|
S80 '06-'16 / V70 & XC70 '07-'16 General Forum for the P3-platform S80 and 70-series models |
Information |
|
High Miles ex police xc70 - bad idea?Views : 3784 Replies : 36Users Viewing This Thread : |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Jan 9th, 2022, 20:39 | #21 |
Junior Member
Last Online: Apr 17th, 2024 13:29
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Brentwood
|
As a police officer with 22 years in, I would never buy an ex police car based on my knowledge of my constabulary only. They are generally serviced quite well but sometimes with reconditioned parts as the maintenance is contracted out to companies who are looking to make as much profit and charge the police as much as possible. Always driven hard from cold and bumped up and down kerbs, speed bumps etc. Plus I would want a replacement interior as god only knows who and what has been transported in them, and it is very rare that they are cleaned professionally
__________________
Current cars. 2006 S60 D5 2004 V70 D5 Previous cars. 240 gl 740 (?) 940 2.3lpt 850 T5 x2 V70 P80 T5 V40 T4 V40 2.0t C70 T5 convertible S40 T5 (2005) S60 D5 (2002) V50 1.8 sport. |
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Shortos For This Useful Post: |
Jan 11th, 2022, 02:22 | #22 | |
VOC Member
Last Online: Aug 27th, 2022 09:57
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cambridge
|
Quote:
About 14 months ago I bought a 2008 XC70 Euro4 Lux Auto Polestar with 158K. It's a very different car - much heavier, quieter, very different engine sound. It's had the same done to it as the 2005 except this time I put Michelin CrossClimate2 on it and that transformed the car - it had Falken all around. The car feels much more planted and nicer to drive but I normally only get around 40mpg (goes like heck though - Polestar turns it into a very different car from the 163 Euro3).
__________________
2008 XC70 D5 Lux Geartronic Polestar, 161K 2005 XC70 D5 SE Geartronic, 203K |
|
Jan 11th, 2022, 14:31 | #23 | |
Premier Member
Last Online: Today 16:43
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Manchester
|
Quote:
__________________
2007 S80 2.4 D5 (P3 chassis) - 110,000 miles 2008 V70 2.4 D5 (P3 chassis) - 163,000 miles |
|
Jan 11th, 2022, 15:05 | #24 |
The Brit Brick
Last Online: Aug 13th, 2023 09:39
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Warwickshire
|
People say this, but Ive owned E3, E4 and E5 simultaneously - and most importantly owned each from new and can guarantee they were treated and maintained identically - and found that not to be the case. Its difficult to see how and engine with greater volumetric efficiency can be less economical if driven equally.
Swirl flaps are a different matter. They can indeed cause issues, but I have dodged that bullet with all of mine.
__________________
2005 C70 2.4T Collection convertible. 40,000 mile sunny day toy. Last edited by Familyman 90; Jan 11th, 2022 at 15:54. |
The Following User Says Thank You to Familyman 90 For This Useful Post: |
Jan 11th, 2022, 17:06 | #25 | |
Bungling Amateur
Last Online: Today 17:02
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Beverley, East Yorks
|
Quote:
There is no doubt in my mind that the most economical D5 I've owned was a 2002 V70 D5 manual which was my dads ex-company car and that could do over 50 mpg on a gentle country run (based on brim to brim fills not the computer). My 2017MY XC60 D4 VEA 2WD would manage 45-46 max in the same driving. The XC60 will have worse aero dynamics but was on factory Conti Eco Contact tyres, the V70 was on Vredestein winters. My view is the difference is down to a leaner burn of the lower emissions cars which is slightly "whiter" than then ideal fuel/air ratio for maximum fuel to power delivery, but that's just a guess. Another issue which clouds it slightly is the E4 cars have the better TF80 6 speed box which utilises more torque converter lock-up and hence is more efficient. If that box had been fitted to the E3 it would have stepped that engine on even more in terms of economy.
__________________
2011 XC90 D5 Executive 2003 C70 T5 GT 2012 Ford Ranger XL SC 1977 Triumph Spitfire 1500 1976 Massey Ferguson 135 |
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Tannaton For This Useful Post: |
Jan 11th, 2022, 17:36 | #26 | |
Senior Member
Last Online: Today 14:12
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Lichfield
|
Quote:
The higher fuel pressures since I studied this stuff improves economy by smaller droplet sizes, plus the ability to more accurately control the injection process. The fundamentals of diesel economy still stand though, that is when running at very high air to fuel ratios they are very economical, if you drive very hard in a diesel you can get the economy down to petrol spark ignition levels (I managed 26mpg in a 1.6 diesel once on clear roads, whereas 55mpg was normal driving economy...). Petrol spark ignition engines are generally constrained by the requirements of the catalytic converter to have an air to fuel ratio of around 14.7 to 1, so are actually way less economical then they would be if lean burn technologies had been allowed, but the catalytic converter producers were very wealthy and effective lobbyists back in the day. This is not as tightly constrained as it was but again generally it is the case, so it is not as easy to get possible to get as good economy or efficiency from petrol spark ignition engines. |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to FreshAir For This Useful Post: |
Jan 11th, 2022, 17:42 | #27 |
The Brit Brick
Last Online: Aug 13th, 2023 09:39
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Warwickshire
|
Well, I can only speak as I find. I keep a spreadsheet - although I stopped doing so on the 163 when that got passed on to my daughter - and have done so for all my cars since the 90's (I should get a hobby!).
My records indicate the 185 Polestar and 200 consistently gave better economy, considerably so on long motorway journeys where they would haul well into the 40's, 43-44 without fail. The 163 struggled to touch 40 under any circumstances. In mixed motoring the difference is less, but still notable. Also I recorded less of an efficiency drop in colder weather for the E4 and 5 cars. Emcon measures will make a difference, but the improvements in volumeteic efficiency are vast and would need to be stuffed up with emcon measures California style to come close to negating such a major efficiency improvement. I must respectfully disagree re refinement. Bore and stroke the same to within a MM, same number of moving parts within the block, mounted in the same manner to identical sheet metal structures. I can think of no rule of mass-physics that would make a difference there. Despite differences in sound deadening, and the 163 suffering it its own way with an older transmission, there is nothing in it as regards refinement attributable to the motor. PS, sorry to steer off topic. In my defence its all good natured, interesting, and could be of interest depending on the year of ex Fed car one might be considering.
__________________
2005 C70 2.4T Collection convertible. 40,000 mile sunny day toy. Last edited by Familyman 90; Jan 11th, 2022 at 17:46. |
The Following User Says Thank You to Familyman 90 For This Useful Post: |
Jan 11th, 2022, 21:58 | #28 | |
VOC Member
Last Online: Yesterday 14:59
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Cupar, Fife
|
Quote:
|
|
Jan 11th, 2022, 22:58 | #29 | |
New Member
Last Online: Jun 8th, 2022 20:10
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: Worcester Park
|
Quote:
__________________
Trafpol |
|
Jan 12th, 2022, 15:19 | #30 | |
Bungling Amateur
Last Online: Today 17:02
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Beverley, East Yorks
|
Quote:
In the same context, I also think the block and head have been lightened on the later E4 cars to decrease warm up time (i.e. lower thermal capacity) and hence absorb less shock.
__________________
2011 XC90 D5 Executive 2003 C70 T5 GT 2012 Ford Ranger XL SC 1977 Triumph Spitfire 1500 1976 Massey Ferguson 135 |
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Tannaton For This Useful Post: |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|