Opinion of new XC90 ride and Noise

[RoyMacDonald]

Originally Posted by FE2015

Thank you for welcoming me. I've so far done about 600 miles, out of which about 100 on the motorway and rest is town/countryside.

On the one motorway trip I've done so far, I got about 40 mpg, with 2 kids and 3 adults in the car.

For my driving, I never get advertised mileage on any car. But I think in this one the gap between what they say it will give and real life will be somewhat bigger.

That's about 3 mpg better than my 2003 XC90 when it was new. I generally get about five mpg more now the miles are mounting up.

Sounds pretty good for a tight engine.

[The Mad Rapper]

Why is MPG a consideration? You do not buy an XC90 to save money on fuel, you buy it because it's the best 7 seat 4x4 in the World and you accept the running costs that come with that.

What it is, is what it is.

[Clan]

Originally Posted by The Mad Rapper

Why is MPG a consideration? You do not buy an XC90 to save money on fuel, you buy it because it's the best 7 seat 4x4 in the World and you accept the running costs that come with that.

What it is, is what it is.

hmm which cars do you see in the outside lane doing 90 mph ? Hoards of expensive german cars no regard to fuel consumption at all .
Which cars do you see on the inside lane 50 - 60 mph ? the economy cars , it should be the other way around in theory , an economy car will allow you to do 90 mph and not use much fuel :-)

[Funky Diver]

lol, Clan... so true.

Often also reflects driving behaviour too. And no, I don't sit at 50/60 on the motorway, but by the same token the speed limit is just dandy for getting somewhere safely.

I've seen enough horrendous speed related incidents in my driving life to figure there's being slightly late or being slightly dead. I'd rather be late if it came to it =D

[TWPC]

Originally Posted by The Mad Rapper

Why is MPG a consideration? You do not buy an XC90 to save money on fuel, you buy it because it's the best 7 seat 4x4 in the World and you accept the running costs that come with that.

What it is, is what it is.

While I agree that the fuel consumption is going to be a small part of the overall cost of a new XC90, it is a useful metric for those of us interested to see the progress Volvo has made in car design in the last decade or so. Such advances are surely a key reason for buying a new XC90.

Why has Volvo reduced the range of engines only to small 4 cyl units? As consumers we don't benefit that much from the economies of scale that justify such a move for Volvo in the long run. As individuals we would probably rather have a 5, 6 or 8 cyl engine. The practical benefits of such a small engine are more space & greater operating efficiency, i.e. less weight => better acceleration & higher mpg. We can easily experience the advantages of more space but, depending on your driving style, probably won't feel those of more acceleration quite so often. Better mpg would be something that we should benefit from on every journey. Regardless of what you think about fuel cost, surely an increase in range from c.450 miles (assuming 29mpg) in the old XC90 to c.560 miles (assuming 35 mpg) is genuinely useful.

This would illustrate real progress: a car only 15 cm longer with x% more space that accelerates faster & goes 24% further on a tank of fuel.

Hence I think the mpg data is useful to know, not only because of the cost of fuel.

[RoyMacDonald]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by TWPC

Regardless of what you think about fuel cost, surely an increase in range from c.450 miles (assuming 29mpg) in the old XC90 to c.560 miles (assuming 35 mpg) is genuinely useful.

My old XC90 does about 600 miles to a tankful.

I agree that cost isn't the issue with fuel consumption, for me it's about the power and efficiency of the engine. Big capacity multi cylinder engines feel good to drive with 3 or 4 speed boxes but feel totally unnecessary with modern 8 speed boxes. What is the point of having a 4.4 litre engine ticking over at the lights and virtually burning as much fuel as it does at 70mph, and having slower acceleration to get there to boot? Power to weight ratio is what it's about nowadays.

[FE2015]

Yes, fuel consumption for me is not a major issue but better range on a tank of fuel definitely is desirable.

Another thing to note regarding running costs is that this car is incredibly cheap to insure, relative to other luxury cars/SUVs. Even the real top end First edition I insured was around £240 fully comp. Quotes for Equivalent X5, Q7 etc all came to over £650 for me. The insurer said it's because of safety record.

[ianu]

I think you'll find it's the emission regulations that are probably driving the engine line ups (BMW), the technology is obviously allowing the mpg to benefit and retain the power levels too.

[xc60ed]

Well I spent yesterday out testing cars. I retried the XC90 and it is on standard suspension and I was happy with the ride/noise. To be honest it's fairly similar to my current Touareg a bit firm and slightly unsettled in town but nice and composed out of town. The car looks stunning in black and as an all round package is a great car. I'm not overly impressed with the engine and think a 6 cylinder diesel would be better. However it is adequate and won't stop me getting the car. To be sure I also tested an X5 which was too cramped and WAGish, a Discovery which is still an impressive car but horrendous on fuel and dated against the XC. I got details on the new Q7 which will have a better engine, V6 , with better performance and very similar economy. However it doesn't look a patch inside or out on the XC90 and again WAGish image. I will be getting a black D5 Inscription in 2 weeks time as the dealer has found one available. Only options are winter pack and spare wheel but I'm happy with that and pleased to get one so quickly.

[yeoman]

Originally Posted by xc60ed

Well I spent yesterday out testing cars. I retried the XC90 and it is on standard suspension and I was happy with the ride/noise. To be honest it's fairly similar to my current Touareg a bit firm and slightly unsettled in town but nice and composed out of town. The car looks stunning in black and as an all round package is a great car. I'm not overly impressed with the engine and think a 6 cylinder diesel would be better. However it is adequate and won't stop me getting the car. To be sure I also tested an X5 which was too cramped and WAGish, a Discovery which is still an impressive car but horrendous on fuel and dated against the XC. I got details on the new Q7 which will have a better engine, V6 , with better performance and very similar economy. However it doesn't look a patch inside or out on the XC90 and again WAGish image. I will be getting a black D5 Inscription in 2 weeks time as the dealer has found one available. Only options are winter pack and spare wheel but I'm happy with that and pleased to get one so quickly.

What tyres size did you try?....If you can afford the surround camera, go for it...The dimensions of the XC90 are considerable