New Volvo V60! Official Thread

Post by **matthew1** » 27 Jan 2014, 17:07

Like I posted on the MVS Facebook page, I can't believe this car was even made, and can't believe it made it to the North American market, based on Volvo's recent decision to not sell the V40 in North America.

"A true driver’s car that offers great handling, natural driving dynamics and all the comfort and versatility you’d expect from a Volvo wagon." -- Volvo's V60 page

$35,300 Base (T5)
$36,800 AWD (T5)
$44,300 R Design (AWD, T6)

Amazement aside, my thoughts, in no order:
Base price that I'm not crazy about. I suppose the "quality costs money" axiom applies.

Only $1500 required to jump up to AWD. Not bad.

Base V60 models come standard with a sunroof, faux leather upholstery, satellite radio, Bluetooth connectivity with audio streaming, cargo anchors, and a cargo cover. Not bad.

A 350 hp Polestar edition

arriving this June. Not bad.

All these models crank your wallet for another $925 "destination fee", a cheap car manufacturer trick that I honestly can't believe still exists. Bad.

I don't see anything about the new Volvo Environmental Architecture direct-injected, twin-turbo 4 cylinder on Volvo's US V60 page.

All these details shrink when you remember the most important thing about it... it's a wagon.

Post by **jblackburn** » 28 Jan 2014, 07:11

I don't see anything about the new Volvo Environmental Architecture direct-injected, twin-turbo 4 cylinder on Volvo's US V60 page.

They don't advertise it, but it's there (look at the model comparison chart).

The FWD models get the 4-cylinder turbo/supercharged "T5/T6" engines. The AWD models get the old *real* T5/T6 engines with that many cylinders. The HP figures are the same - 240 for the "T5s" and 300 for the "T6's". That 4-cylinder T6 sounds like a beast - a supercharger for off-the-line scoot and a turbocharger for power up top - best of both!

Not only does it look phenomenal for a wagon (I never liked the rear of the 850/x70, sorry guys)...that 37 MPG highway figure while at the SAME TIME having 240 HP on tap...is just incredible.

To put that into perspective: that's 1 MPG less (hwy) than my Cruze/a Honda Civic with their measly 138 HP engines get. That's tied with or 1-2 better than any mid-sized 4-cyl car (Fusion, Camry, Accord, etc.) get on the highway.

And best of all, I've read a few reviews that say the new transmissions are very good...and they're not a stupid CVT to ruin all the driving enjoyment!

Matt, you should find a way to get in on press events as a Volvo enthusiast site owner. Me...I'll have to stop by and take a look at one sometime.

Post by **matthew1** » 28 Jan 2014, 07:29

jblackburn wrote:The FWD models get the 4-cylinder turbo/supercharged "T5/T6" engines. The AWD models get the old *real* T5/T6 engines with that many cylinders.

Wait, so Volvo badges the new 4-cylinder V60 models "T5" and "T6"?

jblackburn wrote:Not only does it look phenomenal for a wagon (I never liked the rear of the 850/x70, sorry guys)...that 37 MPG highway figure while at the SAME TIME having 240 HP on tap...is just incredible.

37+240=whoa! Agree ^ completely. I'm a big fan of maximum efficiency.

jblackburn wrote:Matt, you should find a way to get in on press events as a Volvo enthusiast site owner. Me...I'll have to stop by and take a look at one sometime.

Great idea. I'll email a Volvo rep.

Post by **jblackburn** » 28 Jan 2014, 07:32

Wait, so Volvo badges the new 4-cylinder V60 models "T5" and "T6"?

Yep! While still having the original 5 and 6-cylinder motors in the lineup too.

Confusing, right?

Post by **matthew1** » 28 Jan 2014, 07:46

Echoes of BMW giving up their tradition of badging models to reflect engine displacement, i.e., 335 was their outstanding 3.5 liter 6-cylinder. But a few years ago they stopped this practice, calling the 2.0 4-cylinder a 325 (if I recall correctly). You probably know all this.

Whatever the case, I'll take the 4. I'm no cylinder partisan. Fours have made incredible gains in power and smoothness in the last several years. See BMW's 2.0 turbo four, putting out "240" hp. (It's much higher.) That is an excellent powerplant. If the Volvo four can match that, look out.

Post by **jimmy57** » 28 Jan 2014, 07:56

240HP is turbo and is the T5 engine (FWD only for now), 302 HP is turbo plus supercharger and will be the T6 AWD one of these days.

The nomenclature confusion thing seems to be in vogue. Infiniti jumped BMW for confusion crown. Their letters now don't mean the same things and the numbers are no longer engine size.

Mercedes may be the leader in this though. Their letters and numbers are major confusion too.

Post by **jblackburn** » 28 Jan 2014, 08:11

328.

It's a phenomenal engine - a friend has one.

Yeah, everyone has gotten confusing with what engines are in what these days.

Really, the only thing I miss about driving a car with more cylinders is the sound, but after owning my S70, I am all for fuel-efficiency. 4-cylinders will never sound as good as 5, 6, or 8. And turbos always have just a little bit of lag before they spool, even if they are very small - there's not that instant power the moment you stomp on the gas pedal there.

They have made HUGE improvements in the balance, power, and smoothness of 4-cylinder engines these days, and 4-cyl turbos that make the power of 6's are making huge gains in the mid-sized market.

At some point along the way, car engineers realized that they could reduce pumping/friction losses by lowering the torque curve of an engine to lower RPMs. Since everything is electronic throttle now, this would enable them to reduce energy losses associated with a mostly closed throttle plate in an engine that had to rev more to breathe. With some clever programming, they could open the throttle wide, run the engine at a heavy load, but run the RPM and gear changes very low in the RPM band for maximum fuel efficiency.

I can run the Chevy down to 1300 RPM in a high gear and still accelerate without lugging the engine down - unless I really need to get moving quickly, I rarely rev above 2200 - all the power is right where I need it. Honda's new 2.4 is almost the same, and the 2.5 in my girlfriend's Camry rarely shifts above 2300 unless you really stomp on it. If you were to try that in a 4-cylinder 6-10 years ago, it would bog down and shake itself (and you) to death.

On the other hand, turbo engines can actually use MORE fuel than a comparatively larger naturally-aspirated engine when being asked for power. City driving MPG is harder to achieve good numbers with smaller engines because they do rely more on air being forced into them to make power (and this means running slightly rich to keep cylinder/exhaust temps down). Ford's even trying their hand at a 1.0L turbocharged 3-cylinder for cars like the Focus.

Sorry for the long, off-topic explanation

Post by **jimmy57** » 28 Jan 2014, 08:34

Carmakers are digging pretty deep for friction reduction and HP loss. Engines with electric water pumps run at variable speeds, oil pump capacity control, controlled thermostats, and yet even more internal engine friction reduction in rotating assembly to reduce fuel consumption and emissions. Direct injection application is going up every year.

Post by **matthew1** » 28 Jan 2014, 08:59

^ Yes. Power steering too is moving to electric in an effort to make cars more efficient, and it's causing a panic with the canyon carver set. They say the feel is lost with electric boosted steering. According to the Car & Driver forums regulars, BMW got it wrong the first two years, model year 2013 and 2014, but the 2015's are better.

Post by **rmmagow** » 28 Jan 2014, 10:34

Let's see. Is this considered a 2015 model? I'll give it a drive say around 2025 or so, about when I might be able to afford it. Course, I'll be 75 yo by then but what the hell