2015 Volvo S60 T6 First Drive

Edmunds.com

2015 Volvo S60 T6 First Drive

Volvo's U.S. lineup has been starved of new product. The new gasoline four-cylinder in the 2015 Volvo S60 T6 sedan isn't a cure-all, but at least it's a start.

Read the full story here

dfelix70

I just don't understand why Volvo would change the front-end of this car (and the XC60). The previous front ends were probably the only distinctive design elements in the entire Volvo lineup and now they've gone and reverted back to the boring Volvo.

agentorange

So we are going to lose the funky snarl of the 5-cylinder motor? That's a shame. I rather liked the noise my S60 made when you goosed it and it was fantastic on fuel if you used the cruise all the time. 31+ mpg running to CA and back at 75mph with the A/C at full chat is good going in a car that never shifts out of top gear on the hills because of the turbo.

bassrockerx

i am part happy and sad the new "t6" engine just seems so awesome but knowing that is the "range topping" engine is upsetting. maybe the deisils will be 5 or 6 cylinder and be the most powerful engines? hopefully with the more mass market volvos going to be efficient 4 cyliners that opens up a niche for polestar to start produceing fast volvos

noburgers

Sounds like a good idea to achieve their goals, but quite a complicated car. If it is reliable, great, if not, I would hate to own after the warranty period--it could be pricey.

In our area of the country the majority of the Volvos for sale have AWD. We will have to wait for the new engines.

piredon

Can any manufacturer just fess up that the engine displacement is smaller than it used to be? T6 and T5? I think it's much more impressive that it has both a turbo and supercharger and that it makes 300 hp from 2 liters than it would be if it were a 3 liter 6 or a 2.5 liter 5. Why not put S60 2.0TS on the badge for the top level, and 2.0T on the lower level, or something like that? But I'm in the minority, I suppose. When you look at the badge on a 328i (2.0 liter) and a C250 (1.8 liter) I guess it makes perfect sense. At least Audi is honest ('cept for that 3.0 "T" that's actually supercharged). Other than that, bring on the diesels!

bankerdanny

Glad to see that Volvo will continue to offer the V60. Wagons rule!

emajor

agentorange,

A family member also has an S60 with the 2.5T and they too get surprisingly good fuel economy out of it. I wonder if the replacement 2.0 will ace the government fuel economy tests but fall short in the real world. Shame, I prefer the sound of a 5 cylinder over a straining four.

quadricycle

I'm pretty excited to see the V60 come back to the U.S. in 2015, even more so if it has this motor. Now if it had one of those twin-turbo diesels I would grab my tent and camp out at the dealership to get one. Shame that they can't get the diesels to sell here, but they could have always protected their profit margin by over-pricing them. You know that there's at least one guy out there (me) who'll pay a pretty premium for a diesel wagon....

lions208487

These initial figures make it pretty competitive, and may finally put it in the same category as the ATS, 328i, A4. The current T5 feels more in line with the Regal GS, and that's not a bad thing, but even the S60 R Design that I was able to drive a few times is not as capable as others it attempts to compete with. It's a solid buy for the money, and a nice ride, just not quite there yet for me. Hopefully this new 8 spd super/turbo charged version will convince me.

huisj

I second piredon's comment about the naming system. It's just stupid. Everyone is downsizing and boosting in various ways, everyone is advertising that they are doing this so they can tout their better fuel economy, but nobody will actually take the step to name the cars appropriately in spite of advertising the advantages of the downsizing. It's a silly double standard.

Audi is the only one who seems to have stuck with using engine size truthfully in their naming and badges, but then they were also the guys who were using 1.8 and 2.0 liter turbos in midsize sedans long before any of the other companies were; as a result, they seem to be the only ones comfortable enough with it to be more honest.

jeffinoh

I agree that the nonsense numbers aren't fooling anyone. Engines are getting smaller, no need to lie about it. S60 is pointless enough as a name. Volvo is really clicking otherwise, tho. Great car. Cool tech.

myob

I gotta think the 302hp T6 version will be limited to awd versions in the US for torque steer reasons.

myob

I watched a video presentation of Volvo trainers trying to explain the new nomenclature to dealers. The dealers were not happy. Obviously T4 and TS4 could be used and signify more to the reader.

volvosales

As an owner and brand loyalist, I agree — the nomenclature has grown silly and meaningless. I'm impressed with the new technology and would much rather see a 2.0T or T4 slapped on the back of our cars. As a salesman, I've seen firsthand what motivates manufacturers to play the perception shell game. A fairly large slice of the buying public is simultaneously afraid of new things and encumbered with years worth of ideas about cars that are no longer valid or were never valid. When we had 5 cylinder engines people were skeptical that they could get the job done. I talk to people every week who still think turbo chargers represent a sketchy mechanical liability. The same people who kvetched for years asking for better fuel economy are kvetching now because they "aren't comfortable" with the engine auto stop/start technology that has helped deliver it. If a manufacturer isn't happy fighting for 1% market share decade after decade — as Volvo has made clear they no longer are — successful marketing requires at least a little bit of pandering to people who aren't that bright, or who at least are too in love with their own misconceptions to loosen their grip long enough to recognize that the world has changed.