D3 - D4 Difference

[JLambe]

Im currently looking to buy a V60 2011 or 2012 model and just wondering what the difference is between the D3 and D4 engine. According to the tech spec on Autotrader the D3 is £115 more tax per year and does 11mpg less than the D4 despite both having a 2.0 ltr 163bhp engine with the same 0-60mph time and top speed. Can someone please tell me why this is? Is the information on there reliable? I have done a bit of searching but can't seem to find a reason for the difference.

[craigv60]

The information on Autotrader can be misleading. When the S60 and V60 were launched, there were 3 diesel engines: the D2 1.6 litre 4-cylinder; D3 2.0 5-cylinder with 163bhp; and the D5 2.4 5-cylinder twin turbo. This range of motors was used in 2010 and 2011.

Then in 2012, Volvo introduced a detuned variant of the 2.0 5-cylinder diesel, with 136bhp. This variant took the D3 name, and the D4 name was given to the full 163bhp 2.0 5-cylinder engine. There was also a special D4 in all-wheel drive models, but we will ignore that for now!

Then of course in 2014, Volvo introduced the new VEA 4-cylinder diesel with 181bhp, and they called that the D4, and dropped the old 163bhp 5-cylinder diesel. But the D3 continued to be the 136bhp 5-cylinder diesel.

Clear as mud, isn't it

To make sure you get the right engine, a full-fat 163bhp D3 2.0 5-cylinder will have the engine code D5204T2 or D5204T3. A 136bhp D3 has the engine code D5204T7. If buying from a Volvo dealer, they should be able to tell you this. A D4 with the 5-cylinder motor will always be the 163bhp variant.

[JLambe]

Thanks for your help. Yeah not very straight forward is it! So would i be right in thinking that the 2.0 163bhp D4 that was introduced in 2012 was an improved version of the 2011 2.0 163bhp D3? Hence why it has lower tax and better mpg but the same performance?

[GMcL]

The original 163PS D3 had 139g/km in an S60, the 163PS D4 was introduced around the same time as stop/start which dropped the emissions to 129g/km in that car.
That probably accounts for the difference in VED and on paper improvement to MPG.

[craigv60]

Originally Posted by JLambe

Thanks for your help. Yeah not very straight forward is it! So would i be right in thinking that the 2.0 163bhp D4 that was introduced in 2012 was an improved version of the 2011 2.0 163bhp D3? Hence why it has lower tax and better mpg but the same performance?

What GMcL said above about stop/start, it came in with the 2011 cars (I had one for 3 years, it was a very good car indeed).

Also, the very first D3s introduced in 2010 gave 163bhp, but had a slightly different ECU mapping which meant power peaked earlier, and they had a tiny bit more low-down grunt. This version was superceded in 2011.

[GMcL]

Thanks craigv60. Didn't know the exact dates but depending on what data OP is comparing could explain the differences.
The £115 difference in VED does seem to point to the newer D4 Euro6 engine vs the £145 I paid the last time I renewed in the UK on my D3.

[JLambe]

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I've seen a nice 2011 D3 but i guess i'd be wise to hold out a little longer and get a D4. I could live with the extra tax but the lesser mpg would soon mount up. Is the claimed 11mpg difference quite accurate?

[GMcL]

The new D4 available since 2014 is reported to be quite an economical unit in the S & V60 though of course that depends on your driving style.
My own D3 I've owned since November 2013, I've kept all fuel receipts since collecting the car. The heaviest fuel consumption was 28.5mpg recorded between 17th & 26th June 2015, the lightest consumption 46.8mpg 17th to 18th May 2014. That was all on the original Volvo map, since having it remapped to 200PS best 44.5mpg worst 36.9mpg.

[craigv60]

Originally Posted by JLambe

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I've seen a nice 2011 D3 but i guess i'd be wise to hold out a little longer and get a D4. I could live with the extra tax but the lesser mpg would soon mount up. Is the claimed 11mpg difference quite accurate?

I ran my 2011 V60 D3 (163bhp) with manual gearbox for 3 years and 40,000 miles, it averaged a genuine 46.8mpg measured at the pumps. 30% long motorway trips cruising at 80ish, 70% short trips of under 10 miles in urban 30 & 40 limits.

I now have a V60 D4 manual (the newer 4-cylinder VEA diesel) which has done 19,000 miles in 20 months, similar driving patterns. It has averaged a genuine 47.2mpg at the pumps. So the claimed 11mpg difference is absolute tosh, I'm afraid

The VEA D4 is the quicker car, but there isn't THAT much in it in terms of performance or economy in everyday use, as the old D3 engine produced the same torque over a wider rev range. The 2.0 5 cylinder motor is a very good engine indeed - grunty, smooth, characterful and sounds good. Have a test drive if you can, and see what you think!

[AndyB06]

Make it simple and just go for a D5

I've had the old 5 cylinder D3, and now a D5. Mpg is generally 10% worse off in the D5 (running shell nitro), but is worth the extra expense.