XC90 -- 6 or 8 cyl?

kmcdonough · Post by **kmcdonough** » 06 Sep 2010, 14:29

We are buying our first volvo and it will be an 2011 XC90. I am undecided weither to get the std 6 cyl or upgrade to the v8. All I read suggests the 6 is underpowered but the dealer says all he sells is the 6 cyl. I was hoping to get some input from XC90 owners on the feelings about this topic and what engine they have. I will not be towing but live in the mountains of NY. And the 7k cost of the v8 is substantial. Thanks in advance.
Kevin

Post by **stone36** » 24 Sep 2010, 09:57

I currently live in the mountains of Utah and have the 5 Cyl. I have taken it to Denver, Tahoe, Moab, etc... Always fully loaded with people, stuff, and sometimes a rocketbox. I have never known it to be underpowered, but I don't have anything to compare it to. My wife and I just had a similar conversation and decided that the only reason we would buy an 8-cyl would be if we bought a camper trailer or something like that. I can't see spending the extra $7K to go from 240 to 311 HP. If anything I would just go for the 3.2 AWD R-design if you had a few extra bucks to spend. To me it looks the best and for the small price difference you have some differentiation from the other XC90's on the road.

koffinb · Post by **koffinb** » 19 Oct 2010, 14:19

i'm a volvo salesman, and me personally i'd say if cost is an issue go with the 6 cyl, cheaper, better gas mileage, 235hp...I mean the v8 does offer massive power, but thats all high end power..meaning you'd have to rev well above 4500rpm to really FEEL the difference in the two.

JimJa1943 · Post by **JimJa1943** » 20 Oct 2010, 10:04

I have an '08 V8, and drove both the 6 and 8 before ordering. It now has ~33K miles. It has NEVER - so far - been back to the dealer. Best vehicle I've ever owned. I do all the routine stuff myself. At the three year point I'll flush the brake fluid, anti-freeze and transmission - the dealer will do that.

Both the 6 and 8 have enough power for most people. That said, the 6 is significantly more "busy" in day to day driving. The XC90 weighs just under 5,000 pounds. It takes power to move it around and the 6 has to work harder in order to move the mass. The V8 is more relaxed. I noticed the 6 was shifting a LOT more to keep you going. What does that mean. Well, if you keep your vehicles a long time like I do, then possibly that extra work may have an impact on transmission life. Will it for sure. I have no idea as everyone drives differently and keeps their vehicles different lengths of time. You'll have to decide and think about that for yourself.

As for having to rev the V8 >4,500 RPM to get the power...not so. There is plenty of power at lower revs to merge with traffic (my winters are spent in San Diego - plenty of freeways) w/out having to stick your "foot in it." Most day to day driving involves RPMs <3K. There is no need (unless you are trying to impress someone or are stoplight racing) to rev beyond 3,200-3,500 RPM.

As for fuel economy, I take issue with Koffinb. All reports indicate the V8 MPG is very close to the 6. So close that it is a non-issue. Personal experience is 18-19MPG urban, 23-25MPG freeway @ 75-77MPH. This has been constant since new and is by the computer, which is probably 1 - 1 1/2 MPG optimistic. The six isn't significantly better and many 6 owners don't do that well. ...and that's using the cheapest fuel I can find. At altitude in Wyoming I use 85 octane and 87 at sea level. BTW, 85 octane at 7,500' where I live is equal to 92 at sea level (one octane point for each thousand feet due to the partial pressure of oxygen).

I was also influenced by the fact about 10% of my total miles are towing. I wanted the extra torque for that and being at 7,500' was another concern since the rule of thumb is ~3% power loss per 1,000' of altitude. A ~22% loss.

Both are excellent engines. Both are very expensive to repair and certainly the initial up-front cost may be an issue for you. Drive them both, listen/note transmission shift frequency, weight it against how long you keep your vehicles, how you use it, and decide for yourself what's right for you. Don't be influenced by economy - it's too close to call. BTW, there WAS a counter bearing issue with early V8's which is no longer a problem. If you buy used and a V8, buy >'05.

JimJa1943 · Post by **JimJa1943** » 20 Oct 2010, 10:18

One more thing. Money can be saved by NOT ordering the nav system. If you use a nav system to get you from point A to point B, the $2,000 Volvo system will work just fine, BUT if you want to find the nearest Costco, Radio Shack, Bed, Bath and Beyond, or other local business; forget it, they are not in Volvo's data base. A $200 Garmin will work better for you.

I ordered my '08 with a Nav system. After using it since new, well, I wouldn't give Volvo $5 for another one. It's a shame since the data supplier is the same for Garmin and Volvo so the data is out there.

I love the HID lights, but if you get those note that Volvo aligns them way low (probably to avoid a flood of complaints) so they appear not to work as good as you might expect. Raise them and you'll be happy. The 15 degree turn with steering is a good idea - I thought it was a marketing ploy, but it's a nice feature.

One more thing. The tires on the XC are expensive. I would suggest you take your new Volvo as soon as you get it, to a respected alignment shop (NOT the dealer) and pay for a 4-wheel alignment. There have been complaints among owners of abnormal and premature tire wear due to alignment. I did (cost was ~$60 total, they needed a little tweaking) and at 33K the tires are wearing perfectly and there is about 1/2 tread remaining.

kmcdonough · Post by **kmcdonough** » 23 Oct 2010, 04:52

Thanks for the input. We ordered the 6 cyl. We are not going to tow with it and the dealer told us that most of the 90's he sells are 6 cyl. The car is supposed to be here the end of Oct. so we'll see how it performs. We got the multimedia package, which includes the NAV system, so we'll see how it does. Only plan on using it for basic directions on trips out of the area. Also comes with a plan that covers everything, including wear-and-tear items, except tires. So I'll keep the alignment issue in mind. Thanks again.
Kevin McD.

9394volvo850s · Post by **9394volvo850s** » 26 Jan 2011, 22:51

I agree V8. im a Volvo tech and drive 3.2s all day and they have little power in low range. there is a steep hill behind the dealership i work at. the 5 cyl XC90 can can make it up to the top at 40 3/4 throttle in 4th gear manual mode (5speed). the 3.2 has to be full throttle in 4th(6 speed) just to barely hold 40mph The V8 has power to go up in 5th gear and pick up speed by the top.( same 6 speed as 3.2) between 15 and 18. depending on how long you let them idle. and sit in traffic. 3.2s dont do hills very well. V8s never have any issues. they are magic. and sound nice too.

Post by **jimmy57** » 27 Jan 2011, 06:04

I had both as company cars and I got worse mpg with the 3.2. The 3.2 was AWD (v8 are all AWD).

Post by **matthew1** » 15 Mar 2011, 16:18

Update: I pinged kmcdonough and he's happy with his XC90. And to settle the I-6 vs. V8 question:

I went with the 6 cyl. Couldn't justify the 7k for the V8. We are not towing with it. So far its been very good. No real power problems in the hills. Sometimes tranny shifts more then I like in the hills, but not bad. I'm very happy so far.

He reports only two nagging issues:

Navi -- "Not user friendly. My $150.00 Garmin is much better."
Homelink -- "Doesn't come with and cant get the Homelink for garage door opener."

brandlj · Post by **brandlj** » 17 Apr 2011, 19:16

I have the I-6 and FWD only in my 2010 XC90. Plenty of power for me. I purchased it used. I called the Volvo dealer to check on service issues and the advisor tolm me that the 6 cylinder versions with FWD were bulletproof. He told me he would probably see me once a year for its annual maintenance.