← New search

2002 Volvo S40

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2002 Volvo S40 do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 26.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all S40 years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

Limited mileage data: 16 of 27 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 6 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 5 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 3 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

4 crash reports0 fire reports2 injury reports

Visibility complaints

2 reports
Clear category filter
2,000 miles · May 22, 2007
Exterior LightingService Brakes, HydraulicVisibility

TYPES OF RECURRING ISSUES WITH VOLVO S40: HEADLIGHTS, DRIVER FRONT WINDOW MOTOR, EARLY BRAKE PAD WEAR. HEADLIGHT BULBS WERE REPLACED 2-3 TIMES A YEAR AT CONSUMER'S COST. WHEN BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF VOLVO DEALER THEY REPORTED THAT IT WAS PROBABLY DUE TO LIGHTS BEING USED DURING DAYLIGHT. THEY CHECK ELECTRICAL AND REPORTED…

Read full complaint

TYPES OF RECURRING ISSUES WITH VOLVO S40: HEADLIGHTS, DRIVER FRONT WINDOW MOTOR, EARLY BRAKE PAD WEAR. HEADLIGHT BULBS WERE REPLACED 2-3 TIMES A YEAR AT CONSUMER'S COST. WHEN BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF VOLVO DEALER THEY REPORTED THAT IT WAS PROBABLY DUE TO LIGHTS BEING USED DURING DAYLIGHT. THEY CHECK ELECTRICAL AND REPORTED NO ISSUE. HAD BRAKE PAD AND ROTOR ISSUED SHORTLY AFTER PURCHASING THE VEHICLE. VOLVO DEALER REPORTED VOLVO ROTORS WERE BUILT THIN AND SOFT. COST OF BRAKE REPLACEMENT WAS NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY AS IT WAS CONSIDERED REGULAR WEAR. DRIVER SIDE WINDOW REGULATOR HAS BEEN REPLACED THREE TIMES. FIRST REGULATOR WAS REPLACED IN JUNE 2005, THEN FEBRUARY 2006 AND NOW MAY 2007. MAY 2007 REGULATOR WAS AT THE COST OF THE CONSUMER AS WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED AND WARRANTY ON PART ONLY LASTS 12 MONTHS EVEN THOUGH THERE IS AN APPARENT PROBLEM.*AK

NHTSA ODI #10191517

Mileage unknown · Oct 21, 2002
Visibility

THERE IS A DANGEROUS REFLECTION OF THE TAUPE DASH OFF THE WINDSHIELD OF MY NEW VOLVO, WHICH THE COMPANY HAS REFUSED TO ACKNOWLEDGE. OTHERS HAVE NOTICED THIS AS WELL: SEE WWW.VOLVOSPY.COM. THIS CREATES A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION IN DAYLIGHT, SO MUCH SO THAT THE GLARE IN DAYLIGHT, PRESENT WHEN THE SUN IS SHINING AND EVEN ON AN OVE…

Read full complaint

THERE IS A DANGEROUS REFLECTION OF THE TAUPE DASH OFF THE WINDSHIELD OF MY NEW VOLVO, WHICH THE COMPANY HAS REFUSED TO ACKNOWLEDGE. OTHERS HAVE NOTICED THIS AS WELL: SEE WWW.VOLVOSPY.COM. THIS CREATES A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION IN DAYLIGHT, SO MUCH SO THAT THE GLARE IN DAYLIGHT, PRESENT WHEN THE SUN IS SHINING AND EVEN ON AN OVERCAST DAY, PREVENTS ONE FROM AN UNOBSTRUCTED VIEW. THE COMPANY'S RESPONSE TO MY COMPLAINT WAS OUR VEHICLES MEET OR EXCEED ALL UNITED STATES SPECIFICATIONS FOR SAFETY BRFORE THEY ARE RELEASED TO CUSTOMERS IS THERE A SPECIFICATION FOR THE AMOUNT OF GLARE ALLOWED? FURTHER, THEY SAY THAT THEY CAN NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHEN AND THE WAY I DRIVE, BUT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT. I'M SURE I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO DRIVES IN DAYLIGHT HOURS. THE DEALER SUGGESTS THAT I COVER THE DASH WITH A DARK COLORED MATERIAL, WHICH DOES, INDEED, CUT THE GLARE; OTHERS HAVE SUGGESTED WEARING POLARIZED SUNGLASSES, WHICH ALSO WORKS. BUT NEITHER OF THESE SUGGESTIONS IS SATISFACTORY, ESPECIALLY IN A NEW CAR. ARE YOU AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM? AND DO YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS? THIS IS NOT A TRIVIAL PROBLEM. THE GLARE IS ALMOST BLINDING AT TIMES. CHECK IT OUT AND SEE WHAT I MEAN. DT

NHTSA ODI #768696

Official recalls

1

03V284000 · Equipment:other:labels

Aug 1, 2003

CERTAIN PASSENGER CARS FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 225, "CHILD RESTRAINT ANCHORAGE SYSTEMS." THE SECOND ISOFIX GUIDE WAS NOT INSTALLED IN THESE VEHICLES AND, IN CERTAIN CASES, THE OWNER'S MANUAL ISOFIX INFORMATION IS INCORRECT.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: THIS DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STANDARD.

Remedy: OWNERS WILL RECEIVE A LETTER/PACKAGE CONSISTING OF THE SECOND ISOFIX GUIDE WITH INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS, AND IN CERTAIN CASES, THE CORRECTED OWNER'S MANUAL MAY BE PROVIDED. IF THE OWNER WANTS TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLE TO A VOLVO DEALER FOR INSTALLATION OF THE GUIDE, IT WILL BE PERFORMED AT NO CHARGE TO THE OWNER. OWNER NOTIFICATION BEGAN ON DECEMBER 19, 2003. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT VOLVO AT 1-800-458-1552.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

0

No exact-year investigations in this snapshot.