New Volvo XC90 D5

The xc90 185 bhp I have is, in my experience, a fabulous tow car. It's only the amount of diesel it takes, and the 68l tank, which after about 400 kms require some attention not to be stranded.

It certainly looks good, but I was worried about the trend towards smaller engines.

I'd be surprised if it's economical while towing.....it's still a big car pulling a big load.

I have owned a couple of Volvo's in the past and have friends with them. Their main Achillies Heel as far as i am concerned is that they never seem to have decent fuel tanks on them.

I will never accept any car with a range of less than  five hundred miles. For example my Mercedes ML300 CDI blue efficiency will do over 600 miles on its 90 litre tank. Thats fine, - and what  I demand. Certainly never less than 500.

And I want a big lazy engine with stacks of torque too!

TF

I simply don't understand that comment!  My Blue efficiency model averages about 34 mpg and lightly loaded has returned 37. It tows a heavy caravan at 24 mpg!  On top of that I get 40,000 out of a set of tyres. It wears all 4 tyres at exactly the same rate.  Remember I am talking about a tough & heavy      3 litre V6 .  I have owned 5 big 3 litre 4x4's since 1998 and this one is the best on fuel consumption of any of them. Mercedes certainly got it right with their Blue Efficiency version.  My only complaint is that today it is getting very difficult to find a real big engined car. I will not go below 3 Litres, and every manufacturer is producing small engines to get under the carbon limits. I want big lazy torque.

TF

Good point CY, but untilI retired last year I was doing 30,000 a year so in 3 years each of my big Toyota Landcruisers did a minimum of 90,000 before I moved them on.  They were great but couldnt stick with this Merc for fuel or Tyre consumption.

An earlier post said that the C90 had a 68 litre tank, unbelievable!  When towing they will be stopping very frequently to refuel!

TF

Merely pointing out what I and a number of others consider is a serious flaw in the Volvo's specification.  I take it that you have no connection with Volvo?  Only all of your posts do seem to be about it!.  I do accept however, that otherwise it is a very good  machine!

The thread is now yours again!

TF

Then Good luck, It really does look very good , but just watch that range problem.

Best wishws

TF

Understood!  My worry is that these highly stressed new small engines will not have the longevity that the big lightly stressed V6 and V8 engines used to have.  Only time will tell. But I'm sticking with my big Mill!

TF

I recently changed my landrover Discovery.  I considered another Discovery, Audi Q7 and I had a look at the Volvo XC90.  I was certainly impressed. The front aesthetics and not the best but inside its practical and packed with gadgets. The downside as I
could see it was that you need the air suspension to give you a decent ride when towing and I found a number of extras were needed to give it a spec similar to the Discpvery HSE.  The four cylider diesel engine though was a worrying factor.  I dont see it
as being as sommth as a V6 for obvious reasons and under the strain of towing I decided I would wait a few years and see how others get on with it.  I had problems with the a new model mercedes E class and have always been wary since then. I found the price
high for what is no longer a premium brand when residual values could plummet. I think its a better car than the Audi Q7 which is much improved but despite its size no where near as practical as the Volvo.  The Volvo isnt as good as a seven seater Discovery
but its not far off.