Delayed

[Chinese taxi]

Originally Posted by Daleman

Yes in theory that 1.1mpg difference between the D3 auto and the D5 Auto seems very little and going for the D5 does seem a sensible way to go.

But I think most of Volvos claimed fuel consumption figures are a work of fiction with real life figures being significantly less than claimed .

Current D5 autos seem to be lucky to turn in much more than 35mpg.

The model year 2011 D5 is supposed to be more economical but I will believe it when we get some real life owner figures .

The other approach is if you don’t need the extra D5 performance or all wheel drive put the £2500 extra you pay for the D5 towards paying for the extra fuel you are going to use and make that gap of 1.1mpg into a 10+ MPG increase in MPG over 80000 miles. Because that’s what the sums work out at or a 20MPG saving over the next 40,000 miles.

Yes that’s equal to getting the equivalent of at least 55-60 MPG out of your D3 XC60 auto over 40000 miles.

Quite right. You cannot expect to get theoretical fuel figures as too many variables give lower figures in the real world. But necessary when comparing so called government test figures across makes and models in a world trending towards better economy.

My D5 auto XC70 (Beautiful drive) typically return 35mpg from mixed round town / urban.
Yet I reset the computer when I filled up last tuesday, drive 250 miles motorway Weds, then ~200 mixed motorway and A - roads to return 46mpg. (Still says I have 100 miles to empty tank).

[Chinese taxi]

We could be in the wrong thread here discussing fuel economy, but not if that is one of the key reasons for changing your car in an ever increasing fuel price world.

I am hoping for up to 10 mpg increase by changing to the XC60 Drive. If they get back with my delivery date !

[Daleman]

Originally Posted by Chinese taxi

We could be in the wrong thread here discussing fuel economy, but not if that is one of the key reasons for changing your car in an ever increasing fuel price world.

I am hoping for up to 10 mpg increase by changing to the XC60 Drive. If they get back with my delivery date !

I think you are making a big mistake going from an auto to a manual in this level of luxury car just to save a few quid on petrol you will regret it ! If you had never had an auto you wouldn’t know what you were missing but since you have you will ,badly in my view.

[GrahamTB]

If I wanted the best fuel economy, I would not be buying an SUV. Even with the ever inceasing fuel prices, taxes, speed cameras etc. etc., we still have to get some enjoyment and satisfaction when driving. Everything I have read about the XC60 says it is a joy to drive and this was confirmed in the test drive of 1 1/2 hours. (The dealer said take the car for as long as you want.)

On the subject of speed cameras, why is it only Mercedes (that I have seen) who incorporate a speed limiter in the cruise control. You set the speed and the car will not travel any faster without a kick-down (automatic). Wake up to the real world Volvo and other car manufacturers, it is the best way to avoid breaking speed limits, without having to constantly look at the speedometer.

I also realise the figures for fuel consumption are just a guide when comparing different cars and engines. To be fair to the dealers, they have all said the figures do not necessarily relate to actual consumption.

[Chinese taxi]

All truisms Graham.
I did a lot of soul searching when choosing this car and model. I enjoy my volvos and the XC60 ticks so many boxes, but when I saw the x-over design coupled with reasonable economy, I knew I had found the right car.

I love my XC70 auto (so does the missus when she gets her hands on it) so looked at the stats for economy..... (old figures only available when I decided)
2.4 fwd D5 AWD
Drive Manual Geartronic Manual Geartronic
Combined mpg 47.1 40.9 40.9 37.7
CO2 159 183 183 199

Maybe I am getting green in my old age, but there is quite a difference as you move towards the (luxury) engine range. With the proce hike for the geartronic option and a firm belief in the new government taxing the emissions bands higher, I opted for the Drive manual (now D3 2.0 l).

I have seen the discussion in other threads regarding economy and auto gearboxes, I would have though they could have the MPG & CO2 figures closer to manuals'.

[Chinese taxi]

Sorry,
that table didn't come out well .
hope you get the gist of my message.

[wimorrison]

Chinese Taxi, you have the better of me - I didn't know that Volvo do a Front Wheel Drive (FWD) that has All Wheel Drive (AWD)

Is it the 2.4 FWD version you have ordered - maybe the confusion is the lack of the table

[Daleman]

Originally Posted by Chinese taxi

All truisms Graham.
I did a lot of soul searching when choosing this car and model. I enjoy my volvos and the XC60 ticks so many boxes, but when I saw the x-over design coupled with reasonable economy, I knew I had found the right car.

I love my XC70 auto (so does the missus when she gets her hands on it) so looked at the stats for economy..... (old figures only available when I decided)
2.4 fwd D5 AWD
Drive Manual Geartronic Manual Geartronic
Combined mpg 47.1 40.9 40.9 37.7
CO2 159 183 183 199

Maybe I am getting green in my old age, but there is quite a difference as you move towards the (luxury) engine range. With the proce hike for the geartronic option and a firm belief in the new government taxing the emissions bands higher, I opted for the Drive manual (now D3 2.0 l).

I have seen the discussion in other threads regarding economy and auto gearboxes, I would have though they could have the MPG & CO2 figures closer to manuals'.

I understand you perfectly as I set of on the same course with a DrivE manual on order for two months but just with that little niggle in my mind I had chosen the right car but the wrong gearbox .I had spent years with Mercedes and automatics and although we have a second car with a manual box I knew in my heart that an auto was “the business” in the luxury car that the XC60 is.

My mind was finally made up when I re tested a demonstrator of each (manual and auto) .The auto was just so effortless in traffic ,a different world to the manual I had just tried a few minuets earlier. The difference in cost (fuel and car tax) is £300 a year and not worth bothering about .You can spend the same to put a few extras on the car that are worthless in real terms and often a novelty.

The first manual I tried had a very sharp clutch ,ridiculously sharp in fact and if that car had turned up for me as a special order I would have not got away with it .So I don’t know where we would be for them taking the engine out and having a new clutch plate fitted. No doubt Volvo would have claimed it was within acceptable limits but it was horrible to drive with the clutch take up that sharp.

[155mph]

Originally Posted by GrahamTB

On the subject of speed cameras, why is it only Mercedes (that I have seen) who incorporate a speed limiter in the cruise control. You set the speed and the car will not travel any faster without a kick-down (automatic). Wake up to the real world Volvo and other car manufacturers, it is the best way to avoid breaking speed limits, without having to constantly look at the speedometer.

Renault offer these too. I found it godsend.

As for buying an SUV, people do so for many reasons; high driving position, space, etc. I do not believe efficiency and an SUV need to be mutually exclusive.

[155mph]

As I am learning from my bitter experience, I would not place too much reliance on information provided to you by Volvo or its agents. You are better off making your decision based on the length of a piece of string.