My Verdict on the XC90 D5 PP R-Design Pro

[Computastar]

So as a new Volvo recruit, I thought I’d share my thoughts on the XC90 D5 PP R-Design Pro I got in May.

For those of you who <TLDR>

The XC90 is a good car but not a great car, I’m happy with it, but not in love with it.

So I had looked at the XC90 a couple of time before, but just couldn’t justify the price for 4 pot diesel, hence previous SUVs have been Merc GLE 350d, VW Toureg R-Line, Jaguar F-Pace 30d Sport and Range Rover Sport 3.0 HSE

So how does it compare to the other models, obviously not a current comparison as some of the above are the previous incarnation now.

As the Merc GLE was being returned, hated the GLE BTW, worst gearbox ever, which ruined what is overall a pretty good car. I began the search for its replacement, front runner was the new VW Toureg 3.0 R-Line Tech, took it out drove fine, a little uninspiring but a good car.
I was already to place the order when the price suddenly jumped another £170 p/m, whilst still around the price as the XC90, it doesn’t have air suspension and a number of other goodies, plus the price jump narked me.

I looked around at the competition, nothing really grabbed my attention, the new GLE was about to be released but only in 4 pot diesel, and if i think £55K for a Volvo is steep, then £70K for Merc is astronomical.
The X5 although always rated the best, I just can’t get into BMWs, plus the split rear tailgate in no no for me, Range Rover and Jag still feel like they put together with a Birmingham screwdriver, don’t get me wrong they look the mutts nutts
but underneath just so unreliable, so the Volvo looks like an option. I go to Stoneacre Sheffield, which seems to be run by children, but who are polite enough and get the deal I want, they are trying to run out the D5 before the B5 is released
Not known for my green credentials so the D5 is fine, except it’s a 4 pot and only 235 horses, so Polestar is mentioned, which i went for, we welcomed the XC90 in May

My main gripes have been discussed on the forum numerous times:

The engine is weak a spot, although on paper the figures suggest it should keep up with the competition, the reality is a different case. The lack of those 2 extra cylinders can most definitely be felt when over taking on A roads, again more than adequate 97% of the time power wise, but if you are going to play the large luxury SUV league, you need a V6 option. Other points on the engine, is the noise, very rattlely and my main bug bear economy, if I’m sacrificing my V6 I expect fuel economy to be vastly improved and it’s not the case and in certain circumstances, such as high speed cruising its worse.

The software is flaky, but this isn’t an exclusive Volvo issue, all manufactures suffer from this, but still should be more stable than it is.

It’s a noisy car for the class, bad road noise, not helped by the 22" wheels, but still not good for this class. Wind noise from the door mirrors and rear doors is bad too, again not deafening but just not quite up there with rest of the class.

Other features that I went with the Volvo are again not up with the rest of the class, the not so intelligent headlights, which often leave you with no illumination when you really need some, compared to ILS on the Merc the Volvo is a dunce. The adaptive cruise totally overreacts on the motorway, when it’s not picked up anything for a while then does, braking heavily from a quarter of a mile away. The boot opening height not extending and banging my head.

It seems I’m picking faults, which I am, but it does have its positive, it’s a good looking car, the interior is a nice place to be, great cruiser over long distance, safely features. I know they are some people on here who a very defensive of Volvo, it’s not a assassination attempt just my experience I would have the Volvo over Merc any day, even given its faults, because the faults only effect driving quality some of the time, the Merc gearbox was a constant PITA.

Just Saying

PS my favourite quirk is the inconsistent timing of the indicator chime, speeding up, slowing down and sometimes missing a chime, again not the end of world, but just indicative that’s it’s not a totally polished article even after 6 years of development.

[Typolee]

Yes your wrong on alot of points I feel.

The headlights not reacting quick enough... have you bothered to change the adaptive speed in the settings? You've probably got them set at slow/medium and not fast.

Regards fuel economy compared to the competition. My mates got a new discovery and is returning low 20s - mid 20s. I'm currently getting 32 mpg around town. 39mpg-40mpg on a long journey in my D5. To me thats not bad at all for such a large vehicle. Also power wise in dynamic mode its plenty powerful enough. 7.6 secs to 60 is more or less equal to the competition. If your not happy then just pay an extra 800 quid for polestar. Or buy a sports car.

Build quality thrashes the competition. I had an Jaguar F Pace which came out the factory with misaligned panels and faulty diff. Shocking.

Love my XC90 but now considering an XC60 hybrid or XC90 B5 depending on the deal.

[Murph7355]

To add my defensive 2p worth

My views on the car are partly formed by owning a mk1, a car we loved but which was leagues lower than the new one...

Engine - a v6 or beyond would sound better, but not convinced it would perform that much better unless substantially more powerful. When it's turbo hoses haven't split/fallen off ours is quick enough and doesn't sound disastrous... And we have a pre-PP car. It's a miles better drive than the mk1.

It's also plenty quick enough for a family wagon. The weight and roly suspension calm proceedings way before the engine.

Fuel economy - not a priority for me really, but we're getting 30mpg on average (b-roads etc). That's at least 5mpg better than it's predecessor. On runs it's much better. Am pretty sure we've had nearly 600 miles out of a tank.

Road noise is poor. Changing tyres helps on this. But it's an area Volvo need to tighten up on. You didn't mind on the mk1 as it was a truck. But it's unseemly in the mk2.

Headlights are very good IME. They make driving on dark, wet country lanes MUCH less stressful.

Boot opening - how tall are you? I'm 6'4" and never had an issue. And I'll smack my noggin on anything

Driver assist - rarely use it. It's not as smooth as driving yourself... But handy in 50mph Road work zones.

Reliability - not as good as the mk1 IME. But then there's more to go wrong I guess

Software - I mostly like it, and ours is stable. I'm not sold on touchscreens, so a few more buttons or a dial might be safer. And some additional config options would be good - why can't I have time and miles to destination in the driver instrument cluster? And why is avoiding part of a route impossible on a usable basis on the sat nav?

Indicators - I was wondering if this was deliberate... Help you not leave them on

[Computastar]

Originally Posted by Typolee

Yes your wrong on alot of points I feel.

The headlights not reacting quick enough... have you bothered to change the adaptive speed in the settings? You've probably got them set at slow/medium and not fast.

Regards fuel economy compared to the competition. My mates got a new discovery and is returning low 20s - mid 20s. I'm currently getting 32 mpg around town. 39mpg-40mpg on a long journey in my D5. To me thats not bad at all for such a large vehicle. Also power wise in dynamic mode its plenty powerful enough. 7.6 secs to 60 is more or less equal to the competition. If your not happy then just pay an extra 800 quid for polestar. Or buy a sports car.

Build quality thrashes the competition. I had an Jaguar F Pace which came out the factory with misaligned panels and faulty diff. Shocking.

Love my XC90 but now considering an XC60 hybrid or XC90 B5 depending on the deal.

Not sure if you're trying to troll me, but what the heck, if you actually read the post, maybe some of retorts would make sense.
The headlights are on fast switching, it’s not the speed it’s the fact they switch around leaving the road unilluminated when you really need it, and if you've driven a Merc or BMW with adaptive headlights you would see a vast improvement.

So the Disco has a kerb weight similar to the moon, the 3.0L V6 Merc got similar mileage to Volvo, with a great engine, the gearbox was awful, but the engine was a cracker.

If you read what i wrote, it is Polestarred, not that I really notice any difference, and 0-60 is about a second slower than the competition, the Touareg does it on 6.1, GTi pace, but like you say I'm not expecting sport car performance, what I am doing is comparing it to the competition.

I agree on build quality, it’s not bad, it’s not JLR poor, and again if read the post I pointed out how bad JLR are, but it’s not up to the zee Germans standard.

I’m happy you love your XC90, like I said it’s a good car just not great, and when its due for return, depending on the configuration and the opposition, Volvo are in with a shout, but given the Toureg Black Edition release, as long as the price is competitive it will be one of those (plus probably last chance to have a V6 before the fun police intervene)

[roundyuk]

Pretty honest review, I am not defensive of Volvo and have been around the brand for some time, owned some different models and had a Volvo salesman brother who's taken me out in pretty much everything they do.

Comparison to ZeeGermans, yes they do put together a nice vehicle; the build quality is great - but even they are now being bitten by vegan leather and all this other nonsense. My old man had a 520d Touring about 10 years ago, the leather quality was heading down the slippery slope even then. I am not sure Volvo have managed to get their production lines up to the same build quality yet, but they are on the bleeding edge of eco materials, build process etc. - those kind of changes take a long time to perfect.

Yeah a V6 is lovely, but they won't be around for long - to get inline with emissions targets all makes are having to produce low CC compact power plants, Volvo are ahead of the game here IMHO. They are not focused on performance, they sit more in the Saab mind-camp, usable power where it makes sense.

Volvo have done some really good stuff with new tech, I still find BMW i-drive or whatever it is clunky and hard to navigate, and I think they are only just about catching up with touch screen etc. I am not sure the BMW adaptive lights are the same sort of functionality as the Volvo system?

That being said, I have big issues with the rear suspension noise on my V60 - for a premium car its sounds quite honestly s**t. But, I accept this premium car I drive is cheaper than the equivalent 3 series Touring (but in actual fact the V60 is probably more on par with a 5 series Touring). Piano black inside, don't get me started, I woe the day car manufacturers started this fad of piano black, it just doesn't stand up to the wear and tear; I glance and mine and I swear it scratches :-D

IMHO Volvo puts a credible alternative in the pot in a world of same-old German premium cars, but they haven't really been playing in the segment all that long, so they will be a bit behind the game.

[Dilinger]

Originally Posted by Computastar

I’m happy with it, but not in love with it.

AGREED

Originally Posted by Computastar

hence previous SUVs have been Merc GLE 350d, VW Toureg R-Line, Jaguar F-Pace 30d Sport and Range Rover Sport 3.0 HSE

DID YOU ACTUALLY OWNED the JAGUAR AND RRS or was CONSIDERING BUYING THEM?

Because from your post, i understand that you owned the Merc, but not the others.

Which model year you got ?
The engine is noisy for sure and not in a good way for such a refined vehicle.
As mentioned in MK1 XC90 or a RR or a Grand Cherokee it would not be a problem as they are more rugged vehicles, but in the Volvo XC90 this noisy engine seems out of place..
The performance though is more than enough for my needs and i am coming from Porsche's.

Headlights not a problem for me, but all these are personal flavours..

I respect your opinion.

[volvocamper]

As you said its an opinion and we are all entitled to those.
I have the same car and spec as the OP (albeit it a Mar 18 car) and previous to that had a Touareg (2014 to 2018) and before that (2010-2014) Mk 1 XC90.
Had them all built to my spec from new and do abt 6k miles/annum.
I really enjoyed my time with the V6 Touareg. It was the previous to current model and I had not a single problem with it in the 4 years I had it. I sold it privately and am aware the ‘new’ owner is still thrilled with it.
The new model was not readily available in Mar 18 and having discounted ALL the alternatives I kept coming back to look at the XC90 because i liked the look of it. My main concern was the 4 pot 2.0 engine. We tow a 2000kg twin axle caravan and I convinced myself the small engine wold not be ‘man’ enough after the 6 cylinder 3.0 VW, even though, on paper the ps and torque were almost identical.
I am pleased to say I was wrong, the XC90 tows the caravan superbly. This engine just seems to ‘go’ and get on with it without drama. The VW would drop a few gears and engine revs would rise sharply but the XC90 just does it. I think it is a bit better after the software update in Nov which ‘optimised’ the gearbox operation apparently. The op may not have had this yet and so that may bring an improvement. There was more drive train noise in the VW than in this car and I have to say I do not find the tyres particularly noisy either.
You can ‘set’ the opening height for the tailgate and wonder if this could be set higher on the OP car (but he may have already checked this out)
I will look at the newer model Touareg in 2022 when lease is up on the Volvo but it will have to be very good to persuade me away from another XC90. Never had a LR product.

[Computastar]

Originally Posted by roundyuk

Pretty honest review, I am not defensive of Volvo and have been around the brand for some time, owned some different models and had a Volvo salesman brother who's taken me out in pretty much everything they do.

Comparison to ZeeGermans, yes they do put together a nice vehicle; the build quality is great - but even they are now being bitten by vegan leather and all this other nonsense. My old man had a 520d Touring about 10 years ago, the leather quality was heading down the slippery slope even then. I am not sure Volvo have managed to get their production lines up to the same build quality yet, but they are on the bleeding edge of eco materials, build process etc. - those kind of changes take a long time to perfect.

Yeah a V6 is lovely, but they won't be around for long - to get inline with emissions targets all makes are having to produce low CC compact power plants, Volvo are ahead of the game here IMHO. They are not focused on performance, they sit more in the Saab mind-camp, usable power where it makes sense.

Volvo have done some really good stuff with new tech, I still find BMW i-drive or whatever it is clunky and hard to navigate, and I think they are only just about catching up with touch screen etc. I am not sure the BMW adaptive lights are the same sort of functionality as the Volvo system?

That being said, I have big issues with the rear suspension noise on my V60 - for a premium car its sounds quite honestly s**t. But, I accept this premium car I drive is cheaper than the equivalent 3 series Touring (but in actual fact the V60 is probably more on par with a 5 series Touring). Piano black inside, don't get me started, I woe the day car manufacturers started this fad of piano black, it just doesn't stand up to the wear and tear; I glance and mine and I swear it scratches :-D

IMHO Volvo puts a credible alternative in the pot in a world of same-old German premium cars, but they haven't really been playing in the segment all that long, so they will be a bit behind the game.

Agreed that the fun police will turn the thumbscrew on V6s etc, I was looking at the Audi SQ7, but it was dropped due to emissions before I was due a new car. V8 4.2L now that's an engine.

[Computastar]

Originally Posted by Dilinger

AGREED



DID YOU ACTUALLY OWNED the JAGUAR AND RRS or was CONSIDERING BUYING THEM?

Because from your post, i understand that you owned the Merc, but not the others.

Which model year you got ?
The engine is noisy for sure and not in a good way for such a refined vehicle.
As mentioned in MK1 XC90 or a RR or a Grand Cherokee it would not be a problem as they are more rugged vehicles, but in the Volvo XC90 this noisy engine seems out of place..
The performance though is more than enough for my needs and i am coming from Porsche's.

Headlights not a problem for me, but all these are personal flavours..

I respect your opinion.

I had the misfortune of owning the Jag & RR, this is few years ago now, and I've test driven the newer versions, and whilst good cars, the horror stories of build quality still persist, twice bitten, twice shy. The Toureg was a great car for the price, and new version is even better, baby Bentley Bentayga. The Merc was a good car let down by a terrible gearbox, this arms race to see who can cram as many gears into an autobox as possible doesn't improve the driving experience, although I think eighth in the Volvo could be a bit longer to try and improve economy.
The XC90 is MY2019, and given the lease prices ATM Volvo wont be a consideration next time, deprecation is still an issue, and that comes down to playing in the big leagues while being not quite there yet. You could argue VW are at the same point, but they can point to their stablemates to demonstrate prestige and quality.
I don't wont to get into a place where people think I don't like Volvo, I do, just measuring them against the market they've pitched up in.
Ultimately I want a comfortable, reasonable turn of pace, reliable and good value for money car, and this time the Volvo ticked those boxes, not sure they will be a position next time to do that.

[Computastar]

The mark 2 Toureg was a great car, and like yours never missed a beat. You like me fell foul of VW's new model scam, pretend there's a waiting list, get a huge order book, then deliver bucket loads of them. The new model has just had decent equipment revamp and given the lease price of VW against a XC90 B5 then a VW it will be next time.
Like I say the engine is adequate 97% on the time, but I do notice the lack of mid range torque compared to the V6s, and my main gripe is the fuel economy, there's only one way to make a car go faster, and that's to make is burn more fuel,quicker. So with its pseudo supercharger and turbo the Volvo is still burning the same amount fuel, might as well have the V6.