Yes, the Volvo 340 was a direct descendant of the DAF 66. Volvo made it heavier, safer and more comfortable. My old prof at Nottingham had one and gave us a ride down to Stevenage in it. I remember that the seats were comfortable but the car rolled a lot on the bends. The Volvo engine was very robust and good for 200k miles if looked after - probable 100k more than the DAF transmission…
You could get them in 1.6 or 2.0 litre sizes. The 2.0 was pretty nippy but heavy on fuel, especially with the CVT. Ford also do a variomatic on the Fiesta (and also the CMAX for sure) but using metal drive belts instead of the rummer ones on the DAF.
The Honda CVT is a direct descendant of these.
CVT is, of course heavier on fuel than a stick shift:
From New Car Net:
If there is a downside to two-pedal motoring, CVT-style, it is in the fuel consumption. Returning 39.8 mpg on the urban cycle, the CVT C-MAX uses about 10 per cent more fuel than its stick-box equivalent. This differential virtually doubles on the extra-urban cycle, where the 57.6 mpg of the two-pedal car is more than 11 mpg adrift of its manual mate. In combined mode, the difference reduces to an exact eight miles per gallon - 49.6 and 57.6 mpg for the CVT and manual car, respectively.