VEL hike

[chrisrixy]

Originally Posted by Ron_XC90

Yep, and mine is one of them (registered Sept 2007) in the £425 bracket.

On the other hand as someone correctly pointed out, is it really such a big deal? £180 more a Year than the older & newer models. Looking at the total cost of ownership incl fuel it can (almost) be neglected in my view...

Unfortunately that is too true - £180 is less than two full tanks of diesel now!
I think it is the principle is that annoys more - why should the tax rates be different for slightly different models? The amount of fuel used by a car creates the pollution - and that is already taxed beyond any reasonable measure.

An XC90 doing 5000 miles a year is much less polluting overall than many a standard car doing 15000 miles a year - so why the extra tax penalty anyway?

[chb]

Chris and Roy are correct. There is a narrow band of XC90 D5's that fall into the higher tax bracket. These were sold in 2006-2007 (early 2008?) and represent the time between the government changing the rules, and the time taken for volvo to complete the engineering (weight reduction?) needed to scrape under the limit and get back to band K.
I have a 2005MY XC90 D5 and pay £235 VED. So for those buying a 4-5 year old XC90 they need to bear in mind the VED hit. Personally I would expect to pay £1000 less if buying one, that at least covers the next 5 years VED premium. But I also completely understand that as a proportion of ownership costs then its not a deal breaker for the right car.

Some of the info posted earlier in this thread is plain incorrect.

[RoyMacDonald]

Originally Posted by chrisrixy

Unfortunately that is too true - £180 is less than two full tanks of diesel now!
I think it is the principle is that annoys more - why should the tax rates be different for slightly different models? The amount of fuel used by a car creates the pollution - and that is already taxed beyond any reasonable measure.

An XC90 doing 5000 miles a year is much less polluting overall than many a standard car doing 15000 miles a year - so why the extra tax penalty anyway?

A good question. Especially when all seven seats are in use which would involve the use of two "normal" cars. My wifes petrol 1.3 Toyota Yaris returns about 32 mpg with 5 in and the XC90 for all it's size and carrying capacity is more like 38 mpg with 7 people in it.

There is no real logic to the car road fund tax. It's a tax on ownership, not use and emissions.

Neil... The issue I have with the original post is that it made me think that my tax had risen to £425 as it seemed to refer to all XC90's. I thought it was some new hike that I hadn't heard of. I had been looking at the Volvo car comparison site a few days previously which had a very different price for the XC90 road fund tax.

[Philthy]

Folks, thank you for the responses. You've opened my eyes to the fact that the hike in VEL bands only applies to geartonic models between 2006 to the '09 facelift model. One more question on this subject as some have pointed out the tank range between the differing models; are the lower emission models getting less range than the band L vehicles or have I misunderstood the point being made?

On a side note; I'm currently on my fourth Volvo. I like the brand. It's solid, mostly reliable, unassuming, happy to plod along all day and comfortable. High safety levels for occupant and pedestrian and capable of a decent turn of speed if required although the ride is a bit soft unless you're in a vehicle intended for high speed. I'd like to stick with Volvo having ventured off to another marque before my current S80 and been treated like something you tread in on a park full of dogs having a crap. I've even had another look at that XC60 interior, but if the XC90 D5 Geartronic can fall in band K then problem solved.

[RoyMacDonald]

[QUOTE=Philthy;847975]Folks, thank you for the responses. You've opened my eyes to the fact that the hike in VEL bands only applies to geartonic models between 2006 to the '09 facelift model. One more question on this subject as some have pointed out the tank range between the differing models; are the lower emission models getting less range than the band L vehicles or have I misunderstood the point being made?

QUOTE]

I'm afraid the emissions and mpg seem to bear an inverse relationship from the posts I've seen. Although early reports on the latest models seem to show improved mpg over the previous models. The best mpg still comes from the Euro III 163bhp. I've recorded 46 mpg average on a run from London to Edinburgh. I think I would have gotten 600 miles from a tankful if I'd had the nerve to leave the red light on longer. Some people report sub 30 mpg though on the D5 185 bhp Euro IIII models.

[Britsud]

[QUOTE=RoyMacDonald;848002]

Originally Posted by Philthy

Folks, thank you for the responses. You've opened my eyes to the fact that the hike in VEL bands only applies to geartonic models between 2006 to the '09 facelift model. One more question on this subject as some have pointed out the tank range between the differing models; are the lower emission models getting less range than the band L vehicles or have I misunderstood the point being made?

QUOTE]

I'm afraid the emissions and mpg seem to bear an inverse relationship from the posts I've seen. Although early reports on the latest models seem to show improved mpg over the previous models. The best mpg still comes from the Euro III 163bhp. I've recorded 46 mpg average on a run from London to Edinburgh. I think I would have gotten 600 miles from a tankful if I'd had the nerve to leave the red light on longer. Some people report sub 30 mpg though on the D5 185 bhp Euro IIII models.

By Hec Roy ' was that at a constant 56mph lol. that must be a record.
MY cars.
All geartronic.
My 54 plate se 163 was the best on fuel 38mpg. The worst was the 06 185 Exec 32mpg and my now 205 polestar sport returns 35. These are based on the same journey to the south of france and on the Autoroute.
Bri

[Beavis]

[QUOTE=Britsud;848017]

Originally Posted by RoyMacDonald

By Hec Roy ' was that at a constant 56mph lol. that must be a record.
MY cars.

i reckon mine could manage that too.....that would be 400 miles under own steam and 200 on the back of a truck..

Best i got (2006 185bhp) on a run to south of France was 400 miles (29.5 mpg) with roofbox and very light foot.

[Britsud]

[QUOTE=StuT4;848340]

Originally Posted by Britsud

i reckon mine could manage that too.....that would be 400 miles under own steam and 200 on the back of a truck..

Best i got (2006 185bhp) on a run to south of France was 400 miles (29.5 mpg) with roofbox and very light foot.

Thats impresive stu' roof box drag and a well loaded car nearly 30mpg, my m8 got 23 out of his Range Rover sport diesel with roof box. So we must not grumble too much

Bri

[darklordmick]

hi all...i have just joined as im looking into my 1st volvo...my dad has always had them..
i currently have a nissan qashqai but need a bigger car for my 3 kids...liking the xc90 due to the boot space...but i am still confused about the road taxing of this car...
its either just over £200 or over £400 for the year...
basically spent all of last night checking the co2 of these cars and its all over the place depending on where you look...
manual or auto?????...always had manuals but thinking auto for those lazy drives...but again nothing is crystal clear of road tax/co2..
going to talk to my local volvo dealer to see if they can help...but thought i would ask on here...
thanks in advance

[chb]

Hi, welcome to the forum. What age of xc90 are you looking for? If the car is less that 3 years or more than 6 years old you are probably in the 230 quid tax area. If you have the reg of the car you can check online on .gov website for its ved band.