Drive-E engine using a quart of oil every 1000 miles; I'm 2.5 hrs from the closest dealer

meade18 said:

That's the exact situation I imagined - if I were to sell my car (back before it was repaired) to some unsuspecting person, it may be their only car and I may have put them in that exact position you described. But I'm not getting on my moral high horse. I knew my car had a problem and bought a warranty anyway. They never actually asked me if it had any pre-existing conditions, but I wouldn't have volunteered that information if they had asked. I was willing to be dishonest with a warranty company but not a buyer in the used car market. Either one is morally problematic.

Click to expand...

I consider myself to be rather upfront at times and not one to sugar coat. Probably won't win me any awards for tact. None the less, private party sales of used cars come with a Caveat Emptor. People don't generally offload trouble free used vehicles. Either the maintenance is getting unaffordable (such as used Mercedes, BMW's, etc) or the car has serious issues needing addressed. As a buyer delving in to the used car market, there's no substitute for doing one's homework and due diligence. Look a
up known points of failure, ask for service records, and do a PPI. It's not a state secret that certain Volvo Cars Pre mid 2016 have potential for piston ring issues. So unless you're equipped (financially or mechanically) to deal with the issue, it's probably best to avoid these cars. Sure, not every vehicle will develop an issue, but there's a chance the one being sold private party MIGHT ALREADY have a problem or develop one at a later date.

Far as dealers go, you may have some honest sales people like @DFrantz, but most aren't going to steer you away from a purchase. By Late 2016, Volvo clearly knew what cars had piston issues. Redesigning the rings by Mid 2016. Yet, I doubt dealers cleared their lots of Early 2016 and older models that potentially suffered or could suffer from Oil Consumption issues. Nor do I suspect, dealers put out any literature or recommended prospective Volvo Customers shy away from these vehicles.

Therefore, you've got a lot of moral quandaries. You didn't disclose to the protection plan underwriting company that your vehicle began consuming oil. Even though you knew of the problem. People who sell their vehicle As-IS private sale might not have any other choice. Say you dropped $35,000 on a Brand New 2015.5 S60. It's now 2020 and the 4 yr / 50K has long an out. The car sits at 115,000 miles and is chewing through oil like water.

1. You can continue to drive the car until it dies. Maybe not being able to afford another vehicle or replacement. Not everyone Driving a Volvo has money bursting from the seams of their pants.

2. The market is extremely competitive due to the chip shortage, You can offload your car to Carvana or Carmax for a decent chunk of change. Similar to you hiding your oil burning dilemma from the protection plan underwriting company. You top off the oil and feign ignorance.

3. You sell the car As-IS privately. Not disclosing the consumption issue and letting the prospective buyer do his or her own homework.

As time passes, we're going to be seeing a lot of these 16s, 15.5s, etc hitting lots as people trade up for newer models. At the end of the day, Volvo is responsible for the headache, but no class action has forced Volvo to issue a repair. So people might have no other choice, but to get rid of the car while it still runs, in order to afford purchasing another vehicle.

Ultrarunner511 said:

I stand by my statement of "when in sales, integrity is a gray area" the majority of the time. This is from personal experience working for multiple dealers and observing the salesman behind the scenes. Also as a customer and seeing the lengths some will go and stories they'll tell to try to bait you in.

I know @DFrantz was cited as one example of an honest salesman. He certainly sounds like one and I applaud him for his helpful and honest posts here.

Similarly, the salesman I worked with at Tucson Volvo is another genuinely honest person. He went to bat for me on my 2020 T6 debacle when he had zero financial interest to do so. They're out there, but I think money blinds most of them.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

If you watch the Letho Law video, Michigan Law (States Do Vary), lets a salesperson make any promises he/she wants. Unless that promise is put into the final contract, it means nothing. As Michigan law says salespeople are not authorized to represent a vehicle in any way. So "promises they make" unless put into writing, mean nothing.

A salesperson in Michigan could literally tell you the car has a brand new engine, Drives like a Dream, and never been in an accident. You sign the standard 7 point contract per Letho Law, and that absolves the salesperson of any liability. As it basically says he/she's not an authorized representative of the dealer capable of making promises or expressing guarantees.

Sales can be a dirty business devoid of morals and ethics.

I think @DFrantz's approach of honesty wins more customers in the long run is valid. But even @DFrantz has admitted that his dealer marks up the Volvo Protection Plans (VIP & CPO Extensions) a few hundred dollars above Steingold Volvo's price. It's not his job to educate or inform buyers of a better deal elsewhere. It's the customers job to do their homework, too.

Salespeople have families to feed and an earning to make. Some people take the scuzzy a sale is a sale approach. I don't care if this customer leaves unhappy, I made a sale. Others (@DFrantz) appear to bank off a happy customer is a repeat customer that also tells friends and family. With the noted above exception on ancillary add on pricing.

Ultrarunner511 said:

I still remember salesman singing, "Another one bites the dust" as an elderly customer drove away in their new car they sold. They were the typical chubby, scuzzy, gold rings on fingers salesman. Ironically reminded me of Harvey Weinstein.

I worked with a salesman for 8 months to find my specific Santa Fe back in 2014/2015. The color combo I wanted was less popular. He called me one day to say he found one but wouldn't tell me where it was. He kept insisting I schedule with him to see it. He set the lowest price possible and wouldn't budge...and still wouldn't tell me where it was located. I took that as a clue.

I did some research and found the vehicle at another dealer in the Phoenix Valley. I called that dealer and inquired and was told the vehicle "was already in contract" with another dealer. They confirmed it was the dealer I been working with. I told them that was me and there was no contract. I hadn't even met the salesman in person. The dealer that had the car immediately offered $2500 lower than the original salesman. I left my house in 15 minutes and bought it that night.

The next day, I was driving my new car. The original salesman called me and left a voice mail saying, "I can still get you into that car!" Never talked to him again

I consider sales not much different than defense attorneys. They are supposed to be truthful and have integrity. The bottom line in sales is money. The bottom line in criminal defense is protecting the constitution. Both seem to lose touch with objective truth too often.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Truth is often subjective and skewed by interpretation. One man's truth is another man's lie. Attorneys often promise to get you the best possible plea deal or will fight to win the case. Just as the salesperson will promise "His/Her" dollar amount is the rock bottom price. All boils down to money and ego.

An injury attorney who sees a big pay day will most definitely fight hard to line their pockets. Not because they love the client like a family member, but the reward is a fat paycheck at settlement. Criminal attorney make all sorts of promises to clients, they know aren't feasible.

I'm sure Harvey Weinstein's attorney promised the sun, moon, and stars. Attorneys are salespeople, too. With some honest attorneys saying they can't guarantee an outcome but will do their best. And others saying if you hire me, I'll get you the best possible plea deal or we'll beat this charge. Full well knowing there are a lot of variables out of their control at play.

See, I would have taken the opposite approach with that sleazy salesperson. I would have returned the call saying I located my desired vehicle at another dealer in the Pheonix Valley and their price was $2500 below your "rock bottom". Guess you weren't offering me the best deal after all.

I've learned in life after having my fair share of follies, that with some people you have to take promises and insinuations with a grain of salt. There's no substitute for due diligence and homework.

DFrantz said:

FWIW I still sell early drive E motors, but it's rare. We don't deal with many of them at this point because they are beyond are ability to certify and don't buy older stuff for the lot. So the only ones I get would be traded in. I'm fortunate that we keep high standards for used cars because if there is a risk of it being a burner we'll offload it ourselves to the wholesale chain. If we sell it certified and it turns out to be an oil burner then we've inconvenienced the next owner, but the CPO will cover it if it's bad. Normally it's rare we would drive a car 1000 miles to know it was burning oil, though right now we are putting nearly all our used cars in the loaner fleet due to inventory shortages. So most dealers would have no idea it's an oil burner unless they were the ones that diagnosed it. I've worked at places with lower standards too though. But thankfully everywhere I've work has done a good job standing behind major issues if they had been overlooked, even on as is. So who you buy things from does matter too. But in the OPs case, they purchased the car 4 years ago. It would still be under CPO if it had been from a Volvo dealer as Volvo had the standard 7 year 100k then.

Click to expand...

It's a sticky situation. Assuming the customer has never reported the consumption issue (out of warranty and knows he/she won't get good will assistance)....Then the only way dealer would know if the vehicle has a consumption issue (or worse) is to take vehicle into the service bay and have techs check cylinders for scoring. Of course, that would confirm the car has a consumption issue and also needs a new engine.

Of course, if there's no scoring, then the only way to find out is drive the car a few thousand miles...Which won't happen.

Creating the proverbial ethical quandary.

A. CarMax / Carvana seems to not care / know about consumption issue. And are paying top dollar.
B. Feign ignorance and pass the buck onto someone for else via Private Sale
C. Most if not all Volvo Dealers know about the problem, and are probably leery of touching Mid 2016s and Older.

Best case scenario is a Mid 2016 has its 7r / 100K CPO term in 2023. Most 2015.5s are going to reach terms by 2022. Mine expires June 2022. This assumes that the vehicle hasn't yet reached 100K. Which I am sure many are very close or have surpassed 100k. I've got 8400 miles left / 8 Months left. Chances are those 8400 miles will be exhausted before June 2022.

People who still have a valid CPO are not likely looking to offload their cars, since the issue would be fixed at no cost.

DFrantz said:

When buying a used car it's important to look for things. As implied above, every car is for sale for a reason. Many of the reasons have no implications on the car (end of lease, person passed away, person just wanted a new car). But you should try to determine the reason and mitigate risks. I find it curious that people focus so much on the best deal and so much lower time looking at a vehicles history. It's generally a good idea to pay more for a better used car. I think if a car is new enough to get CPO and you don't it's dangerous.

Click to expand...

Age plays a factor. Older the car, the greater the likelihood the vehicle being sold has major faults. Even with a newer car, ascertaining WHY it's being sold is important. Never safe to assume little Old Grandma Died, Gave Up Her License, etc. And the vehicle is trouble free.

Complete Maintenance Records are imperative. A new car could an issue if the little old lady skipped service visits, too.

When I bought my car in June 2016, the dealer offered to "lower the price" by $1600 and remove the CPO. Seeing the car had 2200 miles and 2 years of age (Manufactured June 2014. Put into Service June 2015 as Demo / Loaner. Bought June 2016). There was no way in hell I'd buy a "used car" even if ever so slightly, without a warranty.

Good thing I did. Oil Consumption ($5k). Thermostat / ECM ($1k) - Under CPO. Not sure if my mirror Motor Dying was CPO or not. Either way, CPO paid for at least $6k in warranty, if not a bit more.

DFrantz said:

But the car industry is still horse trading. Dealers and customers can end up with the short end of a stick. If you want to try to do things in the most upright way you could go to carmax and tell them it uses some oil. They might make a big deal and they might not. If they knock it down what you consider to be okay then take the offer and feel good about your choice. They genuinely might not care much. If they are selling for $18k then the trade is probably around $13k. If you paid $18k 4 years ago, that's $1250 a year... which is pretty cheap for vehicle depreciation of 4 years 53k miles. So I wouldn't fret over the current market. Your car is worth more because of it. So trade it in and buy a CPO and get the 5 year extended wrap warranty.

Click to expand...

Let's be honest, very few consumers are going to have a "Moral Reckoning" on telling Carvana or CarMax the vehicle burns oil. Especially if this vehicle is their only source of transportation. Even though the market is paying top dollar for cars, replacing a car requires also paying top dollar.

There's no real winning solution. Other than steer clear of Drive-E Volvos made mid 2016 and earlier that have not had the piston rings replaced or are not still under the old 7 yr / 100K CPO.

Too much of a gamble.

p.rico said:

I don't know why you keep harping on money or technical prowess. Those two things have nothing to do with integrity.

Click to expand...

American Express, do you accept "Integrity" as a form of payment. You Don't? Well sh*t. guess some sacrifices are going to have to be made on feeding the family, rent, etc etc to come up with $5k.

Other manufacturers got class actioned on their consumption issues. Volvo did not, leaving Volvo to "selectively apply" their integrity on who and how much they wanted to help.

Again, I don't see Volvo stepping up to fix a known issue that plagued several years worth of their vehicles. Instead, Volvo has taken the "Let's Hope Most of these Cars FAIL OUTSIDE WARRANTY" and stick the owner with the expense. Which is now happening quite a bit, as these vehicles age out of their CPO's or long surpassed their factory warranty.

So yes, this has everything to do with Dollars and Cents. Volvo acted unethical but refusing to acknowledge the issue rose to the level these cars needed repaired. Instead, they're playing the numbers game.

How many of these cars would fail post Factory Warranty or 7 yr / 100k CPO. Thereafter, we can legally absolve ourselves of financial responsibility. Offering goodwill only if we see fit.

WhiteT5 said:

The Mazdas were really impressive, but my wife thought the CX-9 was too big and I think the CX-5 is too small, so no agreement there. Too bad they don't make a CX-7 anymore. The Mazdas handle really well for what they are. We need to go find a lightly used X3 and a well-optioned Forester to drive before we make a final decision, but so far, driving the competition has made me appreciate my V60 a bit more. I'd love to go SPA XC60, but with no dealer around, I'm not sure that's such a wise idea.

Click to expand...

I had a Mazda 6 rental car a year or two ago and I was quite impressed by the comfortable seating and handling of the vehicle. Interior also felt rather plush and less plastic. Not sure the long term reliability or safety, but first impressions were striking

I'm in a bit of a similar boat. Closest dealer is 70 miles with the preferred being about 80 miles away. I try to incorporate my service visits or warranty work with passing through the area. I schedule a loaner in advance. Dealer is very flexible with their loaners, too. They know a lot of the time, I need to drop off my car, then get back on the road. Their loaner car will be returned with an extra 300 miles, while my vehicle sits around waiting to be worked upon. Their car will get dropped off after hours and the key goes into the box. We've got this worked out to a science.

I've brought my dealer all services 10-90k, brakes, wipers, warranty piston job, ecm / thermostat, and a bunch of other warranty work. I do an alignment every 10K. So all and all I try to be very loyal. When mishaps occur, and I've had a few occasions where I couldn't make it back to return their loaner, they understand.

Not everyone has this relationship with their dealer, but it helps.

Best thing I can say is find a brand where you are happy. Whether you keep the Volvo and get it fixed, or find greener pastures.

Dyno said:

You're right. 1/3 of 50 million is chump change. Heck, I wouldn't even get off my couch for that much.

Click to expand...

To huge law firms that chase these class action lawsuits, I imagine 16.6 million is chump change. Especially, when you can ride the coat tails of a MAJOR class action and get 100s of millions or Billions in fees.

If you've ever had to sue anyone, or been involved in a car accident and dickered with insurance companies, legal crap can takes years and years. It's not an overnight process. If you ever see those stupid ads for class action lawsuits, they are never some mom and pop law firm, instead being some conglomerate with dozens of attorneys.

These dozens of staff / partners that have to be paid in fighting these cases in the ensuring years. So 16.6 Million doesn't go a long way. But 100s of millions or billions do. Especially, when winning isn't a slam dunk. So a Law Firm could be involved in litigation for years and come out losing. Why take that chance on "Chump Change"?

So to dedicate years and years of manpower and resources for $16.6 million is a drop in the bucket, when you can take on MAJOR cases where the potential payout is 10 or 100 times that amount.

Attorneys chase the money trail....