Volvo S90: It Exists
Posted by Doug DeMuro in It Exists on | 23 comments
I think, if you asked around, you’d find that this site really needs some more Volvo content. And so I’ve decided to provide that in the form of a short piece on Volvo’s forgotten model: the S90.
I know what you’re thinking: there is no S90! You’re crazy! Also, this site does not need any more Volvo content! You’re probably right about that last bit. I’ve covered a lot of Volvo stuff here, largely because they build loads of very unusual cars. Like the S90.
OK, so you’ve heard of the S40, and the S60, and the S80. You had forgotten about the S70, but now you sort of remember that, too. So what the hell was the S90?
In the late 1990s, Volvo decided to ditch its naming scheme, which largely consisted of three numbers randomly strewn together. (Actually, Volvo’s 1980s and 1990s naming scheme was far from random – but it was also fairly far from coherent.)
The new naming scheme would arrive for the 1998 model year, which coincided with the debut of the facelifted 850 (dubbed S70 or V70) and the all-new C70, which was either a convertible or a really, really gorgeous coupe.
But there was a problem: Volvo’s other model, the 960, wasn’t all-new for 1998. It wasn’t even changed. So what should Volvo do? Leave the name as is and wait until 1999, when the replacement would be ready? Or bring it in line with the rest of the new names for just one model year?
Volvo chose the latter, which resulted in the arrival of the S90. There was also a wagon version, dubbed V90. Basically, these were just slightly updated 960 sedan and wagon models, given a new name that would last for one model year only.
In 1999, the S80 replaced the S90 and Volvo’s rear-drive platform died for good. Nobody really misses it, proven by the fact that nobody really remembers its swan song model even existed.
23 Responses to “ “Volvo S90: It Exists”
Leave a Reply
“and the all-new C70, which was either a convertible or a really, really gorgeous coupe.” YES. I have irrational levels of reverence for the first-gen C70 coupe, especially with a manual transmission. I occasionally find them on Craigslist for ~$3000, but usually with a ton of miles. I still really want one.
Especially in that gorgeous Saffron color…
I rarely see coupes anymore. Convertible people seem a bit more dedicated to keeping them on the road. I miss that car. One of the last truly beautiful non-exotics on the road.
I’d still take a nice V90/960 wagon today. Especially one with the upgraded leather with piping. And a small block swap like Paul Newman’s 960 would be nice too.
Yes! Good call. Or if not a V8, a turbo inline-6 from an S80 and some form of manual transmission.
This was a great car. Extremely robust and reliable. A friend of mine had one and beat it to shit and it never faultered. It also had the best turning radius of any car I’ve ever driven.
It’s cars like these that true Volvo fans miss.
I’ll never forget the 960 that a customer of mine purchased. It was a 1996 purchased sight unseen off Ebay in 2006. It had a whopping 191k miles on it and the guy spent $6000 on the car.
He brings it to me (working for the Volvo dealer) knowing “it probably needs about $2500 worth of work… just fix it and get back to me as quick as possible.”. About 24 hours later, I call him with the proverbial shit list of items that dictate exactly how poorly cared for this car was. It totaled about $7500 worth of work to get the car A-1 squared away… exactly as he’d asked for. After about 20 minutes, he called me back and asked “What kind of discount can I get if I did it all and how long until I can get it back?”. I nearly crapped my pants.
Against the better recommendations to resell the car and cut his losses, his response was “Well… I’ve been looking for a good way to put points on my Discover card.”. I’m pretty sure he puked in his mouth a little.
About two weeks later and $6750 worth of discounted prices, “Mr. X” had himself a 10 year old, 191k mile Volvo 960. I left the dealership in 2008 and he’d spent about another $3000 on it since then.
The money people will dump into these cars blows my mind… but they love them some RWD Volvo’s.
That’s wild. But a lot of these WERE far more robust than Volvo’s front-drive stuff at the time. I had tons of problems with my 850.
Then again, Volvo’s rep for reliability was really only a rep by the late ’90s. These days it’s gone completely. It’s funny how just 10 years can do that.
Yeah… Honda and Toyota are the same way. They’re legacy brands. They USED to be great… now they’re just average but everybody still thinks the products are just as good as the used to be.
Selective blinders, as I like to call it.
My ex-wife (amicable, I’m her kid’s godparent) had an early production 1993 850 sedan. After the 90k mile mark, it had enough major problems that even a French or Italian would be considered reliable in comparison!
But the 900-series, and the 700-series on which it was based, would last for forever. They couldn’t get out of their own way with the base 114hp 4-cylinder, but they would keep running (slowly) forever. They also had a reputation for developing squeaks and rattles sooner than just about any other car. So they sounded like they were falling apart, but they never made good on the threat! =)
Beelzebubba,
I also had an early production 1993 850 GLT – it was my college car, having been handed down to me by my parents. As soon as it hit 90k miles it started to develop a long list of expensive and frequent problems, which prompted me to eventually plan for its going-away party.
I was actually going to get rid of it after I graduated because it was going to need a new transmission and new half-shafts at only 112k miles. Then I totaled it in a wreck and got my current 1996 850, a far more reliable car in comparison.
Yep… the 1993 850 (first production year and also the only year to use that transmission) was on the same lines of reliability with the 1999 S80 T6 and the 2003 XC90 T6. All were equally terrible.
I also sort of have one of these, a 1994 Volvo 960 wagon with the Inline 6. A great car with good power, rides awesome, handles well – although terrible gas mileage (17 in the city/ 23/24 on the highway). Really easy to work on. I paid $1600 for it about a year ago.
A couple years after my 1994 model they went to an independent rear suspension (the sedan 960s may have always had this), air springs, and a bunch of other techno stuff prone to breaking down – not the least of which can probably be associated with the switch to OBD II, as I’m finding out with my POS 1998 M3. So in re to Lenn above, the post 1995/1996 rear wheel drive cars are not loved by RWD Volvo enthusiasts in the know as they are simply way too complicated with their independent suspension and engines lacking direct lineage to tractor engines.
Fellow (former) ’98 M3 owner checking in. What model do you have? Mine was a sedan – white over a VERY light gray… loved it. Miss it. Though after 15 years and 120k miles, it wasn’t quite the car I read about in the 1996 Car & Drivers where they talk about how great it is.
1998 4dr Sedan, black over probably the same light gray (can’t believe anyone would pick that awful color when given a choice). I just bought it in February, 200k, rebuilt title and only $4500
. Runs good when I disconnect the MAF 
, otherwise hesitates at full throttle sometimes – gotta be a vacuum leak but I can’t find it, and working around the intake is a mess. Think I’ll try to avoid OBDII project cars from now on.
Hi Doug,
I’d like to throw in my $.02 worth here – I’m a lifelong Volvo enthusiast and wanted to offer some comments I have.
I’m planning to buy a 1995 960 wagon this coming fall for not very much money. It is an original-owner car – the owner happens to be my dentist. It has 171k miles on it and is in above-average, if not perfect, condition. He told me that he would rather sell it to a Volvo enthusiast (me) than give it to someone who would trash it in no time. Right now it’s cosmetically challenged but since I like my cars to be in perfect, mint condition it’s nothing I can’t handle. Oh, and it also has a new transmission that was installed at the dealer a year and a half ago.
I also own a 1991 740 that is my daily driver – it’s a naturally-aspirated sedan but it’s simple as heck to repair and maintain. It was a one-owner car that I purchased last year for all of $950. It has 156k miles on it and is in immaculate shape.
Nothing like a one-owner, dentist-owned car! Just have to ask: no love for the front-drivers?
Doug,
I also have an 850 – that one is a 1996 naturally-aspirated sedan, again purchased from its original owner. I got it in February 2005, almost immediately after my first 850, a 1993 GLT, was totaled in a car wreck while on my way back to college in Vermont. The car had 61k miles when I bought it – I then proceeded to put 25k more miles on it over the next three years before deciding to relegate it to a summer-only car.
It now resides at my parents’ house in Florida and has a mere 93k miles on it. My folks continue to pamper it just like I did, taking it out only when it’s not raining.
I skimmed through the preview of the upcoming season of Seinfeld’s “Comedians With Cars Having Coffee” (or whatever the title of the series is). Jerry meets with David Letterman in one of the episodes and they end up driving a Volvo 960 or S90 wagon, I believe. Given Dave’s friendship (?) with Paul Newman, I’d imagine that the Volvo being featured in the video has a V8. Looking forward to watching that one.
Nice, that’s a good series, I hadn’t seen the previews. I’m almost positive when Newman built his 960, hey built 2 others, one for Letterman, and another for a Volvo NA exec. It’s rumored Letterman still has his, so fingers crossed!
In the late 1990s, Volvo decided to ditch its naming scheme, which largely consisted of three numbers randomly strewn together. (Actually, Volvo’s 1980s and 1990s naming scheme was far from random – but it was also fairly far from coherent.)
The original three number scheme was actually very logical- first number indicated the series/model, second number indicated the engine (cylinder count) and the third number was the number of doors. So a 745 would be a 700-series, 4-cylinder in the 5-door wagon body style. Right?
The 760 turbo (4-cylinder) and 780 Coupe deviated from the structure.
It’s a lot like BMW’s designations used to indicated engine size. A 325 had a 2.5L inline-6, etc. I’m not sure when they abandoned it, but I do recall that the ’98 323i had a 2.5L I-6…why it wasn’t designated a 325i is beyond me? It remained the 323i from 1998-2000, then in 2001 they renamed it. One guess what the 2001 model’s new designation was…..325i!?!? WTF?
The problem was it initially made sense but deviated quickly. The first number was actually supposed to indicate the GENERATION, then the series, then the number of doors. So the 144 was a first-gen, 4-cyl, 4-door; the 244 was a second-gen, four-cylinder with four doors, while the 245 was a second-gen four-cylinder with five doors (wagon).
The problem came when Volvo decided they prefered the 0 at the end, so that part of the naming scheme was quickly eliminated. Then they ditched 3 altogether and moved onto 4 (440). I’m not sure what happened to 5 or 6, but we had the 740 until the 760 screwed up the middle number, as did the 780. The 850 and 960 kept it intact though. But by the end it was so mucky Volvo just had to abandon it completely, and that’s how we got S, C and V instead.
BTW the craziest BMW naming scheme was when the Z3 2.5i had a 2.8-liter engine. Actually the CRAZIEST is the “sDrive35is” which is just an embarrassment to the modern auto industry…
I love these! When my wife and I got married, a week later the engine blew in her Mazda. Her dad said his coverage was out of warranty, so car shopping we went. The Nissan and Volvo dealers were side-by-side; I heavily campaigned for a Maxima SE (my Nissan truck at that time was at 180k carefree miles…), but she always wanted a Volvo. The S70 was the same price as the Maxima; the dealer also had a demo S90 (1600 miles) for the same $$$.
So as we honed in on Volvo, I really pushed for the S90, knowing the myriad of problems there was with the 850. But she liked the way the S70 drove better, so there you go.
It was the biggest piece of shit I’ve ever owned (well ok, after my Turbo Trans Am). Finally, after 70k miles and 5 years, it needed close to $8000 worth of work (complete AC and ABS). We took a bath and fled to Toyota.
I will say I loved driving the Volvo – slow as hell, but comfortable and built like a tank. My new Outback greatly reminds of it.
But I wish we had gotten the S90….
I briefly looked at the XC90 before I bought the Outback; love the way it drove and looked, but the interior was a little too Scandinavian for me and the legacy of our S70 woke me up.
I even don’t know existence of S70 although I saw one of my colleague drives one today. I always think that 40, 60, 80 are for sedens while 50 and 70 are for wagons. SUV is another story.