Volvo Comfort / V50 2.0d / D5

[stevo83]

I'm getting 45.9mpg out of my manual D5, and that's worked out properly, not from trip.

[r30ser]

Originally Posted by stevo83

I'm getting 45.9mpg out of my manual D5, and that's worked out properly, not from trip.

So a Geartronic will be around 42-43

[S7iFFLER]

Originally Posted by r30ser

So a Geartronic will be around 42-43

I would say that would be a realistic overall figure yes

[faffi]

If it helps, Ford listed the MK3 manual Mondeo TDCi at 49.6 mpg overall and the 5-tronic at 38.2 - a huge difference. For the urban cycle, the manual came out at 38.2 mpg, the 5-tronic at 27.7 mpg. In other words, the 5-tronic/geartonic isn't very economical in operation.

[lnbmb02]

Ha ha, i'm new to this forum and loving every minute so far.... Love the tone of writing... Well, here's my 2 penneth worth. I've just bought an 05 V70 D5 Geartronic. Now, please bear in mind that my basis for comparison is a land Rover Series 2, 2.5 TDES. But, the comfort in the Volvo excellent, mine has the leather seats and I'm given to understand that in the P2 Volvos, they switched the type of leather used and have opted for a softer hide and mine certainly is soft. From past experience, so long as you feed the leather annually, it returns a very pleasing seat, that said, my wife would always prefer cloth trim as she finds leather to slippery (perhaps I should stop oiling her skirt?) The Geartronic box does what it says on the tin, it is smooth and changes up and down when I want, although, in moments of quick driving, I do use the manual option as there is no sport mode and I like to hold the revs a little longer. MPG, well, I'm not the most conservative of pilots and I'm averaging 39 mpg around town and 42 on a longer run.

[nilsj]

Originally Posted by r30ser

Do you find that you slip/slide in the leather seats?

No, that's not a problem.

Regarding the other comments about the engine: If you want an auto box, you may not be interested in the 1.6d which I can recommend. However, an argument in favour of the D5 is that the tank has 10 litres more capacity than the 16/2.0d tank. (62 v.s. 52 litres.) I find the tank rather small.

[r30ser]

Hi All,

I recently took a V50 2.0D Powershift for a 30-40 minute drive, in town, dual carriageway and motorway, but struggled to achieve 40mpg, even on the motorway.
Is this a normal figure? Its seems no better than a D5.
I would be interested in peoples thoughts.

[Clan]

The 2.0D isnt a particularly economic engine it is used for its vigourous feeling power really .However you just cant test the MPG on such a short test run ..

[r30ser]

Originally Posted by Clan

The 2.0D isnt a particularly economic engine it is used for its vigourous feeling power really .However you just cant test the MPG on such a short test run ..

In comparison, my 2006 2.0TDI Golf with the DSG gearbox, does an average of 40ish around town, and upto 60ish mpg on a run.

Any ideas how the D5 Geartronic compares?

[Clan]

Originally Posted by r30ser

In comparison, my 2006 2.0TDI Golf with the DSG gearbox, does an average of 40ish around town, and upto 60ish mpg on a run.

Any ideas how the D5 Geartronic compares?

The older pre 2005 heavier, larger VC70 D5 2400cc does that too . Not much point in the 2.0D at all .
The current 2 litre version of the D5 , The D3 and D4 are a much better option if you can afford one .