New Generation XC60

[Harvey1512]

Just to correct an earlier post. I go to Cheshire every so often, real Cheshire wives country. The SUV of choice is the Porsche Cayenne although I suspect that is soon to be challenge by the F-Pace. Second place goes to a combination of the Evoque or other RR derivatives. Cheshire wives would not lower themselves to an XC60, oh the shame.

I suspect all of us are grateful that these women stay well clear of Volvo and we remain clear of the taint

[marchesman]

I think the external photographs of the new XC60 are terrific, much better than I expected and better looking than anything from JLR. As others have said the pricing also looks good compared with its competitors. But between the interior which looks as though it has taken its inspiration from a forty year old Cadillac and the engines, for me it vindicates the decision not to wait for it but to buy one of the outgoing model.

[andrewpain]

Originally Posted by pagan8c

I have the V90 D4 and as far as I am concerned it is a very nice place to be when driving . I have had no problems with the equipment and the engine is quiet enough to me . I would agree that the sloping rear door causes a slight problem of space but having said that I have a crate in the back which holds my 2 small dogs with space to spare.With the seats down there is acres of room. The XC70 P3 I traded in had more rear space but as there are only 2 of us and the dogs we are still not cramped even with stuff in it for the Caravan. My problem is the height in that when we ordered it we had not seen 1 but having owned this since October we decided it was a tad to low to make getting in and out comfortable as we both suffer back problems. Because of that we have ordered the XC90 Momentum D5 after having our garage let us have 1 for a few hours and being able to appreciate the height and space. I again did not find the car noisy or the engine corse or underpowered but as we are not sports car drivers the idea of having 0 to 60 in 4 secs or whatever is not needed . I too looked at the Q7 but didn't really like the shape and to get the same extras would have cost us many thousands more so the XC90 will be the one for the next few years.

have you thought about having the dogs on the passenger seat and your wife in the crate in the back? I find you can then have the luggage cover in position which keeps the car looking nice and tidy...mind you, if you DO have the dogs locked in the back they'll be pleased to see you when you let them out. Not always the case the other way around.

[RoyMacDonald]

Originally Posted by Chief inspector

Ive seen the comments on costs, my R design nav lux with winter pack and front parkies was about £39K list.

I cant seem to configure leather, but otherwise soec for spec it comes out £41K, plus its now AWD and automatic, so at some price points, the list is much the same.

Must say though, I don't really like it and for similar money think the V90 is the only Volvo that appeals to me, its a year before I will be looking anyway.

The "Pro" has leather as standard.

Roy

[RoyMacDonald]

Originally Posted by foggyjames

So...my thoughts, with my moderator hat off...

I remember when Volvo first announced that the XC90 would only have four-pot engines, and I think everyone, including Volvo-fans, thought they'd lost their marbles. Various people, myself included, bemoaned the lack of a 6-cylinder diesel in the P2 and P3 platform cars, never mind a drop down to 4-pots! I then took a step back and thought about it a bit more, listened to some of what Volvo said about the decision, and concluded that it was actually a pretty shrewd move. Here's my reasoning:

1) Who bought P2 XC90s? People who wanted the friendly face of an SUV, IMO. That's why they ended up selling only D5s - the smaller petrols became uncompetitive, and people who wanted a V8 were always going to get an X5 or Range Rover anyway...because of the image.

2) The emissions/tax landscape is changing, and fast. Downsizing, apart from for seriously niche markets, is the future. They were the first to announce it, and the fact that others have followed (albeit they'd probably already made the decision) supports the suggestion that, in view of the tax situation, it was inevitable.

3) Introducing a narrower engine allowed the chassis rails to be narrowed, which massively improved crash protection. The SPA 90-series cars are currently numbers 1, 2 and 3 in EuroNCAP's chart. The new Q7 scores worse. Look at the low-offset crash performance for the 90s (and, arguably, the new XC60 performance is even more remarkable, given its smaller frame). I have it from an JLR insider that nothing they have in the pipeline will compete on that front. So there was some method in the madness there.

The motoring press has been highly positive about the 90-series cars...surprisingly so, to me. Clarkson described the XC90 as having the best interior this side of a Bentley. Cheap suspension components? The P3 platform (including my V70 and the mk1 XC60) share suspension components (and brakes) with Fords, so that's nothing new! I also see few ill effects from it on my P3, much as it pains me to say it.

Also bear in mind that development of both the platform and those engines will comfortably pre-date the Chinese buy-out, so they're probably not to blame. What they probably are to thank for is the sharp rise in the overall quality of the interiors. The P3 platform cars were cheapened in various ways compared with their predecessors by Ford (you could even see it within the P2 platform - thinner floor mats, cheaper connectors - lots of little details, year-by-year).

I firmly agree that the XC60 will compete with both the Tiguan and Q5...but I think it will do so on favourable terms, to the right buyers. My friends have a late-model mk1 Tiguan, and it's not remotely as nice inside as my P3 V70...not even close. I just don't buy that the interior quality in the Skodas is on a par with my experience of the new SPA-platform Volvos. I think the Skodas are good for the money, but you really do get more with Volvo's offering.

So...I'm not convinced by the build quality argument, nor that the fundamentals of the platform are 'cheap'. That really just leave the engine issue. I do buy that one - it will put some people off. Yes, if you are a serious performance-head, the lack of larger engines is an issue, but Volvo have been off the pace on that front for many years...and there are plenty of other brands to choose from if that's your thing.

For my money, Volvo are carving out a nice niche for themselves as providing cars for people whose priorities lie more in interior comfort & quality, together with low running costs, rather than the outright driving experience. And as someone who covers circa 40k miles a year, that sounds very appealing to me. I'd happily have a V90 for the motorway, and something significantly more exotic than a 530d for the weekend!

And yes, there have been some unfortunate quality issues, but those will get resolved. Frankly, I wouldn't dream of spending my own money on the first couple of years of production run of ANY car. Early P2-platform Volvos weren't good, reliability-wise (especially the electronics), but later ones were among the most reliable cars ever made.

And no, I don't have blind faith...but they are a genuinely attractive offering for my needs. If I needed a single car to do it all, I'd be looking elsewhere, for sure (unless a D6 hybrid comes out), but because I scratch my performance itch with a second car, I'd happily take the "luxury Passat" option which the V90 represents.

cheers

James

Thanks James.

The reason I bought a P2 XC90 was that it was so much better than any other 7 seater on the market in terms of quality, durability, and safety and style. Yes there was the issue with wheel bearings and the splined sleeve but I had faith that they would be sorted and they were. The end result was a car that I loved for being able to do everything I wanted from a car with a bomb proof engine and kept my family safe in the process.

Ever since I started buying Volvo's (245) back in the eighties I've always thought that Volvo have made the best bodies bar non. Growing up in an age where the life of a car was determined by how long it took the body to rust through, Volvo were a revelation in strength and durability. The move to boron steel for the safety cage has only enhanced that view for me.

My first Volvo had a four cylinder engine and I can't honestly say that the 6 cylinder 940 TD improved my driving experience, but I welcomed the extra boot space in the body. I did like the move to 5 cylinders, but more because they were in the V70 with it's fabulous seats. I've driven my V40 4 cylinder to Scotland and back and the driving experience is great and it handles superbly on the twisty country roads around here. I've had a new XC90 for 3 days and I didn't feel it was underpowered at all, what I noticed was the exceptional quietness.

So will I buy a VEA Volvo? Well I already have one that I love and the more I look at the new XC60 the more I like the way it looks. Plus full air suspension without the over the top, for me, movement of my Range. The only thing I don't like is that the air suspension comes with 20" wheels as standard and I just don't think 20" wheels are practical off road, or on road when you look at the standard of road surface around here. My son has already wrecked a low profile wheel on his V40 driving locally.

All the best.

Roy

[Tannaton]

Originally Posted by RoyMacDonald

The only thing I don't like is that the air suspension comes with 20" wheels as standard and I just don't think 20" wheels are practical off road, or on road when you look at the standard of road surface around here. My son has already wrecked a low profile wheel on his V40 driving locally.

I seem to remember when I ordered my XC60 SE Lux you could swap the nicer 18-inch wheels for the basic 17" one from the lower model as a no-cost option. Is that not the same on the new XC60 with 20's ?

I agree 20" wheels are wasted on a car like that - for one you are more limited on winter tyres and I'm not aware of any all terrain tyres?

[NigelDay]

Originally Posted by Tannaton

I seem to remember when I ordered my XC60 SE Lux you could swap the nicer 18-inch wheels for the basic 17" one from the lower model as a no-cost option. Is that not the same on the new XC60 with 20's ?

I agree 20" wheels are wasted on a car like that - for one you are more limited on winter tyres and I'm not aware of any all terrain tyres?

The 'highest' profile tyres now seem to be 235/60R18, one step down from the 'old' 235/65R17 which I chose as a no-cost-option. Whether these 18" wheels will be a 'nco' remains to be seem when VUK produce the MY18 price list.

[simonjedrake]

Originally Posted by RoyMacDonald

Thanks James.

So will I buy a VEA Volvo? Well I already have one that I love and the more I look at the new XC60 the more I like the way it looks. Plus full air suspension without the over the top, for me, movement of my Range. The only thing I don't like is that the air suspension comes with 20" wheels as standard and I just don't think 20" wheels are practical off road, or on road when you look at the standard of road surface around here. My son has already wrecked a low profile wheel on his V40 driving locally.

All the best.

Roy

Hi Roy

I made the same mental note like you re the wheel sizes especially as todays SUV tyres have a much stronger sidewall construction and can easily take a sporty top performance heavy SUV on 18'' wheels. I cannot see the point in buying an SUV that you may take off-road (or on field?) with a very low profile tyre - the car is meant to look rugged as an AWD SUV surely?
Disappointed that the T8 does not appear to be a launch configeration option, so looks like I will have to wait until 2018.......but as a positive that should allow Volvo to crack the software issues first on the XC90's.

NB.
Good to see James intervention last night after my posting may have banned Kev78 again or least throw a warning shot across his brow!

[NigelDay]

Would anyone care to interpret the fuel tank capacity:

Fuel tank, l (T8/T6 & D5, all US & CDN/D4&T5) 50/71/60

[andymcp]

Hybrids usually have smaller tank, petrol thirsty, diesel more economic?

Edit: ignore that, doesn't explain the latter mix of diesel/petrol....