When I told people there's a special new Volvo derived from a German car, blah, blah, blah, they ask me what's it called...
The Jag's fake Jaguar -- the Mondeo-based X-type -- has to look more Jag than a Jag. Jag just cancelled the transversely-mounted-engine-cars for their future models.
The new S40 looks every bit as close to the older S60/S80 as possible w/ hardly anything new, so people won't know it's no traditional Volvo?
Let the people miss this secret so Volvo will start the rebate soon!
you need both front seats w/ cushion-tilt & lumbar support, plus quietness, good ride & charcoal air purifier.
That disqualifies cars like the ones w/o charcoal such as the Passat. & the G35 & TSX can't even provide a comfortable ride & the passenger-seat adjustments.
But even the $27k+ stripped A4 auto doesn't include lumbar & cushion-tilt for both front seats, plus a questionable ride.
The new S40 auto has all of the above essential "first class" comfort features std. & even if you add the sumptuous Premium Package w/ power memory leather seat, moonroof, dual-zone auto climate & wood trim, it still costs only $27+. Imagine getting a 3-series or C-class w/ all these features.
& the new S40 handles superior to them all except maybe the 325i w/ std suspension. The C-class bounces too much even w/ sport suspension. The G35 simply handles & steers too crudely. & the TSX can't let your hands sense the tire grip.
I think it really is subjective. I rode in a sporty VW Golf today and what I liked about the ride was that it was fairly flat and didn't move up and down much. However, it was at a price. Moderate bumps were felt strongly due to the heavy damping and wide tires and bad bumps were quite harsh. BMW 3 series with sport suspensions have less harshness, but some, and a flatter ride than the Golf. The Passat has moderately firm damping with some up and down motion over some wavy roads. The s60, even the T5 has a fairly soft reaction to road bumps, but with a strong rebound over sudden rises in the road. Somehow the s80 manages to slow down the rebound and has less abruptness in these situations while feeling quite supple in tire impact (at least when they are new). There's a bit more movement, though, overall compared to Bimmers, and somewhat similar to the stouter feeling Mercedes. I think Mercedes ride comfort has to do with their stoutness of body and chassis over the damping in the latest models. The later models have a fair amount of vertical, though not lateral, motion.
Overall, I think it is subjective in what the driver feels vs. the passenger. As a driver the harshness isn't noticed as much, the car reacts to the road and the flat ride helps create a feeling of control. For the passenger, however, the bumps are somewhat more intrusive, especially in the back of the cars, and can become somewhat tiresome over time. I say the Bimmers have the best ride because they had excellent control with acceptable occasional harshness. The Volvo feels most cossetting most of the time, especially on roads that aren't wavy, it isn't bumps that bother the s60, it's changes in elevation of the road and manhole covers, anything that causes the rebound action to activate. I actually think going firm with strong compression in Volvo shocks is the best solution as the harshness is mild, the springs still are fairly soft and progressive, and the rebound isn't as abrupt. The Passat rides well but feels a bit of a family car set up with some motion. Adding firm shocks would make more harshness without much advantage as the Passat doesn't rebound harshly, there's stiffer progression in the springs and dampers than Volvo usually tunes in.
I think it really comes down to preference, control with some degree of impact harshness vs. how minimal impact harshness with some degree of body motion. Where I think people differ is in how much control vs. body motion they prefer. And I think it is different with the driver vs. the passenger experience. I don't mind quite firm if it is with minimal harshness and I like the ride to be as controlled as possible but with some suppleness in the springs. I prefer mild rebound and strong compression. Hoping that's the way the s40s are set up.
"Somehow the s80 manages to slow down the rebound and has less abruptness in these situations while feeling quite supple in tire impact (at least when they are new)."
That's what I meant by good ride. I predicted the new S40 is tuned this way, maybe that's why it looks more like the S80 than the S60? ;-)
"...it isn't bumps that bother the s60, it's changes in elevation of the road and manhole covers, anything that causes the rebound action to activate. I actually think going firm with strong compression in Volvo shocks is the best solution as the harshness is mild, the springs still are fairly soft and progressive, and the rebound isn't as abrupt."
"I prefer mild rebound and strong compression. Hoping that's the way the s40s are set up."
I think you & I have the same preference, but that's actually MORE rebound firmness/tightness in the shocks to slow/damp down the spring's extension stroke, NOT LESS rebound.
& yes, that's what feels like to me when I press down each corner of the new S40 T5.
When the rebound became too slow, the car tend to stay downward. & when the rebound became too fast/loose, the car tend to bounce upward.
Mazda tends to like to set up w/ quick/loose rebound, as the "quick rise" can help the car to regain sufficient suspension travel right away right after the first bump to swallow the next bump. But in the case of the TSX, despite w/ long firm travel, can occasionally airborne the rear tires.
You actually find the ride of the 3-series w/ the LOWERED sport suspension the best? You do not prefer its std suspension(325i 4-dr only)?
I think in order to compare apples to apples, you should compare the S40/T-5(they both have similar suspension) to the 325i std, C-class sport, Jaguar X-Type sport & TSX. Not sure which A4 suspension, as I haven't driven that car.
In the late '80's, one of the front-page articles from Automobile realized that the Honda Legend is superior to the Sterling 825 twin in every way except the stubbornly tuned less-comfortable ride, & it was most likely due to the Japanese people's shorter legs that walk differently.
Like how new borns like to be rocked & cradled at the frequency the pregnant mother walks.
I can imagine being a green giant striding at lower-frequency steps but also pounding w/ a harsher thump. A mini-nature human would have to make several quick little BUSY steps w/o harsh pounding, but when encountering a rock he also has to climb over it & therefore changing elevation.
This pretty much summarizes the difference of the CALMER firm-&-long-travel but harsher-firm-bushing German ride vs the BUSIER soft-&-short-travel plus loose/quick-rebound Japanese ride.
Perhaps this is why when I was little, I preferred riding in a Datsun 510 over the Super Beetle. & my short classmate preferred riding in the Civic over the Rabbit.
I'm surprised the tall Swedes tuned the 850/S70 & the S60 the "quick-bounce" way! Maybe it's their conspiracy to force customers to upgrade to the S80?
Even w/ relatively short suspension travel, the Nissan's & Mitsubishi's have the tendency to keep the shock-tuning slow & calm on the rebound stroke.
Over rough roads I prefer the standard 3 series. Over mild bumps, tar strips, wavy roads, the lowered suspension feels taut yet still comfortable.
Regarding the 850/s70, it seems Volvo tried to go for less impact harshness, but got the spring/shock tuning wrong. The s60 improves on it, but some of the quick-bounce feel is still present. Maybe worse on xc70. I do like their "glide" on flat roads.
I may prefer Mitsubishi to Nissan, but I only know Maxima and Galant. Maximas feel harsh to me. The Galant feels a bit German, but as you say, lacks the suspension travel to feel German. Bushings are softer as well.
I went to the S40 Drive Event in the Bay Area yesterday. Overall, I was impressed with Volvo's new offering. The 2.5T 6MT is a hoot to drive, although it does suffer from some torque steer.
Since I'm a Subie guy, I've posted my comments over in the Subaru Crew Cafe forum:
had the traction control keeping the power low, so there was no steering tugging in the T-5 I drove. It's good that you assured us the strong-torque T-5 has torque steer. Now I can eliminate the good-value T-5 w/o regret! ;-)
Today, I was driving an '04 Passat 1.8 turbo auto w/ 170-hp(the boost is already light, as the Jetta is boosted to 180 hp & the TT to 225 hp). Man, turbo sucks. That delay built-up boost -- always comes too late & at the wrong time! Plus, even the exact amount of output is hard, if not impossible, to modulate! Please note, this turbo engine has max torque continuously for several thousand rpms, just like the T-5's engine.
I know the T-5 already has 2.5 w/ the turbo added, but still, boosting from 166 to 236 lb-ft of torque means a big percentage of the output is depending on the turbine spooling up the pressure.
The T-5's 2.5 may be slightly larger in displacement than the normally-aspirated 2.4, but the 2.5 also has a lower compression ratio in order to make room for the force induction. So, at off boost, I'll bet that 2.5 is no more powerful than the 2.4.
So what does this mean? I'm more likely to get more direct-power than the slightly hard-to-modulate T-5 if I keep the T-5's 6-sp running in vacumn mode. & at the boost mode, I'm simply gonna be annoyed due to the "after shock" power wave.
Come on you guys, the 2.4 is powerful enough, at least w/ stick. The already-fun Mazda 3S twin only has 150 lb-ft of torque.
Well, I got to drive the T5 in dry weather on Friday. At full output the torque steer is alot less noticible than on prior Volvo cars. The 2.4 is a nice engine esp w/ the manual gearbox. But no match for the T5. Since the T5 engine is at full boost @ 1500 rpm its pretty easy to have all the power you'd want whenever you want it.
"Since the T5 engine is at full boost @ 1500 rpm its pretty easy to have all the power you'd want whenever you want it."
Yes, the full boost is AVAILABLE at just about every rpm range, but read -- available. What I'm talking about is, when I step on the gas FROM off throttle, the minimum-1/2-second throttle-response boost-built-up time that'll drive me nuts while I try to, to say the least, fine tune the cornering line, or especially when I shift from neutral into gear & want the power instantly. No wonder the BMW M3 would never go the turbo route at any cost.
So you have to adjust your driving style. You have to plan ahead a little. There are plenty of turbo street and race cars out there, they all have some lag. Yet they all win races. All engines have some lag built in, unless your talking about large displacement high horsepower engines. With the T5, if your doing ANY kind of driving you'll have the car over 1500 rpm. The car is very easy to control w/ the manual gearbox. Admittedly harder w/ the auto trans. Disable the DSTC so you don't lose throttle control. You should try and drive the car on dry pavement. I did and was very impressed. In many ways the setup is superior to my S60R.
What is the peak boost? Is this still considered a light-pressure turbo? Those can spool up quicker.
Some turbos are like an on/off switch and come on with a bang, but some newer ones keep getting better. Go try Subaru's 2.5T in the Forester XT, sure 0-30 and 0-60 are fast, but also passing times are quicker than the new V8 GTO.
Response can be tuned to be nearly immediate, so you can't say all turbos have lots of lag.
I agree. For some reason, it seems as the newer Volvos have less leg and headroom than the previous generation. S40 to the new S40, S70 to the new S60...
I agree that the rear seats would be comfy for someone up to 5'8". I'm 5'8" and at NAIAS, I sat behind someone who was 6'3". Both of us were seated comfortably.
"For some reason, it seems as the newer Volvos have less leg and headroom than the previous generation. S40 to the new S40, S70 to the new S60..."
The S70/850 was still very roomy, while the old 240DL has too much leg room on the passenger side.
It must be the expensive S80's fault, as Volvo wants to force you to spend more $ to upgrade. But I'm sorry, even if they charge the same price on both the S80 & the new S40, I'd still pick the smart little one over the low-tech old-hag S80.
As long as the front seat is kept high w/ thigh tilted up, I can sit behind myself in the new S40 w/ enough stretched-out leg room, although on the passenger side only.
I think it was the styling. And they both do look much, much better than their predecessors. The swoopy roof line eats into rear headroom on both, though.
The boxier wagons didn't make the same sacrifice. That's all I'm saying. I prefer wagons any way, so it doesn't matter.
Not much fun: Understeers only, steering-feel is limited, 6-sp manual a little clunky & the turbo engine has a little lag so lacks BMW 6-cyl's direct throttle response.
Body roll is there. Engine's quiet. 6.9 seconds to 60(or 62) mph.
Comfort level is high. Even the wind & road noise are well suppressed.
At least they still found this car light-years ahead of the old V40 in both handling AND ride comfort, thanks to the talented Focus II's underpinning.
Sounds like I'd prefer the 5-sp FWD S40 w/ the 2.4i engine that needs to rev more & also w/ the torque-curve that changes the engine-noise tone to make the whole revving process sound more-exciting. Plus, there is the instant-throttle-response-nature of a normally aspirated engine.
volvomax Mar 1, 2004 6:57pm "All engines have some lag built in, unless your talking about large displacement high horsepower engines."
Unless it has the electronic throttle(by wire) replacing the mechanical throttle linkage, there should be no lag in a normally aspirated engine. You may have to wait till its rpm to rise in order to gain a strong burst of power, but as long as the rpm is kept high enough to begin with you'll get a big thrust that's also INSTANT. & even at low rpm it still punches instantly in a small push, unlike turbos where you always have to wait at least a split second for the pressure-change no matter what rpm you're in, even w/ low-pressure ones.
We're not here to win the race on the track. We just want to have fun fine-tuning the line on the curves while the car listens to our right foot obediently.
My point w/ the turbo exactly!! As long as you keep it @ 3-4000 rpm the is no lag. You take a 2.5l 4 cyl or V6 @ 1000 rpm and hit the gas you have to wait for the power to build. If your driving aggressively, keep the rpms up!
the V70 is a bigger car (wheelbase too I believe) than the S60. Not sure if the 50 will be bigger than the 40, but I don't think it will be. You do get some extra room from the extra headroom (no sloping roof), which lets you sit more upright, and may let the seat be a little farther back.
the BMW 3 series is the same way. Sedan feels very tight to me, but the wagon has plenty of room.
The sloping rear window forces you to sit leaning forward. I'm not sure if the position of the rear seat is different in the wagon because the wagon was locked up at NAIAS.
Local dealer finally received some cars, so I stopped in to scope them out, and take a quick TD. Sorry Creak, but I couldn't find a place to try and get the tail hung out (which may have annoyed the salesperson who came along for the ride).
Anyway, some misc. ramblings:
Style: looked real nice, very similar to the 60 and 80, with some diffs. in the roofline and windows. Overall, nice and sharp. Interior was very nice, well laid out, and the center stack was neat. Lots of buttons, but once you get used to everything, should be fine.
Interior: Actually seemed roomier than the S60 in front. One area that I noticed was more clearance between your legs and the steering wheel (I tended to hit the wheel in the 60 when I had the seat the way I liked it). Seats were great (as expected), maybe even better than the 60. In the rear, I had a surprising amount of leg room, and toe room was OK. I did hit the roof, but could fit if I slouched slightly. But, I sit tall (long torso), to the extent that I can't fit in the front of some cars (such as the last gen. TL), so for kids and occasional adults, should be fine. The V50 should have plenty of headroom.
Driving: Took a T5 (auto, of course) out. Plenty of pick up, nice and linear, but I didn't try anything aggressive. Quiet, composed ride, good handling, and very nice steering. Should be a very nice all around package (combo of sporty enough to be fun, but nice and comfy on the highway). Overall, felt like what you would get if you took a Mazda 3 and added a few hundred pounds of sound deadening and creature comforts.
Price: The T5 was loaded (xenons and audio package included) and ran 32K+. They also had a 2.4i, premium/cold and a few other things for about 27.7K. Deduct $1,200 if you get a stick (the geartronic AT was listed as an option at this price).
So, overall, I think this is a winner, but really does make the S60 seem redundant. They should probably move the 60 up in size to compete better with the TL/ES330/etc. class, and take the S80 into the luxo class to spread the line out better.
Forgot to mention, also go to spend some time driving an S60R 6-speed. Fun and wicked fast. Relevant to this discussion because the manual 40/50 will use the R model 6-speed, which is going to make it a really nice package.
A V50 T5 FWD 6-speed could be the perfect combo of fun/utility/luxury, at a reasonable (if you think of 30K as reasonable) price. Will even get good MPG ratings (the T5 AT was something like 22/31 IIRC). The 6 speed seemed to be geared pretty long in 6th.
Also loved playing with the active suspension (the advanced setting made off ramps real entertaining).
Sounds fun, I'm registered for that Event on 4/24, so I'll be waiting for quite a while. OTOH, it's nice to be able to push it a little around the cones.
You do get quite a chance to test out the vehicle in the S40 Drive Event. The "road course" is quite generous (long) and gives you a nice straightaway and some twisties.
"The 6 speed seemed to be geared pretty long in 6th."
Yes, it was either that AUTOCAR or some other Brit magazine that pointed out that the 5th is all you need that they never bothered to use the 6th.
Wow, the 5th tall enough even for the T-5's fatter than 2.4i's fat torque(see p76 04/04 CR: "a smooth, torquy 168-hp version in the 2.4i model")? Imagine the 6th being as high as heaven -- you're in Caddilac-quiet dream land.
That's new info. Everything I have seen so far IIRC said it was the tranny from the R, but maybe that was supposition (since it was the only 6 speed Volvo had).
Doesn't Getrag supply trannys for some BMWs, and the Lincoln LS when it had one?
Anyway, should be nice shifting, although Volvo still needs to do something about the feel (modulation) of the clutch. Still too much like an on/off switch, but at least it is nice an light.
I am new to Volvo. Can anyone tell me about the origin or manufacture of the engines to be used in the new S50? My mechanic once tol me he thought Volvo used engines from a French auto company like Renault. If so, are they reliable?
The V6 that was jointly developed by Volvo, Renault and (IIRC) Peugout (sp?) is long gone. Wasn't a particularly good engine, but it was used in the Delorean, if that means anything to you.
The V50 will use a tried and true 5 cyl. engine. I believe it was developed in house, but may have other origins. Regardless, it has been used for 10+ years (in the 850, S70, V70 and S60), and is considered to be relatively bulletproof. The T5 has a turbo version, and the 2.4i is naturally aspirated.
Volvo makes these engines themselves, but I'm not sure where (Sweden or Belgium) for the 40/50.
Test drove the new s40 yesterday - attractive styling, good handling, and several innovative features, but a couple serious flaws. Rear window visibility is very poor. The window is smaller in size, is very pitched, and visibility is further obstructed by the 2 oversized back headrests and the large back light mounted on the top of the window. Also, rear seat head room is insufficient. I am 5' 8" and my head was touching the ceiling. I don't understand how these basic items could be overlooked. Well, back to the drawing boards for the next re-design!
sounds to me like you don't want a compact car. Hell, it doesn't even have to be compact to have bad visibility. I just got rid of a Maxima rental I was driving for 2 weeks and that had the worst rear window visibility I've ever experienced. Not every car can please everybody. But thanks for stopping by and good luck with your search.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I believe, IIRC, Volvo's estimate on the manual T5 is about 6.5 secs (give or take a tenth). Based on what I've seen in other Volvos, the auto will only penalize you by about half a second. AWD? Well, that's tougher, but I'd say another half a second is reasonable. Hopefully less, but we'll see.
Funny thing I've noticed about Volvos, though, is that no 2 seem to be alike. For instance, on my S70, I've seen 0-60 times listed for anywhere from 5.9 to 7.3 seconds ... all automatics!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Comments
When I told people there's a special new Volvo derived from a German car, blah, blah, blah, they ask me what's it called...
The Jag's fake Jaguar -- the Mondeo-based X-type -- has to look more Jag than a Jag. Jag just cancelled the transversely-mounted-engine-cars for their future models.
The new S40 looks every bit as close to the older S60/S80 as possible w/ hardly anything new, so people won't know it's no traditional Volvo?
Let the people miss this secret so Volvo will start the rebate soon!
That disqualifies cars like the ones w/o charcoal such as the Passat. & the G35 & TSX can't even provide a comfortable ride & the passenger-seat adjustments.
But even the $27k+ stripped A4 auto doesn't include lumbar & cushion-tilt for both front seats, plus a questionable ride.
The new S40 auto has all of the above essential "first class" comfort features std. & even if you add the sumptuous Premium Package w/ power memory leather seat, moonroof, dual-zone auto climate & wood trim, it still costs only $27+. Imagine getting a 3-series or C-class w/ all these features.
& the new S40 handles superior to them all except maybe the 325i w/ std suspension. The C-class bounces too much even w/ sport suspension. The G35 simply handles & steers too crudely. & the TSX can't let your hands sense the tire grip.
Overall, I think it is subjective in what the driver feels vs. the passenger. As a driver the harshness isn't noticed as much, the car reacts to the road and the flat ride helps create a feeling of control. For the passenger, however, the bumps are somewhat more intrusive, especially in the back of the cars, and can become somewhat tiresome over time. I say the Bimmers have the best ride because they had excellent control with acceptable occasional harshness. The Volvo feels most cossetting most of the time, especially on roads that aren't wavy, it isn't bumps that bother the s60, it's changes in elevation of the road and manhole covers, anything that causes the rebound action to activate. I actually think going firm with strong compression in Volvo shocks is the best solution as the harshness is mild, the springs still are fairly soft and progressive, and the rebound isn't as abrupt. The Passat rides well but feels a bit of a family car set up with some motion. Adding firm shocks would make more harshness without much advantage as the Passat doesn't rebound harshly, there's stiffer progression in the springs and dampers than Volvo usually tunes in.
I think it really comes down to preference, control with some degree of impact harshness vs. how minimal impact harshness with some degree of body motion. Where I think people differ is in how much control vs. body motion they prefer. And I think it is different with the driver vs. the passenger experience. I don't mind quite firm if it is with minimal harshness and I like the ride to be as controlled as possible but with some suppleness in the springs. I prefer mild rebound and strong compression. Hoping that's the way the s40s are set up.
That's what I meant by good ride. I predicted the new S40 is tuned this way, maybe that's why it looks more like the S80 than the S60? ;-)
"...it isn't bumps that bother the s60, it's changes in elevation of the road and manhole covers, anything that causes the rebound action to activate. I actually think going firm with strong compression in Volvo shocks is the best solution as the harshness is mild, the springs still are fairly soft and progressive, and the rebound isn't as abrupt."
"I prefer mild rebound and strong compression. Hoping that's the way the s40s are set up."
I think you & I have the same preference, but that's actually MORE rebound firmness/tightness in the shocks to slow/damp down the spring's extension stroke, NOT LESS rebound.
& yes, that's what feels like to me when I press down each corner of the new S40 T5.
When the rebound became too slow, the car tend to stay downward. & when the rebound became too fast/loose, the car tend to bounce upward.
Mazda tends to like to set up w/ quick/loose rebound, as the "quick rise" can help the car to regain sufficient suspension travel right away right after the first bump to swallow the next bump. But in the case of the TSX, despite w/ long firm travel, can occasionally airborne the rear tires.
You actually find the ride of the 3-series w/ the LOWERED sport suspension the best? You do not prefer its std suspension(325i 4-dr only)?
I think in order to compare apples to apples, you should compare the S40/T-5(they both have similar suspension) to the 325i std, C-class sport, Jaguar X-Type sport & TSX. Not sure which A4 suspension, as I haven't driven that car.
Like how new borns like to be rocked & cradled at the frequency the pregnant mother walks.
I can imagine being a green giant striding at lower-frequency steps but also pounding w/ a harsher thump. A mini-nature human would have to make several quick little BUSY steps w/o harsh pounding, but when encountering a rock he also has to climb over it & therefore changing elevation.
This pretty much summarizes the difference of the CALMER firm-&-long-travel but harsher-firm-bushing German ride vs the BUSIER soft-&-short-travel plus loose/quick-rebound Japanese ride.
Perhaps this is why when I was little, I preferred riding in a Datsun 510 over the Super Beetle. & my short classmate preferred riding in the Civic over the Rabbit.
I'm surprised the tall Swedes tuned the 850/S70 & the S60 the "quick-bounce" way! Maybe it's their conspiracy to force customers to upgrade to the S80?
Even w/ relatively short suspension travel, the Nissan's & Mitsubishi's have the tendency to keep the shock-tuning slow & calm on the rebound stroke.
Over rough roads I prefer the standard 3 series. Over mild bumps, tar strips, wavy roads, the lowered suspension feels taut yet still comfortable.
Regarding the 850/s70, it seems Volvo tried to go for less impact harshness, but got the spring/shock tuning wrong. The s60 improves on it, but some of the quick-bounce feel is still present. Maybe worse on xc70. I do like their "glide" on flat roads.
I may prefer Mitsubishi to Nissan, but I only know Maxima and Galant. Maximas feel harsh to me. The Galant feels a bit German, but as you say, lacks the suspension travel to feel German. Bushings are softer as well.
Since I'm a Subie guy, I've posted my comments over in the Subaru Crew Cafe forum:
kens "Subaru Crew Cafe" Feb 29, 2004 3:10pm
Ken
Today, I was driving an '04 Passat 1.8 turbo auto w/ 170-hp(the boost is already light, as the Jetta is boosted to 180 hp & the TT to 225 hp). Man, turbo sucks. That delay built-up boost -- always comes too late & at the wrong time! Plus, even the exact amount of output is hard, if not impossible, to modulate! Please note, this turbo engine has max torque continuously for several thousand rpms, just like the T-5's engine.
I know the T-5 already has 2.5 w/ the turbo added, but still, boosting from 166 to 236 lb-ft of torque means a big percentage of the output is depending on the turbine spooling up the pressure.
The T-5's 2.5 may be slightly larger in displacement than the normally-aspirated 2.4, but the 2.5 also has a lower compression ratio in order to make room for the force induction. So, at off boost, I'll bet that 2.5 is no more powerful than the 2.4.
So what does this mean? I'm more likely to get more direct-power than the slightly hard-to-modulate T-5 if I keep the T-5's 6-sp running in vacumn mode. & at the boost mode, I'm simply gonna be annoyed due to the "after shock" power wave.
Come on you guys, the 2.4 is powerful enough, at least w/ stick. The already-fun Mazda 3S twin only has 150 lb-ft of torque.
I also test drove the 3S stick today:
creakid1 "Mazda3" Mar 1, 2004 6:20am
At full output the torque steer is alot less noticible than on prior Volvo cars.
The 2.4 is a nice engine esp w/ the manual gearbox. But no match for the T5.
Since the T5 engine is at full boost @ 1500 rpm its pretty easy to have all the power you'd want whenever you want it.
Yes, the full boost is AVAILABLE at just about every rpm range, but read -- available. What I'm talking about is, when I step on the gas FROM off throttle, the minimum-1/2-second throttle-response boost-built-up time that'll drive me nuts while I try to, to say the least, fine tune the cornering line, or especially when I shift from neutral into gear & want the power instantly. No wonder the BMW M3 would never go the turbo route at any cost.
You have to plan ahead a little.
There are plenty of turbo street and race cars out there, they all have some lag. Yet they all win races.
All engines have some lag built in, unless your talking about large displacement high horsepower engines.
With the T5, if your doing ANY kind of driving you'll have the car over 1500 rpm. The car is very easy to control w/ the manual gearbox. Admittedly harder w/ the auto trans.
Disable the DSTC so you don't lose throttle control.
You should try and drive the car on dry pavement.
I did and was very impressed. In many ways the setup is superior to my S60R.
Some turbos are like an on/off switch and come on with a bang, but some newer ones keep getting better. Go try Subaru's 2.5T in the Forester XT, sure 0-30 and 0-60 are fast, but also passing times are quicker than the new V8 GTO.
Response can be tuned to be nearly immediate, so you can't say all turbos have lots of lag.
-juice
-juice
"Volvo might have shot themselves in the foot with the latest S40 as it's so good that you have to wonder why you'd opt for the larger S60."
I sat in the S40 at NAIAS and it was indeed too tight for adults, both leg and head room.
But the V50 definitely has more head room, may have more leg room too.
The Mazda3 hatch looks small, so they might reverse rolls when you're talking 5 doors instead of sedans.
-juice
Still, I'm about 6' tall and my head would poke about 3" over the roof liner. I think it'd be comfy for folks up to about 5'8".
The wagon appears to have more head room.
Here's a pic, my friend Bob is in the back seat:
http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=4288056341&p=4193653085- &idx=225
You can tell his head is leaning forward to fit, and he's not that tall. I'm taller and simply was not comfortable.
-juice
-juice
The back seat is not that small.
Maybe you have a long inseam and short torso, we're all shaped differently. I could not sit there for more than 15 seconds without feeling squished.
-juice
Ken
The S70/850 was still very roomy, while the old 240DL has too much leg room on the passenger side.
It must be the expensive S80's fault, as Volvo wants to force you to spend more $ to upgrade. But I'm sorry, even if they charge the same price on both the S80 & the new S40, I'd still pick the smart little one over the low-tech old-hag S80.
As long as the front seat is kept high w/ thigh tilted up, I can sit behind myself in the new S40 w/ enough stretched-out leg room, although on the passenger side only.
The boxier wagons didn't make the same sacrifice. That's all I'm saying. I prefer wagons any way, so it doesn't matter.
-juice
Body roll is there. Engine's quiet. 6.9 seconds to 60(or 62) mph.
Comfort level is high. Even the wind & road noise are well suppressed.
At least they still found this car light-years ahead of the old V40 in both handling AND ride comfort, thanks to the talented Focus II's underpinning.
Sounds like I'd prefer the 5-sp FWD S40 w/ the 2.4i engine that needs to rev more & also w/ the torque-curve that changes the engine-noise tone to make the whole revving process sound more-exciting. Plus, there is the instant-throttle-response-nature of a normally aspirated engine.
volvomax Mar 1, 2004 6:57pm
"All engines have some lag built in, unless your talking about large displacement high horsepower engines."
Unless it has the electronic throttle(by wire) replacing the mechanical throttle linkage, there should be no lag in a normally aspirated engine. You may have to wait till its rpm to rise in order to gain a strong burst of power, but as long as the rpm is kept high enough to begin with you'll get a big thrust that's also INSTANT. & even at low rpm it still punches instantly in a small push, unlike turbos where you always have to wait at least a split second for the pressure-change no matter what rpm you're in, even w/ low-pressure ones.
We're not here to win the race on the track. We just want to have fun fine-tuning the line on the curves while the car listens to our right foot obediently.
As long as you keep it @ 3-4000 rpm the is no lag.
You take a 2.5l 4 cyl or V6 @ 1000 rpm and hit the gas you have to wait for the power to build.
If your driving aggressively, keep the rpms up!
the BMW 3 series is the same way. Sedan feels very tight to me, but the wagon has plenty of room.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
It did look bigger.
-juice
Anyway, some misc. ramblings:
Style: looked real nice, very similar to the 60 and 80, with some diffs. in the roofline and windows. Overall, nice and sharp. Interior was very nice, well laid out, and the center stack was neat. Lots of buttons, but once you get used to everything, should be fine.
Interior: Actually seemed roomier than the S60 in front. One area that I noticed was more clearance between your legs and the steering wheel (I tended to hit the wheel in the 60 when I had the seat the way I liked it). Seats were great (as expected), maybe even better than the 60. In the rear, I had a surprising amount of leg room, and toe room was OK. I did hit the roof, but could fit if I slouched slightly. But, I sit tall (long torso), to the extent that I can't fit in the front of some cars (such as the last gen. TL), so for kids and occasional adults, should be fine. The V50 should have plenty of headroom.
Driving: Took a T5 (auto, of course) out. Plenty of pick up, nice and linear, but I didn't try anything aggressive. Quiet, composed ride, good handling, and very nice steering. Should be a very nice all around package (combo of sporty enough to be fun, but nice and comfy on the highway). Overall, felt like what you would get if you took a Mazda 3 and added a few hundred pounds of sound deadening and creature comforts.
Price: The T5 was loaded (xenons and audio package included) and ran 32K+. They also had a 2.4i, premium/cold and a few other things for about 27.7K. Deduct $1,200 if you get a stick (the geartronic AT was listed as an option at this price).
So, overall, I think this is a winner, but really does make the S60 seem redundant. They should probably move the 60 up in size to compete better with the TL/ES330/etc. class, and take the S80 into the luxo class to spread the line out better.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
A V50 T5 FWD 6-speed could be the perfect combo of fun/utility/luxury, at a reasonable (if you think of 30K as reasonable) price. Will even get good MPG ratings (the T5 AT was something like 22/31 IIRC). The 6 speed seemed to be geared pretty long in 6th.
Also loved playing with the active suspension (the advanced setting made off ramps real entertaining).
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
-juice
Ken
Yes, it was either that AUTOCAR or some other Brit magazine that pointed out that the 5th is all you need that they never bothered to use the 6th.
Wow, the 5th tall enough even for the T-5's fatter than 2.4i's fat torque(see p76 04/04 CR: "a smooth, torquy 168-hp version in the 2.4i model")? Imagine the 6th being as high as heaven -- you're in Caddilac-quiet dream land.
I use 6th alot on the highway in my R, great gas mileage.
Doesn't Getrag supply trannys for some BMWs, and the Lincoln LS when it had one?
Anyway, should be nice shifting, although Volvo still needs to do something about the feel (modulation) of the clutch. Still too much like an on/off switch, but at least it is nice an light.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
The V50 will use a tried and true 5 cyl. engine. I believe it was developed in house, but may have other origins. Regardless, it has been used for 10+ years (in the 850, S70, V70 and S60), and is considered to be relatively bulletproof. The T5 has a turbo version, and the 2.4i is naturally aspirated.
Volvo makes these engines themselves, but I'm not sure where (Sweden or Belgium) for the 40/50.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Once you add the AWD (with the automatic) what are your guesses as to what the 0-60 will be then?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Funny thing I've noticed about Volvos, though, is that no 2 seem to be alike. For instance, on my S70, I've seen 0-60 times listed for anywhere from 5.9 to 7.3 seconds ... all automatics!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
-juice
Does have a power gas lid release though, if thats important to you.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Engine: Sweden
Transmission: Japan.