Login Register

1997 850 T5 fuel economy

Help, Advice and DIY Tutorials on Volvo's P80 platform cars -- Volvo's 1990s "bread and butter" cars -- powered by the ubiquitous and durable Volvo inline 5-cylinder engine.

1992 - 1997 850, including 850 R, 850 T-5R, 850 T-5, 850 GLT
1997 - 2000 S70, S70 AWD
1997 - 2000 V70, V70 AWD
1997 - 2000 V70-XC
1997 - 2004 C70

Post Reply
wizzo337
Posts: 2
Joined: 22 March 2009
Year and Model: 1996
Location: UK

Re: 1997 850 T5 fuel economy

Post by wizzo337 »

Allegedly I drive like a loony, and I get a minimum of 27mpg, sounds like you have a problem.

TWMn
Posts: 61
Joined: 12 November 2008
Year and Model: '94 855 Turbo
Location: Saint Paul, MN

Post by TWMn »

Chzman wrote:Thanks, Matthew.

The check engine light is NOT on, and I have tire pressures at 36 psi for the stock tires. I will add some injector cleaner tonight and see if the MPG will improve.

Thanks again...
Chuck, Ever get this one resolved? Injector cleaner help? My '94 855 Turbo is getting around 15-16 mpg ave., primarily city driving. Seems to me used to be much better. Have replaced plugs, cap, rotor and wires. I run 92 octane as well. What else should I be looking for?

tjts1
Posts: 673
Joined: 13 November 2007
Year and Model: 96 855 NA 5 speed
Location:
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by tjts1 »

The EPA shows the 850 turbo at 17 city, 24 highway. Add in a cold start every morning, a little agressive driving, sitting in traffic etc and you'll be at 15mpg in a hurry. If it makes you feel better, modern cars in real world driving aren't much better.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do? ... s&id=11160
Ambitious but rubbish

SimLyons
Posts: 806
Joined: 3 April 2011
Year and Model: 2001 V70 T5
Location: Newberg, OR (Portland)

Post by SimLyons »

Had a '97 T-5 for several years. I kept it at "Stage 0". 22 mpg in town (combination of freeway for short runs and surface streets for the rest). On trips, like to Michigan and back to California (2500 miles each way) it is 27-29. Some trips had a rocket box on top and it made little difference....surprised the heck out of us!
Sim

jblackburn
MVS Moderator
Posts: 14043
Joined: 8 June 2008
Year and Model: 1998 S70 T5
Location: Alexandria, VA
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Post by jblackburn »

That's definitely an interesting site!

Around-town mileage is hideous on the 5-cylinder turbo models. I get something like 17-18 and about 27 on the highway at 75 mph.

They have an extremely tall 1st gear ratio that makes for crap acceleration at low speeds and makes the little engine work really hard to get you moving.

Of the cars I drive regularly (and one I'm looking at buying), the Volvo fares 2nd to worse - and all of these engines are of larger displacement than mine.
12-12-2011 9-40-54 AM.jpg
12-12-2011 9-40-54 AM.jpg (155.94 KiB) Viewed 2792 times
'98 S70 T5
2016 Chevy Cruze Premier


A learning experience is one of those things that says, "You know that thing you just did? Don't do that."

mercuic: Long live the tractor motor!

Northern Chev
Posts: 55
Joined: 18 October 2011
Year and Model: 2000
Location: SW Michigan

Post by Northern Chev »

I've been guilty of this myself...

If you're looking at buying an additional vehicle that gets better mileage for around town commuting, ask yourself if you've done the math to figure out how many years it will take you to recoup the gasoline savings against the cash output of buying an additional vehicle? And don't forget to add in all the other costs like repairs, plates, oil changes, insurance, tires...

I've been faced with this many, many times and the math never works out (neither in the short or long run of it). The TRUE matter of the facts is that it's usually I'm just jonesing for something new and I use the gas mileage thing to convice those around me that it's a good idea.

BTW, you're spouse doesn't read these forums do they? Just kidding.

To address the question though, electric hybrids such as the Prius are the only vehicles that get better mileage IN the city than on the highway, because of the electric motor assist. But going back to costs... you ever bought a replacement battery pack for a Prius? Have $5000-7000 cash laying around when you do. Screw it, buy the Lamborghini.

tjts1
Posts: 673
Joined: 13 November 2007
Year and Model: 96 855 NA 5 speed
Location:
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by tjts1 »

Northern Chev wrote: To address the question though, electric hybrids such as the Prius are the only vehicles that get better mileage IN the city than on the highway, because of the electric motor assist.
Yup. Thats why my 850 replacement will be a used second gen Prius.
Northern Chev wrote: But going back to costs... you ever bought a replacement battery pack for a Prius? Have $5000-7000 cash laying around when you do. Screw it, buy the Lamborghini.
Nope, and 99% of hybrid owners never will. The whole battery pack replacement myth has been debunked many times.
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1023 ... ttery-myth
http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/20 ... forms.html
http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/20 ... ttery.html
Ambitious but rubbish

Funkymohawk27
Posts: 2
Joined: 18 May 2015
Year and Model: 1997 850awd sport wa
Location: California

Post by Funkymohawk27 »

looks like an old thread, but I'm new here and considering a '97 T5 wagon.
Why are all of your mpg results so low?
Is it purely the T5 that gets poor mpg?
I owned the 1997 850 awd sport wagon (low pressure turbo, 5speed manual)
It was 3 years old when purchsed it and I drove it like I was on a rally course everyday. I never got below 30mpg 33mpg if I babied it.
That was the last Volvo I owned and the newest one. As I looking to get back into my most fav car I am finding poor mpg results across the board for volvo.
I have owned many from 1971 up to 1997, every model in between and never got below 25mpg.
Has fuel mileage dropped in volvo since 2000? Is 25mpg a high avg now?

Sommerfeldt
Posts: 1148
Joined: 29 July 2008
Year and Model: 2018 S90 T8
Location: Oslo Area, Norway
Has thanked: 55 times
Been thanked: 42 times

Post by Sommerfeldt »

In all fairness, these aren't very low numbers.
I've never really heard of an 850 going as high as 33 if you actually "drive it like you're on a rally course". Hardly any car will do that, especially 20 year old chunks of Swedish steel.

My current 855, a '96 T5, does 22 - 27 mpg, depending on my driving and where I am - I usually drive shorter trips, and quite a bit around town, and haven't even gotten it all the way to stage 0 yet. I'm not, however, expecting it to get to a steady 33 any time soon. Note, I drive mine w/o the A/C. Never really need it up here.

You should expect something along my numbers if your car's in good shape, good oil, no CEL etc. Oh, and I run 95 or 98 octane in my car. Those're the choices we have over here.

All that said, I do have an interesting story about my T5-R...
I landed in Stockholm after a trip to Poland, and found that my cards and cash was stolen. Had to get to Gothenburg, on about 1/2 tank.
On that trip, which was some of the most nerve wracking driving I've ever done, I made it to 39.88 mpg. Also made it to Gothenburg.
That wasn't any kind of normal driving, however - it was basically hypermiling the whole way - tailgating bigrigs while doing my best to stay out of their mirrors, no A/C, as little electric as possible, coasting in N down hill, etc, etc. So nothing you'd want to do on a daily basis.

- S
2018 S90 T8 Inscription - glossy black with amber interior and dark as night rear windows.
[Gone] '96 855 T5 - R bumper and spoiler, Koni Yellows & blue H&R springs all 'round.
[Sold] '97 S70 T5
[Gone] '95 855 T5-R - one of the black ones... sadly stolen and wrecked.

User avatar
atucker1
Posts: 56
Joined: 21 March 2015
Year and Model: 1995 850 Turbo
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Post by atucker1 »

Just throwing in my experience (1995 850 Turbo):
Driving in the worst conditions (hilly, short trips--as in less than 2 miles--around my small town) I got 16.5, that was my first tank on the car so I "tested" the turbo quite a bit. The next tank I drove as economically as I could, never accelerated hard, and got 18.5. It's hard to drive that slow but it can be done. Driving on the highway I get almost 30.
1995 850 Turbo, Sedan
1996 850 N/A, Sedan

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post