V70 D5 geartronic advice please

[recardo]

Hi

I'm considering changing my LPG 4x4 SUV thingy for something a little more comfortable and luxurious, specifically a 2004 V70 2.4 D5 SE geartronic with 114K and Full volvo history. Its more than twice the mileage of LPG car but both of similar value.

Enough rambling from me! My questions are;
1. is 114K nothing for the 2.4 D5 engine?
2. would adding another 60K to 80K be realistic with regular servicing without additional expense? or are there any known additional cost items or known issues which could be expensive at this sort of mileage? (eg injectors needing replaced a xxx-miles - that sort of thing)
3. what sort of mpg does the d5 give with the autobox?

thanks in advance!

[Clan]

yes it should be fine , make sure the cam belt was changed at 96000 miles though ...
The 2004 wasnt particularly prone to injector problems as it has a new type fuel filter. but if any were going to be faulty they would have been replaced by now and having done 114000 miles shold go on and on ...

mpg depends how you drive , expect between 38 and 48 to the gallon , most average mid 40's .... and driving at 60 mph for long distances will give 50+

[recardo]

yep confirmed the cambelt was changed at the 97K service.

thanks for the info!

[jackass]

Originally Posted by Clan

mpg depends how you drive , expect between 38 and 48 to the gallon , most average mid 40's .... and driving at 60 mph for long distances will give 50+

Doing a pretty good example of "combined" driving, I only get about 37-38mpg out of my S60 D5 Geartronic. It will hit mid-40s on a long run though.

[Dynosaur]

Originally Posted by jackass

Doing a pretty good example of "combined" driving, I only get about 37-38mpg out of my S60 D5 Geartronic. It will hit mid-40s on a long run though.

It's difficult to believe how much difference the autobox makes.
My 2004 manual D5 saloon (94K) gets 51 MPG combined with a foot on the heavier side of average - and set on cruise-control at 70 mph, gets 76 MPG.
Now I'm beginning to understand why autoboxes need oil coolers, drinking all that torque.

[Clan]

Originally Posted by jackass

Doing a pretty good example of "combined" driving, I only get about 37-38mpg out of my S60 D5 Geartronic. It will hit mid-40s on a long run though.

Hills are a killer of mpg if you go up many ... so is stuck in traffic queues and going a mile to the shops and back ...

[jackass]

Originally Posted by Dynosaur

It's difficult to believe how much difference the autobox makes.
My 2004 manual D5 saloon (94K) gets 51 MPG combined with a foot on the heavier side of average - and set on cruise-control at 70 mph, gets 76 MPG.
Now I'm beginning to understand why autoboxes need oil coolers, drinking all that torque.

There's also a software improvement between 2003 and 2004, as a 2003 D5 autos is 201g/km, but a 2004 auto is 199g/km.

It's the torque converter that consumes all the torque, most modern 'boxes lock them out in higher gears.

According to an interview in EVO a few months back, modern Jag 'boxes only use the torque converter to pull away in first gear and the bottom of second after that they don't even use it to change gear .

[Dynosaur]

Actually, I've done the math (as they say) after my first 7,500 miles and the meter is quite optimistic at 51 MPG average.
It's actually 44.6 MPG.

Still not bad for a large car.

[david_sh]

The geartronic 163 diesels I've test driven all seem to show around 33-35mpg on their average mpg screen. The 185 I now have does about the same, but with the extra performance thrown in.

Rgds