Assuming you have either worked on Volvo S40 and/or been trained on the technical aspects. Based on the specs/parts that make up the car; from the standpoint of a manufacturer who has invested in the engineering of the vehicle. Between Volvo and Mazda, which brand is more mechanically sound, and which is better built from a manufacturing and technical standpoint. And why in your opinion is this so? This is primarily a research and development question.
2007-06-30 07:49:54 · 5 answers · asked by mark_hensley@sbcglobal.net 7 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Car Makes ➔ Volvo
Regarding the U.S. spec 2004.5-present S40, the normally aspirated i (2.5) has an engine management system developed and manufactured by Denso of Japan. The turbocharged 2.4 has an engine management system developed and manufactured by Bosch of Germany. Both of these engines are highly engineered. The transmissions are advanced in design also. The A/T's were developed by Aisin Warner of Japan for Volvo. The car is assembled in Belgium with engines shipped in from Sweden and A/T's shipped in from Japan. There are also various parts from Poland (battery), Japan (Denso alternator), Germany, Spain, and various other countries.
Volvo is an advanced European car designed and developed by European designers and engineers, and heavily utilizes Bosch systems like its German competitors do. One should not be comparing it to Mazda. Step inside one and take a test drive. Look under the hood of an S40 and under the hood of the larger and most expensive Volvo cars. The technology has trickled down to the S40. Then look under the hood of a Mazda and compare. You can see the Japaneseness in a Mazda. Volvo quality emanates from a Volvo when you drive one. It is technologically advanced and superior. And Volvo still has some of the most comfortable seats in the automotive world.
Compare Volvo with Volkswagen and Audi. Compare Mazda with Toyota, Honda, and Nissan. Forget their connections with Ford - learn the facts about their engineering and development. Many modern Volvo cars (U.S. market) have a straight-five engine. Does Mazda have a straight-five (in the U.S.)? No. But Volkswagen/Audi does.
2007-07-01 16:48:34 · answer #1 · answered by Spee 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Which is better? Well I guess it's more of a seat of the pants answer. I like a lot of things about the S40. And to say Mazda is a low quality car would be ignorant. I feel there is a lot of Ford in both lines. But Japanese cars tend to have a feel about them that I would call tinny.Volvo's have often been referred to as tanks,deservedly so. I see Volvo's with 200-300k on them all the time. Can't say that for Mazda. Will S40's carry on with that tradition? Can't say yet. Comparison of the two lines is tough.I like them both,I hate them both. By the way I do drive a Volvo.
2007-06-30 09:39:23 · answer #2 · answered by David S 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In my eyes the S40 is crap, I have several volvos and have driven volvos for the past 10 years, My wife as a Mazda 3 and that car is far superior in quality from the S40, the price is better and the build is better. The S40 is not built like the rest of the volvo 60,70,80,90 series cars. I have have driven most of if not all of the current volvo line and like mazda hands down over the S40 for fit, feel, comfort,quality and price....................
2007-07-03 02:15:22 · answer #3 · answered by very confused 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
both are reliable [true mazda not re-badged fords from the same plant] both have had electrical troubles, mazda has always wanted to be the "bmw" of japan [back when bmw was a "real" car] but now like volvo follows it's own road.
the volvo may be better built structurally but mazda's are easier [quicker] to service. a quick look in a labor/time estimate book will prove this job for job.
volvo does use better materials in general but mazda's plastics and electronics are better.as far as power-train management mazda's is longer lasting volvo's is more refined
so both brands are tit for tat in r&d and nip&tuck for reliability why is this so? look at the common denominator, while ford parentage has brought up the low aspecs of each it has also quashed the high merits of each resulting in a more homoginized [but bland] market and leaving a enormous vacume to be filled by the aftermarket for more performance and personality oriented parts installations
2007-07-01 00:43:09 · answer #4 · answered by hobbabob 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Volvo.
not the new ones actually.
the older ones
because they have really great protection. i've had my volvo for 18 years. it's got choke mileage on it.
mazdas break down fast.
my friend's mazda had to be replaced in 8 years.
2007-07-01 13:41:25 · answer #5 · answered by happy. 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋