Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

Almost Makes the Grade - 2015 Volvo S60 Long-Term Road Test

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Posts: 10,059
edited February 2016 in Volvo
imageAlmost Makes the Grade - 2015 Volvo S60 Long-Term Road Test

No, the 2015 Volvo S60 isn't quite up to 3 Series or C-Class standards. And there's nothing wrong with that. The S60 offers its own mojo, for a lot less dough.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • The Acura TLX might be a more appropriate comparison. Like the Volvo S60, it too is built on a front-wheel-drive chassis. The TLX is available with close to 300 hp. It is also available with torque-vectoring all-wheel-drive, which solves the torque steer issue and provides more neutral handling.
  • ebeaudoinebeaudoin NE IllinoisPosts: 509
    As of this writing the twin-charged engine isn't available with AWD, correct? Looks like it is if you purchase the R-Design. I think that would make a lot of difference with regards to torque steer and any traction deficit.
  • djd352djd352 Posts: 31
    edited February 2016
    +subatomic, I think the Acura might also be a better handler too, not to mention more fuel efficient, better reliability, for thousands less than a Volvo!
    TLX 3.5 V-6 9-AT P-AWS with Advance Package $42,600
    TLX 3.5 V-6 9-AT SH-AWD with Advance Package $44,800
    Plus, you can get great lease deals on Acuras due to their high-residuals. Until the S60 gets updated to the level of the XC90 or S90, it will be on very few people's radar, and why would you consider it over an Acura TLX? I think the Volvo needs at least a $5000 price cut.
  • I did check Volvo's website. The "twin-charged" engine is now available in the AWD R-Design model as ebeaudoin stated. Comparably equipped, the S60 would probably be more expensive than the TLX, but these two cars seem closer together in execution than the RWD-based BMW 3-Series and MB C-Class.
  • Volvo just recently announced the mid-year update of the 2016 S60 getting available AWD with the 302-hp twin-charge engine.
  • Acura still doesn't have Mojo, reminds me of a nice Accord. It used to be different a decade ago, but the current model is boring to look at, and nothing to write home about inside either. I'd take a S60 over it anyday and since Volvo likes to wheel and deal, probably get a nice one cheaper than a TLX.
  • It's very easy to damn a Volvo with faint praise. I know, because I owned a 2006 S60 for a while. Passengers generally said "this is nice" for their first ride and seemed to totally forget the car afterwards. It neither offends or excites, but still manages to avoid the appliance feel of an Accord or Camry.
  • bankerdannybankerdanny Posts: 1,021
    edited February 2016
    Except paper engine performance means squat, actual on road performance is what matters.

    Here are the performance results of the S60 vs Edmunds LT 328i xDrive GT

    0-60:
    s60: 6.0sec, 328: 5.9sec

    1/4 mile:
    S60: [email protected], 328: [email protected]

    Slalom
    S60: 64.4mph, 328: 64.8mph

    So there is no need to spring for a 340 when the "less powerful' 328 easily matches the performance (and price) of the S60
  • dm7279dm7279 Posts: 63

    Except paper engine performance means squat, actual on road performance is what matters.

    Here are the performance results of the S60 vs Edmunds LT 328i xDrive GT

    0-60:
    s60: 6.0sec, 328: 5.9sec

    1/4 mile:
    S60: [email protected], 328: [email protected]

    Slalom
    S60: 64.4mph, 328: 64.8mph

    So there is no need to spring for a 340 when the "less powerful' 328 easily matches the performance (and price) of the S60

    The 328i may match up with this FWD S60 T6, but doesn't come close (in a straight line at least) to the previous T6 AWD R-Design model with the 6 cylinder, which is capable of getting to 60 in under 5.5 seconds and through the quarter mile in the low 13 second range at 105 mph or so. I will be interested to see if the new R-Design with the twin-charged 4 cylinder and AWD will match these numbers.
  • bankerdannybankerdanny Posts: 1,021
    Why is that a relevant comparison? Volvo no longer sells that car and that isn't the version Edmunds is testing.
  • When I think of Volvo I think of long term reliability not performance. Not sure if this new superturbocharged engine is going to go the distance of Volvos of the past. I still remember my friends' old hand me down Volvo 740 from his Dad that took him through college, numerous road trips and relocated him half way across the country to his first job with few problems. The 4 cylinder engine was weak but that thing was bullet proof and required very little maintenance. I'm sure it had well over 200,000 miles on it when the transmission finally gave out.
Sign In or Register to comment.