

EDIT: beat me to it bazz!

JHMEG

colm_mcm wrote: »

anyone in the know will tell you that an S40 is a tarted up Mitsubishi Carisma/Ford Focus, and nothing to get excited about.

EDIT: beat me to it bazz!

The new S40 is lovely! Old one was lovely when it first came out, but doesn't seem to have stood the test of time. A lot of them look tatty now.

colm_mcm

The new Focus is lovely too! Can't see how the Volvo's price tag is justified over a similarly specced Focus, fair enough the dash materials are very good, but that's about the only tangible area where it beats the Focus.

At the moment a flexifuel S40 isn't too bad value, but that's due to the 50% VRT

JHMEG

colm_mcm wrote: »

The new Focus is lovely too!

Mmm. It's not really. Well not the hatch anyway.

sk8board

colm_mcm wrote: »

The new Focus is lovely too! Can't see how the Volvo's price tag is justified over a similarly specced Focus, fair enough the dash materials are very good, but that's about the only tangible area where it beats the Focus.

Thats a well-aired and old view.

Like all car company's looking to turn a profit (which VERY few actually do), they share platforms. The '04 S40 is so much the better for the Focus chassis over the old Carisma one.

Would we prefer if there were no Volvo's, Audi's, Seats, Skoda's, Saab's and many others?

We'd all be driving Golfs and Vectra's. Would prefer to walk.

EDIT: By the way OP, while we have our eye on changing our Focus for an S40, I saw a new Mazda 6 just yesterday with a very subtle body-kit which looked excellent.
Something like this I think:
http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/Mazda/Mazda6/new-se/927487/

MuffinsDa

colm_mcm wrote: »

anyone in the know will tell you that an S40 is a tarted up Mitsubishi Carisma/Ford Focus, and nothing to get excited about.

EDIT: beat me to it bazz!

Yeah sure.
Who gives a flip about:

- vastly better safety
- hugely more comofortable interior and seats
- better equipment level
- beautiful design (well, subjective...)

chassis is the only thing that defines a car as "all in the know" know.

At the end of the day they are all cars, maybe we should all drive old clio's like me (they have all 4 wheels anyway, what's the diff).

sk8board

MuffinsDa wrote: »

chassis is the only thing that defines a car as "all in the know" know.

"all in the know" must know something the rest of us mere mortals don't.

Its such nonsense and is discussed ad nausaum on these chat boards. Audi v VW, Saab v Vectra/Chrysler, and many others. Apart from "all in the know", no-one actually cares!

These companies need to badly make some money. Sharing platforms (and more specifically sharing engines) has been a revelation in the car industry, reducing/sharing costs and increasing reliability.
Its just business.

Tabnabs

OP, bit of info on the S40 here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volvo_S40

It's a smaller car than the Mazda6 and aimed at a very different market, so horses for courses... No complaints with my one though.

colm_mcm

MuffinsDa wrote: »

Yeah sure.
Who gives a flip about:

- vastly better safety
- hugely more comofortable interior and seats
- better equipment level
- beautiful design (well, subjective...)

chassis is the only thing that defines a car as "all in the know" know.

At the end of the day they are all cars, maybe we should all drive old clio's like me (they have all 4 wheels anyway, what's the diff).

How is the safety on the S40 "vastly" better than on the Focus? The Focus actually gets a higher adult occupant safety score than the S40.

Granted the seats in the Volvo are very nice, I drove a new model for a good while last year and it was very comfy (not exactly big inside though)
My original point was and is, that having a Volvo S40 is hardly something to shout about, and the Mazda6 shouldn't be ignored on the basis that it is "only " a Mazda

colm_mcm

MuffinsDa wrote: »

Yeah sure.
Who gives a flip about:

- vastly better safety
- hugely more comofortable interior and seats
- better equipment level
- beautiful design (well, subjective...)

chassis is the only thing that defines a car as "all in the know" know.

At the end of the day they are all cars, maybe we should all drive old clio's like me (they have all 4 wheels anyway, what's the diff).

How is the safety on the S40 "vastly" better than on the Focus, the Focus actually gets a higher adult occupant safety score than the S40?

Granted the seats in the Volvo are very nice, I drove a new model for a good while last year and it was very comfy (not exactly big inside though)
My original point was and is, that having a Volvo S40 is hardly something to shout about, and the Mazda6 shouldn't be ignored on the basis that it is "only " a Mazda

Thank goodness for people like you, who else would buy 1.6 A3's?

Oilrig

Given that Ford bailed out Mazda a while back, is the Mazda 6 platform a Ford? Mondeo per chance?

colm_mcm

AFAIK, the new 6 platform is a development of the old 6 model, and not the EUCD platform the new Mondeo uses, although a lot of reports say it's based on the Mondeo. Dunno!

Biro

Nuttzyy wrote: »

basically, which is the better of the 2 cars and makes the best purchase?

Can anyone tell me which engine is exactly in the S40, 2002 - 2004 models, i heard someone saying the 1.9Tdi which has 115bhp apparently, is a Renault engine? If it resembles anything like the Laguna are you better off staying clear?
And when i googled for some info that said the S40 has the same diesel engine as some Fords and Peugeots? I think that was the new S40 though, but that seems like an awful variety of engines.

Also, I assume the Mazda is more straight forward and has a Mazda engine? Its a 2litre turbo diesel, anyone here have experience of this engine/car? Again, around the 2002 - 2004 years. The Mazda6 looks very well in black with the standard spoiler and alloys and fogs, but there isnt a lot of diesels on carzone, i thought the diesel would have been the most common model.

The spec on both these cars seems pretty decent, leather, air con etc seems pretty common on the majority.

Are there any other issues worth noting on either of these cars besides the engines, any little issues with electrics or that. And if the S40 has a renault engine would the car share some of the Laguna electrics that seem to plague the lagunas with problems, or would the only renault thing be the engine?

Are these engines handy to service, like any other diesel or have they any new fancy awkward stuff to consider.

All opinions appreciated, negitive and positive.

In the 2002 - 2004 year range, the Mazda 6 is better in nearly every way to the S40. The S40 at the time was an OK car, but that engine was never excellent. Mazda is more reliable, roomier inside, nicer to drive, better engine. Also you'll sell it easier.

JHMEG

Biro wrote: »

In the 2002 - 2004 year range, the Mazda 6 is better in nearly every way to the S40.

+1

It would have been as the mediocre-when-new S40 was very long in the tooth by then.

coolbeans

Oilrig wrote: »

Given that Ford bailed out Mazda a while back, is the Mazda 6 platform a Ford? Mondeo per chance?

The 6 is a totally different car to the Mondeo. Separate platforms and parts used throughout. I'm not sure about the petrol engines but I know for a fact that the direction injection, common rail, sixteen valve turbo diesel was a new from the ground up Mazda design. Never used in a Ford. In fact Ford's TDCI units are a result of a collaboration between Peugeot-Citroen and Ford.

For the OP: The mother's 2002 black 6 diesel is just about to pass the 100k mark trouble free. 100k miles isn't much these days but it's fairly impressive to be able to say that the only thing that went wrong in that time was a blown headlamp bulb.
The previous generation S40, I know I'm biased, is a jumped up Carisma. Made in Holland on the same production line. Nothing to write home about in my opinion.

The new 6 uses an evolution of the old 6's platform. In fact Ford considered using it in the new Mondeo...dunno how it went after that. Maybe the Mondeo platform is loosely based on the Mazda's?

sk8board

Heres a low mileage '03 diesel for €12.9k.
http://www.carzone.ie/used-cars/Mazda/Mazda6/2.0-TURBO/949547/

the owner may need lessons in using Photoshop, but other than that, it looks in good nick.

pburns

GERMAN ROCKS wrote: »

i would go with a volvo at the end of the day as its a volvo. its better when you tell friends you got a volvo than an common jopsoap mazda

GERMAN ROCKS - you seem to be the resident expert in these parts of giving out crap, ill-informed, totally subjective advice. As has been pointed out the old S40 is based on the Mitsubishi Carisma, a car by no means as bad as some say but nowhere near the almost Mondeo levels of dynamic ability of the old 6. And that's before we even consider build quality and reliability...

This almost beats your recent advice to an OP asking "What's a good reliable car?". Your reply began:
"For big mileage I'd go gor something French..."
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055246423
:rolleyes::D

Biro

pburns wrote: »

GERMAN ROCKS - you seem to be the resident expert in these parts of giving out crap, ill-informed, totally subjective advice.

I was thinking the same thing.