By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Thanks!
preliminary info: 4.4L V8, 315 hp, 325 ft/lbs, 6 speed Geartronic, AWD.
US Price figure $50,000+ w/ the usual equipment.
US debut scheduled for the first quarter of 2005, although each dealer might get one in Dec.
No word on when the car would be available for OSD.
One could take either side of the argument that (a) the 2.5 is a great deal at $35k or (b) the V8 would be a lousy deal at $50k, but anything north of a $5,000 differential for the V8 engine is, IMO, unjustified. And frankly, the V8 is a necessity, not a luxury. The T6, with it's antiquated, inefficient 4-speed auto is a lacking "flagship" engine for Volvo's otherwise attractive SUV.
As for design issues, my only complaint is turning radius. It stinks and makes it hard to maneuver into my garage. My GMC Envoy had a much tighter radius.
All in all, this vehicle has exceeded my expectations re quality.
The T6 nicely equipped is 45-48k.
So a V8 @ $50,000 is not out of the question. Nor would it be overpriced in comparision to the competition. All of whose V8's are over and sometimes well over 50k.
The Touareg is not a competitor for the XC90. It's simply too small. Plus, VW has yet to prove that it can cater to the luxury buyer. The XC90 is number one in sales for Euro SUV's.
Volvo has yet to commit to a price structure for the V8.
If I had to guess I would say a base price @ 45-47k, with a fair amount of standard amenities ala the T6. $50-52k w/ 7 passenger setup and nav and the Prem sound system. All in all I think the car will do very well.
Good Luck
Sorry, just got a little sensitive on the issue after reading a post calling the transmission "antiquated".
Chris
Please do not get upset. Many of the negative postings here are written by the people who never drove a car in question, and base their opinions on some "general" knowledge (5 better than 4, etc.)
I have chosen T5, but because I thought that it is adequate, and did not want to pay extra for the extra power.
I was really impressed with the "punch" on T6 during the XC90 introductory event at El Toro marina base. However, our family has decided collectively to go with the better gas mileage and "greener" image of T5, realizing that we will compromise the performance.
T6 is very impressive on S80 too. I have a couple of friends who enjoy that extra power. I have "whimpped" and bought 2.9 four years ago, once again, not because of "antiquated" transmission, but strictly to save a few $$K.
Enjoy the ride.
I dont' know if it is true. I only drive the 6 at the Skip Barber event. No question it was more fun in that circumstance than the 5 was.
I do agree with you re the MPG issue, however. Over a year, it is simply not that much money (or even that much fuel or emissions).
I like the extra power. Plus there really isn't that much difference in shifting in either car.
Most publications turn their nose up because the T6 has "only" 4 forward gears.
I am not upset. Just had something on my chest I needed to get off.
The XC90, IMHO, is a great car no matter what model you happen to drive. It is not the answer to everyone's transportation needs, but if you are in the market for a mid-size SUV it is a great option. It costs a few more dollars than the average domestic mid-size SUV, but I am gambling on better relibility, banking on its safety features, and loving its styling.
Chris
I have read a lot of reviews where it was said that the T6 is the only way to go with the XC90, because of the lack of the power in T5. I remember, that for a while, I felt that people are so abscessed with the HP, and that there was a T5 bashing as been underpowered. It seems that now the pendulum is swinging the other way.
I maintain my position that each trim has it's own buyer's pool.
He asked which engine I wanted.
I couldn't decide.
He said, "are you a left lane guy or a right lane guy?"
I said, "left."
He said. "T6".
My wife, driving 2.5T, will not let you pass her by on a fast lane.
Come on, guys...
It's not about the speed, it's about the agressivness of your driving.
T6 is for people who like to race from the red light. And there is nothing wrong with it. A 40-45K car is a bit of a toy for adults. And everybody has their preferences with toys.
Now, whether the 5 is as much fun as the 6 at 30 mph around town, or while towing something, that is a different question.
I don't plan to be poking along in the right lane in my 5. That comment shows that your dealer is simply an imbecile who is unfamiliar with the car. I have talked to a two dealers and four salesmen, and I have been behind the wheel of a 5 and a 6 more than all of them. Dealers never drive the catrs (unless they take one home to demo, and the salesman spend lots of time IN the cars, in the passenger seats, and very litle time driving them. All the dealers and salesmen want to do is move the 6 because sales of it have sucked.
I gurantee you that he had twice as many 6s sitting idle on his lot than 5s, and he was offering good deals on those 6s. I'm sure that had a little to do with his "preference."
I can't believe you trust a dealer's or salesman's opinion about anything.
I agree that the 6 has a certain audience. Towing? Buy the 6. Speeding around town? Buy the 6. Normal driving? The 5 is more than adequate.
horesepower junkies are really absurd - they always want more; nothing is ever enough.
There is a marked difference here at altitude. You lose roughly 3% of horsepower for every 1,000 feet of altitude. Your T5 has the equivalent of roughly only 175 horsepower in Denver and 145 in Vail.
1.Constant buzzing sound from the radio dash board... Software patch lasted about 24 hours... Loaner vehicle had this problem and I'm told it's an issue on all Volvos. Most audible when the car is not running and it's not a fan...
2.Grinding sound when steering wheel is turned more than 360 degrees. Stops when the car warms up after a few minutes. Ever notice that wood steering wheel is not circular?
3.Crushed drainage tube from sunroof during assembly. Dealer says had I not noticed it petruding from front windshield car would have flooded in heavy rain or car wash.
4.Status dial indicates only 15.2 MPG mixed highway/city driving... Average MPH is always 19 MPH... Instantaneous MPG and Miles to Empty Tank work properly.
I really like the look and ride of the car, as well as the spatiousness. Premium audio is not very impressive. Engine performance is fine, plenty of power for me! It was a tough decision not to get a Lexus, but with the '04 deals the XC90 AWD was well worth it.
ps. If you are in Stockholm be sure to visit the Vasa Museum....
You are kidding, right? I just test drove a Cayenne S last night. That's for the red light gang. The Touareg V8 is close. Even the lowly MDX and Honda Pilot can get 7 people 0-60 faster than the T6. Mind you, I'll be coming out of an Isuzu Trooper, so there isn't a vehicle out there that isn't an improvement, but anyone that thinks the T6 is a "performance" SUV really has blinders on, given the current state of performance among new SUV's. Granted, many of them are low on "utility", but the T6 is nowhere near the top of "sport".
We continue to keep the XC90 on our shopping list because we believe the vehicle has a excellent mix of SUV attributes. And those attributes exist in the 2.5 to the same degree that they exist in the T6. Perhaps we would feel differently if we lived at high altitude, but from my test drives, the T6 offers MARGINALLY better performance, at the expense of 15%-20% lower gas mileage. Drop the equivalent of the the Cayennes V8 or BMW X5's 4.4i Valvetronic V8 with a 6-speed transmission into the XC90 and then you could talk about real performance (AND better gas mileage).
It is apparant to me, substantiated by current dealer inventory, that the T6 is a tough sell to anyone that's really shopped around and lives within 2,000 feet of sea level. If I wanted to prioritize performance over utility, the T6 wouldn't even make it on my shopping list. As it is, the XC90 2.5 is right up there. And to prove my point, if I were offered a T6 and 2.5 at the exact same price, it wouldn't be an easy decision.
Why did not you bring a couple of the sport coupes or a race car into the picture?
The comparison is between the XC90 T6 and XC90 2.5T. Volvo XC90 has enough of merits to be wanted regardless of the engine's performance.
So, my statement was - Those who want to drive XC90 and race from the red light will prefer the T6 over 2.5T.
Do not be overly awed by the sheer numbers, all these seconds, 0-60's, etc.
The driving style is more important.
I have a friend, for instance, who drives a 530 BMW with manual 6.
His wife drives an rather old Honda minivan with 145 HP engine.
I would not bet on anybody in Porsche, racing against of my friend in Honda from the red light...
Another example:
I have participated in an introductory event for the Volvo S60R, where we could race.
My best lap was about 27 second (remember I have opted out of T6 twice). The best "armature" lap that day was 21 sec, The professional race driver went through the same lap in 19 seconds (10% better).
Having said all that, my point is that the T6 gives you substantially more power in the lower speed range, and is more appealing to the "heavy footers"
"The speed-dependent power steering in
the XC90 T6 AWD provides progressively
less assistance as speed increases, thereby
improving steering precision and enhancing
road feedback."
Personally, I think it is great. Especially when I compare it to my van which is comparable in weight to the XC90. I feel like I am driving a beast when in the van v.s. the T6.
Chris
I've got to decide this month whether to buy a 2004 xc90 2.5T AWD with the free versatility (I need this option anyway) and the 1.9% financing or wait for a 2005--I can wait up to 12 months (and potentially spend a lot more). I've scoured the edmunds boards and it seems that the only possible advantage to me in waiting is tire pressure monitors (a very good idea for a suv!--i wonder if they can be retrofitted into a 2004 by volvo later)and a slightly improved 2.5T engine output(seems like a marginal improvement). Depreciation of 2004/2005 isn't much of an issue since we keep cars an average of 10 years.
It seems(again by reviewing the edmunds boards) that almost all the initial problems for the 2004 2.5T AWD have been resolved by TSB's or campaign recalls. Is anyone aware of any further refinements, particularly relating to reliability--recall items, in the 2005 model?
The options I'll be getting either way are premium pkg, versatility, climate pkg, parking sensor, metallic paint
Thanks for the help.
Otherwise, no major changes are planned for the XC90 2.5T.
As far as buying now or in 1 year, no one can say what incentives, if any will be available. Interest rates are trending upward again and the 1.9% costs Volvo money. Whether they will be able, or willing to offer this 6 months or a year from now is unknown.
Now, you have a sure thing, later who knows.
You stated it's impossible to get a nicely equiped 7 passenger 2.5T for $35k. An AWD is well over $40k.
According to the "Prices Paid" forum, post #350:
Here's what I got yesterday in Southern California:
XC90 2.5T FWD w/ Premium, Versatility, & Metallic Paint
$5065 off MSRP of $40920 for a sale price of $35855
Add $1,800 to that price for AWD and you're at $37,655. After checking around, that is consistent with the good deals available around here. So, yes, I was off base with my $35k, but you seem to be equally off base with "well over $40k".
I'll repeat that, while the XC90 V8 would certainly appeal to me, I don't think it will sell well at $50-$52k. That's $1-2k more than a loaded Lexus GX470 is actually selling for and $10k+ more than a navigation/RES equiped MDX. I'm not directly comparing these vehicles, each has it's pro's and cons. I just think a nicely equiped XC90 V8 would need to be in the mid $40's to be price/value competitive. That's still a $6k+ premium over the actual selling price of the 2.5. and, I suspect, a ton more than the incremental cost difference of the two engines.
As for the poster who says he got an XC90 FWD for $35,855 I'm a little leery of that. Doing the math on that deal doesn't add up for me. But even if the deal is right, your looking at a year end deal, which certainly won't be around come January.
As for the V8, I think the XC90 is certainly superior to the Lexus.
I think the only thing that is holding the XC90 back form selling even more units are the engines. The V8 will be a real winner for Volvo. If people are willing to pay $45-48,000 for an XC90 T6(and they are) why not pay $48-50,000 for a V8?
Car based platform with the superior ride and handling against of GX470.
And a vast array of the safety features superior to anything on a market now.
I can personally attest to the wonder of the roll-over protection system. The remains of my family and I would be, probably, scraped off the cliff somewhere between Germany and Czech Republic, if not for the DSTC,ROPS, GRSC and other alphabetical "soup" available on Volvo.
I have recreated the famous "moose avoiding maneuver" trying to make a hairpin sharp turn at 60-70 MPH. I could tell you that the XC90 drives better than I do.
Plus - the cargo space, both the volume and the versatility.
Those are the hard facts, and you do not need to follow any boards.
The posting on the boards are the reflections of the personal opinions. And, normally, people do like a $40K investment, no matter what that investment is.
In any event, we may be talking apples and oranges here. You are quoting MSRP and I'm referrinf to actual market prices. I am sure there may be a few people somewhere "willing" to pay $45-48,000 for a T6. But in my area, today, they'd have to be willing and "dumb". I have two voice mail messages from the local Volvo sales manager indicating that he can do $2,000 under invoice on any T6 in stock (I test drove the car with for a second time him 3-4 weeks ago). If I could play it back for you, I would. Clearly, the MSRP of a T6 is a meaningless number around here.
P.S. The best I could possibly hope to do on a Lexus GX470 would be about $2,000 OVER invoice, and that would require me to buy well out of state. And, although I don't intend to sell whatever I buy in 3-4 years, the resale differential between just about any Lexus and just about any Volvo is night and day. It appears from the Washington Post ads that you can sell a 5 year old Lexus for proportionally more of its original price than a 3 year old Volvo.
P.P.S. Lev, I sure as hell hope you are using the third row seats in your XC90! Otherwise, you would have been much better off in a Cayenne S, given the way you (want to) drive! And at 10% off sticker, I better stay away from the Porsche dealership myself.
I am sure as hell we will. We are replacing our Mazda MPV with the XC90 and you will be surprised how often have we used all 8 seats there.
The 7 seat option was a must for us, and that have narrowed our choices. Plus, I am a loyal Volvo owner. I am planning for the third OSD already, two weeks after coming back from the current trip.
Otherwise, I'd want to see a purchase order
Me I wouldn't pay a premium for a gussied up 4Runner, so I gues we will just have to disagree
However, if you want a retort to your GX470 being a "gussied up 4-runner", the XC90 could be characterized as a "soccer Mom's mini-van alternative, incapable of handling 8-12 inches of snow, let alone doing any off-roading". This is how the husband of one of our neighbors describes their XC90, which they are quite HAPPY with, in spite of it sitting during one of last winter's more severe snowstorms. He just wanted to make sure I didn't confuse the XC90 with a "serious" SUV like our current Trooper, Touareg or the GX470 (which HE pointed out happened to be named off road SUV of the year 2 years running).
Interestingly, in 2-3 trips to Lexus dealers, I have not heard a single disparaging remark against any other make. Ever. Hell, one even tried to make me feel good about the great "utility" of our top-heavy, lousy build quality 1996 Trooper. But in 3-4 trips to Volvo and Volkswagon dealers, I hear a lot more cheap shots at other makes, when they ask what else we are considering. From a consumer's standpoint, I don't consider this a good practice. It suggests a lack of confidence in one's own product.
Your friend is just talking or is uninformed. The stock tires are the limiting factor in snow & ice driving, not the car. The XC90 is outstanding in winter conditions--with the proper tires--better than the Jeeps we had before. As for off-roading, it is reasonably capable and can go 95%+ of places people are likely to take a "serious" SUV. It is comfortable and secure on unimproved desert & mountain roads with ample clearance, traction and gearing.
We all guilty of it. You , for example, is really good at shooting the disparaging remarks at Volvo.
The GX470 IS a "pretty-up" 4Runner. There is no any doubts about it.
I also never understand people buying some of the Lexuses (LX470, ES330, GX470) over their Toyota counterparts.
Same applies to Infinity and Nissan.
Your reaction to the simple statement from Volvomax indicates that you are not sure about benefits of GX470 either. "It suggests a lack of confidence in" your own convictions.
Buzzing - Would have to hear it. Several systems come on before the engine is started to prepare things, or remain on for some minutes after the engine is shut down. You might be hearing the A/C that clears out condensation to prevent mold.
Grinding - A little lube on the linkages, perhaps. Check oil levels, too.
Crushed tube - Nice catch. At least this is not as serious as the crushed electrical harness that caused some Touaregs to lose all systems and crash!
Status - You may be looking at the averages since the car was delivered. Reset them or go on a long trip and see what happens. I reset every tankfull so mpg and average speed vary depending on the conditions.
Audio - Adjust the equalizer for the type of music you listen to and your sound preferences. The Premium Audio is quite good with CDs considering the inherent limitations in an SUV cabin. For radio, turn off Dolby which can cause problems with weak signals.
Power - Agree that the 2.5T has plenty of power for all the driving I have done in over a year. I think people look at the HP numbers and jump to conclusions. I know I get surprised looks when people ask what kind of engine I have and I say a 5-cylinder turbo. They have no idea!
Thanks,
Chris
P.S. I have 18" wheels.
Michelin Pilot HX MXM4 (stock) - mediocre in winter.
Pirelli Scorpion Zero - better.
Pirelli Scorpion A/T - more aggressive than Zero.
Dunlop Grandtrek Winter M2 - a good winter tire that some people use all year.
Nokian WR SUV - good all-around tire with bias towards winter.
Anyone have any experience with the Pirelli Scorpion Zero and A/T?
What kind of mileage can I expect off the OEM tires?
Thanks,
Chris
We had narrowed our shopping list down to the XC90 and the Acura MDX. The Acura dealer, like your Lexus dealer, never made a disparaging remark about the XC90. In fact, he commented on how good both vehicles were, but that he was partial to the Acura, of course. I thought it showed class and also respect to us as consumers.
For us, we just liked the Volvo better, but I really did appreciate the way the Acura dealership dealt with us. We bought our XC90 through the Overseas Delivery - an excellent program, by the way - and I think it was loaded off the boat at the port in Baltimore today.
Actually, I did research these topics, but your comments are useful. I'll reset my averages (was that in the demo CD?). I'm already using the audio advice; I listen to classical/opera only.... All fluid levels look good, but the grinding is more common now so I'm sure the dealer will hear it on my next visit.
The dealer agrees that the buzzing is not from the A/C condensation fan. I suspected this as well. Since I've heard it on every Volvo I've driven (loaner cars and test drives) I wanted to know if this was a common problem. Dealer says yes... Make sure the car is off and put an ear against the center dash. One you hear it you always will every time you get in the car :-)...
It's still a GREAT SUV. My neighbor summarized it best. "It's a smart looking vehicle".
What post-deliverly options are safe/possible to add? For example, I'd guess that replacing the leather steering wheel with wood is not safe due to airbag issues. On the other hand, I'd assume the XC90 is already wired for reverse-warning, so adding that radar should be easy?
Any comments on bi-xeon headlights or even retrofitting the '05 tire pressure monitoring
system onto an '04 vehicle? How about the Navigation system? Is adding a post-market backup camera integrated into the NAV system out of the realm of possibility?
And just what do you think my "convictions" are, that I have a lack of confidence in?
I have repeatedly stated that I am shopping for a replacement SUV and weighing the pros and cons of several vehicles, including the XC90, GX470, MDX/Pilot, etc. I tend to form my opinions after test drives and researching a variety of information sources. And I certainly have the self confidence to be able to change my opinion if new facts warrant it. Case in point, the XC90. Based upon my initial research and "problems" reported in the Edmunds forum for the 2003 model, it was off my list. Frankly, if you (and I know this is tough) looked at the data objectively, it was only matched in reported problems by the older model ML320 and early production X5. Fortunately for Volvo, they appear to have improved quite a bit for 2004 and I am open to reconsidering the XC90 for the 2005 model.
I don't think looking at the pros and cons of a variety of vehicles and then making an informed decision is showing a lack of conviction. It's showing intelligence. And after that purchase decision, I still won't lack the confidence to point out the cons, as well as the pros of the vehicle. My former S2000 was the closest car I have owned that I would label "perfect". But I am still quick to point out that for some who prefer luxury over sport, the less edgy, quieter, nearly twice as expensive Boxster S may be a better choice.
P.S. Bigeddy,
My neighbor with the XC90 isn't uniformed, you are. For God's sake, my former S2000 could go 95% of the places most people drive SUVs. The XC90 is a car based, FWD based vehicle with no locking rear differential, no low gear transfer case and limited wheel/suspension travel. Not to mention car tires without a full size spare. And, not to mention, exactly the wrong type of engine you would want to be trouncing through the woods with. Anyone that would try to take an XC90 off road has got big ____ , no brains, or both. However, in the 75,000 miles on our Trooper, the number of miles it's gone off road that the XC90 (or MDX / Pilot for that matter) couldn't make it is probably less than 750. So the fact that the XC90 isn't a "serious" SUV has not ruled it out from our consideration. We do need a vehicle capable of handling snow, but not necessarily logging trails.
I have opened my e-mail in my profile.
Send me an e-mail and I will definitely answer. It's getting personal again, and I do not think that other readers would be interested to know what I think about your convictions.
We have an aftermarket wood wheel that uses the leather wheels hub. This is much less costly.
Rev radar is fairly easy to add, although more expensive than at the factory.
Xenon's are impossible at this point. I would be on the same for the tire monitoring system, which has been suspended for the time being.
Nav is a possibility, but twice as costly as having it done at the factory. I doubt you could wire a backup camera into the screen.
Bottom line is that there are alot of factory items that could be added at the dealer. However, the XC90 is not compatible with alot of aftermarket applications.
Tell us how you feel! I stand by my statement that the XC90 "... is reasonably capable and can go 95%+ of places people are likely to take a "serious" SUV. It is comfortable and secure on unimproved desert & mountain roads with ample clearance, traction and gearing." I understand the vehicle's limitations which is why it can't go that extra 5% of places I could go in the Jeep Grand Cherokee. The 2.5T engine is actually very nice off-pavement with lots of torque from low RPM and good gas mileage. The Haldex AWD works very well for not having a locking differential or low-range. And the stock 4x4 Synchrone tires are pretty good on sand and loose dirt, too. I carry a second spare and tire repair items when boondocking. And I have the skid plate and side rails. It's not a rock crawler but can handle most other off-road conditions with confidence. I know because I've done it.