1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188 
OPERATOR EXPERIENCE
Page 144
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
VOLVO FL616 RIGID. (non disc brakes) ORIGINALLY TESTED: 30/5/87.
ENGINE: VOLVO TD61F 207hp. GEARBOX: VOLVO R52 8-speed. BACK AXLE RATIO: 4.87:1 TESTED GVW: 16.26-tonnes, OVERALL RESULTS: 11.72mpg/38.1mph. ORIGINAL TEST REPORT PLUS POINTS: Air suspension on rear axle/adjustable and automatic ride height/easy access/good instrumentaion and trim/low cab noise/light power steering/good manoeuvrability/good torque curve and gearbox/good payload/light clutch pedal/improved exhaust brake. ORIGINAL TEST REPORT MINUS POINTS: Below average mpg and mph figures/poor cross cab access/rear brakes had tendency to lock.
Operator 1 has a 26 mixed-vehicle fleet on own account poultry collection and distribution. This involves very mixed work from high street deliveries to farm yard collection. Operator 2 and 3 have similar operations. Operator 2 runs a mixed vehicle fleet of 10 and Operator 3 is an owner driver working for him. The work consists mainly of animal feeds distribution and collection on local to middle distance work.
Operator 1 keeps his vehicles for 7 years and says that Volvos are 'damned good'. His work is not geared up for fuel economy and the fleet average is around 9mpg. This can vary from vehicle to vehicle and driver to driver depending on the work done. Brake vibration was one problem experienced and a tendency for the brakes to lock if applied too heavily. From his point of view, the lack of body roll and chassis strength are the two plus features for his operation.
Both Operators 2 and 3 have had good service with their vehicles and reliability was a strong point.
Most of the good and bad points from the roadtest were agreed upon but the manoeuvrability of the vehicle was not thought to be a strong point. From a driver's point of view, all agreed that the Volvo cab took some heating.
Opeators 2 and 3 felt that dealer service was good and spare parts prices reasonable. Operator 1 was less impressed. He quoted an instance where a cylinder head was sent to the dealer for pressure testing. This was checked and sent back as ok. It was refitted and the vehicle had the same problem. The head was then checked independently and found to be cracked. Since then the policy has been to use the dealer until the warranty period has expired and servicing and repairs are then carried out by the operator. He commented that, as with most service operations, the efficiency of a dealer is dependent on staff.
Operators 1 and 2 did not feel that Volvos did any more work than other makes in the fleet or were any more efficient. But their strong point was that drivers liked them and tended to look after them. They had purposely run a mixed fleet to keep their options open and compare one vehicle against another.