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
When we drive on relatively flat highways, again with 4 - 5 passengers we are getting 22 - 24 MPG.
Also, for what it is worth we have no problem with power and speed going over 10,000 foot+ mountain passes with everyone on board.
I believe that motor has been selling well in Europe with good mileage and adequate power.
By the way, our V8 has been an exceptional vehicle, but I think that diesels will be the flexible-fueled engines of the future.
maybe the folks getting 22-24mpg highway are not using reformulated gasoline? (no oxygenates added - not E10 - not MTBE10).
The D5 is popular in Europe, but the engine is too underpowered for the XC90.
The SI6 diesel engine debuts in 1 yr, look for that in the XC90.
Also, there are issues w/ diesel emmissions in certain US states. This will have to be addressed before Volvo can bring the engines over here.
I live in So. California and use whatever they sell on our gas stations. I think it does have some additives.
Cali gasoline is definitely "reformulated" - they were the first to require it with RFG1 around 1993 and RFG2 later in the 1990s. In 1993 I was living in santacruz/sillyvalley area and was quite annoyed to see my 92 civic EX mpg drop from 42 mpg to 28 mpg after RFG1 was introduced!
Steve, Host
Under inflated Tires? Bad wheel bearings? Aggressive acceleration?
tires always inflated to 34 cold psi. no symptoms of bad wheel bearings. leadfoot/me or lightfoot/wife.
i don't really leadfoot in the xc90 because it barely makes a difference. but i've tested under all conditions, including over 3000 mile drives at 70 mph.. never more than 20 mpg even for a whole tank at 70.
one irony regarding small children & vehicles including xc90 - and why we barely need it any more since our kids are now 12, 9, 6 instead of 9, 6, 3.
one reason we got xc90/3-rows was because we had 3 small children and no reasonable way to disable the front passenger airbag - so a kid could not sit safely in front passenger seat.
now our oldest (12) is definitely large enough to be in front passenger seat especially with latest-gen airbag there.
so we don't need the 3rd row so much in xc90. and now my wife or myself can reasonably drive all 3 kids in a TDI instead. obviously the TDIs are not as safe in a collision or as roomy/comfy as xc90 so those are the downsides... tradeoffs tradeoffs.
As for the tires, if you are working with a dealer you might be able to substitute Michelins but examine the Pirelli's first to see if there is any unusual wear. Just because some people have had problems with them does not mean everybody will. No reason to throw away good tires. Be sure to check pressure, rotate them regularly and if the edges start to wear check the alignment.
I believe the bearings involve a technical notice so you don't get those fixed unless they act up. However, there are some recent recalls that may need to be done before you take it. Just make sure the dealer checks that the car is current for all service and recalls.
The driver does make a difference.
tidester, host
Great versatility in the seating arrangements, huge trunk space in 2 row arrangement.
Nice supple, well controlled ride, although, it feels more composed (stiff) than S80. Exceptional handling, very strong pull from 2.5T engine at low RPM. 6000 lbs XC90 feels more agile than 4500 lbs S80 2.9.
Great seating position for people who like to ride high. Some people complained about the rear visibility, but I never have any problems with it. The rear view mirrors are huge, compare to S80.
Seats are fantastic - I have made quite a few round trips LA - Berkeley (~700 miles in one day) and was still pretty functional after that. Although, I like S80 seats more, but those are considered to be the best in industry by many reviewers.
Exterior is simply beautiful - all my family believes that XC90 is the best looking SUV on a market now.
Road noise is on a par with the best sedans. My S80 at 120K is noisier now (rubber strips drying out, I think)than XC90 at 40K miles.
Reliability is very good - no problem at all. Have replaced tires @30K, mainly because of the poor snow handling of the original 18" Michelins. Still keep 2 tires that look like a new. Maybe will be able to sell them on e-bay.
Replaced brake pads @37.5K service. Front ones were gone, but the rear ones could serve more, I should not gave in. Original rotors. My mechanic said, that they definitely will survive till the next pad replacement.
Unbelievable active safety features - DSTC and roll-over stability. Had one potentially deadly experience, where car got me out of trouble, basically, on its own. (see my posting @ XC70 vs. XC90 thread).
So - nothing but A+ marks in every area. The gas consumption is 20-25% higher than S80. We average 17MPG on XC90 and 21MPG on S80 with 90-10 city driving cycle. But this was always expected, and therefore was never considered as a down side. You have to pay for the versatility, space and off-road capabilities.
There were several main reasons for XC90 (vs. another S80 or S60, for instance) - my wife likes to drive high (she went through 2 consecutive Mazda MPV), we need additional seating capacity from time to time, and we can appreciate AWD, DSTC and RSC, and extra cargo space on our ski trips. We can fit 4 people with all skis, snow boards, boots, luggage, food supplies, etc., for a week long trip, inside, with a 3rd row and a center seat of the 2nd row folded.
Let me know if you have any specific questions. I am a happy and loyal Volvo owner, and do not mind to share it with others.
According to Volvo the 0-60 time of the 3.2 is very close to the 2.5T. 2.5T has torque that is much more useable.
3.2 will get better mileage, esp on the highway.
We have taken a couple of 10 hours trips and this vehicle is VERY comfortable. The longer the trip, the better you feel about it.
This is one of the safest vehicle on the road.
I once owned a 1993 850 by the way...
The T6's typically came with more toys than the 5 cyl did.
The 5 cyl isn't as quick but does get better mileage.
I would opt for one of the late 04's or newer. These had bigger brake disc's and a larger fuel tank.
If it were me, I'd have to get the V8 though
Yeah, from the mouth of an R owner...
I thought that 2.5T AWD + Premium + Versatile was pretty common - it was the only way to push the gross weight over 6000 Lbs, and quite a few people have done that to benefit from the accelerated depreciation available in 2004 fiscal year.
My 2004 has literally zero problems at 41K miles. Even tires have lasted for 32K miles (except for the one that was damaged by the "close encounter" with the curb.
Prem, Vers XC90's are very common. But the poster wanted nav and the dvd player and park assist. Not common options on the 2.5T
Thanks for the advice on the late 2004 and up. I'll definitely look for that. Someone mentioned that used XC-90s sometimes come with 16" wheels. Doesn't that look a little odd? Does it affect the handling or driving experience very much?
Mine does have the park assist feature; it's kind of addictive tough. I have 2 other cars at home and I sometime back up and wait for the beep only to realize I'm in the wrong vehicle...
I'm not into DVD at all. I feel kids spend enough time looking at tv and computer screens anyway; but I'm old fashioned I guess...
Personally I would not go for the 6 to get those options. For me the 5 is the perfect engine for the XC. I have not driven the V8 however...
Steve, Host
16" might look odd, but they should give some additional quality (softness and cushion) to driving, while make very minute difference in handling. 17" is a sweet middle ground, 18" looks cooler, and supposedly, provide better handling.
I personally, find CD/DVD-based Nav. system extremely overpriced and of comparatively low quality. There are better solutions from renown GPS manufacturers, both PDA based and car-mounted. However, Volvo system has a really huge screen and is nicely fitted into the dash-board.
I have opted out of Nav. system twice, and use Microsoft products Street and Trips in US and AutoRoute in Europe using either laptop or Dell Axim. It works, and if you already own laptop and PDA is less than $150 all together with the Bluetooth GPS device.
Also, if my kids will be smaller, I would just buy $250-300 portable DVD player.
However, I do suggest installing rear park assist. It saves money. My wife and I always have had some minor accidents (at $500 deductible a piece) while backing up on our two Mazda MPV, and really enjoy the additional convenience of that device.
I always get light (lighter) interior. Looks more festive, especially in a combination with darker exterior.
BTW - I strongly recommend Ruby Red, especially, if car is driven mostly by female (like in our case, when my wife is a primer driver).
Now the hunt is on!
And Ruby Red with taupe does not require being particular to the details - it blows you away...
Tell you husband to e-mail me. XC90 is a beautiful car for a beautiful woman.
I hope no one will call me chauvinist.
And while I am on - can I give you one more advise? - if you money situation is such that there is any chance of getting a new XC90 instead of the used one - buy your Volvo through the Overseas Delivery Program.
You will never regret it, and will thank me for many years to come...
Engine: the 2.5T is ideal around suburbia, the T6 or V8 better on highways and at passing speeds. Your option list points to the T6 or V8 where the add-on are more common. More tires are available for the 2.5T's 17" wheels; you may want to use different tires than stock to fit your conditions better.
Features: some owners with kids report that the running boards help get in & out, some others don't like them--best to test drive an XC90 (even a new one) with the family. There are 2 kinds of DVD players that have been available--overhead and on the seatbacks--with pluses & minuses for both; some families prefer the flexibility and low cost of portable units.
Interior Color: Taupe shows grim and dark dirt, Graphite shows dust and light dirt. It is too bad that there is not an intermediate color available. Reflections from the dash can be an annoying problem and Graphite is preferred for this but test drive both colors to see how it is for you; polarizing glasses eliminate the reflections when you can wear them. Taupe has the advantage that small items left on the seats are easier to find.
Have fun shopping!
Volvo increased the size of the brake discs in the late 04 and up cars. This meant the 16" wheels no longer fit.
Park assist can be dealer installed and is a great option to have.
The nav system we have is expensive, but it is not as bad as some people say. I view all nav systems as toys. They are only practical if you travel alot or are in outside sales where you are going places you normally don't venture.
As for aftermarket DVD's, most electronic places won't touch the XC90. Nor do you want them to. The places that are familiar with the car won't save you much over the dealer.
Of course, a portable dvd player is a great option.
http://www.volvocars.us/footer/about/NewsAndEvents/News/default.htm?item={316017- 52-F661-4B92-93AA-80A14589A3BD}
It's dated June 30, 2006 and it says specifically, "This center will have overall responsibility for the application of hybrid systems into Volvo Cars vehicles globally." Staffed through engineers from Volvo Cars and other Ford brands.
My friend with her Toyota hybrid SUV is getting 36 mpg in town. Of course, it cost her more to buy. Her decision wasn't based on finances, it was based on her environmental commitment. It seems to me that Sweden is a great place to make some advances here. I'm just wondering how long it'll take to implement. Until then, I'm still happily hunting for my own XC90. Hopefully they won't release a hybrid version just after I've purchased my fully gas-powered version.
Volvo began playing w/ the concept back in 89.
Even built a turbine/battery hybrid.
There are alot of engineering hurdles to overcome. Even then, alot of the engineers are not convinced that a hybrid is a cost effective solution. Diesels or a multifuel car may be a better long term solution.