New d4 economy?

[wimorrison]

Out of interest how do the onboard stats compare to the Fuelly figures? I am finding that mine are remarkably similar.

[CDJ]

Originally Posted by spaceman2844

Currently averaging about 40mpg in my auto XC60 VEA. Unfortunately my commute averages significantly less than 50mph, and the average speed on the trip computer since I got the car has been 20mph! I am fairly happy with 40mpg in light of the slow commute and a lot of round town school runs. The performance of the D4 is fantastic for such a big car.

Well, I ain't boasting, but my average speed has reached the dizzy heights of 30mph over 2,400 miles now. Average mpg over all that time/mileage stubbornly remains dead on 40 though.

Weekend town driving and frequent lack of self-control undoes the great mpg from the commute...

[swishtony]

Originally Posted by andymcp

You can get the app to group the individual journeys together so you have a view of the whole trip. In the driving journal page, click Edit at the top, select the journeys you'd like to group, then once you've selected more than one journey the little chain link icon at the bottom will become active. Press that and it'll group the journeys together. You'll still be able to look at individual journey details inside the overall trip, or ungroup them later. Very useful, I use it a lot.

Brilliant, just what I was after. Thanks very much!

[tickedon]

Originally Posted by wimorrison

It is smaller, physically as well as operationally, but it is also down on power and it is the reduction in power output that appears to be delivering the economy benefits not an increase in engine efficiency.

Erm... we've gone from old D4 of 163bhp / 400Nm to 181bhp / 400Nm.

So the power has gone up...

[wimorrison]

Originally Posted by tickedon

Erm... we've gone from old D4 of 163bhp / 400Nm to 181bhp / 400Nm.

So the power has gone up...

Unfortunately we were comparing with the 215 engine not the rather older 163 engine

[RoyMacDonald]

Originally Posted by wimorrison

Unfortunately we were comparing with the 215 engine not the rather older 163 engine

The 215 D5 is a bigger engine though. The older design D3 is the equivalent in cc isn't it? The older D4 was a de-rated D5 putting out 163bhp.

[MikeIOW]

Originally Posted by xsaab

Mike
You said
"hey ho. Still better than my Saab Aero averages ;-)"

but how does it perform, acceleration, load capacity, recovery from a puncture or blown out tyre etc, us potential defectors need to know <g>

A Freudian slip....."averaged", I don't still own it!!

So....XC60 D4 auto v Saab Aero estate (or technically, Turbo Edition ;-)
Performance: well, the Saab would always have the edge, but the Volvo is a very good match, particularly given the size of it.
Acceleration: probably same comment, although I am years from being the boy racer, and Stormy is good enough, particularly on the move.
Load capacity? Volvo wins. Both had space saver spares, but the Volvo has almost 20% more space in the boot.
Puncture? Not had one in the Volvo, but I do know I ended up carrying a full trolley jack in the Saab boot 'cos the Saab jack was a *nightmare* to use!!

Overall, I did love my Saab's (14 years in 3!), but the Volvo equipment level (particularly with the DSP, the hard disk music, etc, etc) is far and above what I had with the Saab....comfort is about the same, but I much prefer the higher road position of Stormy ;-)
Not regretted the move for a moment. Now 7,500 miles in!

[andymcp]

Originally Posted by wimorrison

Out of interest how do the onboard stats compare to the Fuelly figures? I am finding that mine are remarkably similar.

The app stats almost mirror Fuelly, and I would expect there to be some minor variation since Fuelly has minor variations depending how much you cram into the tank each time. The on board trip gets less accurate the longer you leave it so I never really use that as I can't be bothered resetting it each trip/fill-up.

[tickedon]

Originally Posted by wimorrison

Unfortunately we were comparing with the 215 engine not the rather older 163 engine

Fair enough

In that case... none of the XC60 engines allow for a like-for-like comparison with the older and newer VEA engines. What you'd really need is a new D5 or D4 AWD (VEA) to compare against the current selection. Or make do with a comparison vs the D3 163

[Roland_F]

The closest comparison to the new VEA 2.0 is the 2.0 D4 5-cyl (which was newer than the current D5). Over 15,000 miles, in my 2014MY XC60 with this engine and auto, I have averaged 42 mpg. However, my figure is likely to be better than most, simply because I cover a lot of distance on congested but usually flowing motorways.

As a rule of thumb, physically larger engines use more fuel because they take more energy to warm up (greater mass), and the pistons are heavier (greater losses of energy in the constant acceleration and deceleration as they go up and down).