Volvo XC90 SUV

ivan_99 · January 2005

I really like cars in general...but this is getting kinda WEIRD...

guyf · January 2005

You should back out of that Pacifica purchase....

Honestly,

Guy

anotherwagon · January 2005

why?

lev_berkovich · January 2005

There is something personal in Volvo cars.

My 16-then years old daughter had called her 240 by lovely female name Lola.

How many Toyotas ever had personal names among of their teenager owners?

Now-21, she calls her 740 that she likes less - Fred.

Go figure...

wwest · January 2005

I would NEVER buy a FWD FreeStyle and not even an AWD without VSC. VSC in 06, maybe.

And I never want to go back to changing points, condensor, rotor caps, sparkplugs, etc, etc.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

What is VSC - analog of DSTC?

If it is - then I agree. I will never buy FWD SUV or AWD without the stability control system.

I have looked at Freestyle and 500 today at LA auto show - very-very nice for a price.

guyf · January 2005

Well, after 20,000 miles they feel like a Volvo with 200,000 miles. they don't age too well. BTW, how many do you see on the road? One of Chrysler worst failure. Slow, heavy, noisy in the 3rd row seat...

anotherwagon · January 2005

The Freestyle AWD LTD we are considering has Traction Control but not Stability Control.

Still a no no?

We are priced right at $30k (every option but the DVD)- the only XC90 we could afford would be the smaller engine one.

rodut · January 2005

Anotherwagon I am OK with Traction Control. I just hate the Stability Control, because I cannot stand the idea that a computer would be authorized to brake my wheels. It's simple: I pay, I brake. If the computer system becomes defective (sensors or whatever) it could suddenly and unexpectedly brake my front left wheel and steer me into the incoming truck. I know I know, it's reliable, will send error codes ... blah blah blah ... you can write that on my tombstone ...

The Host deleted my 3807 post because I violated the Edmunds policy (I promoted another auto chat web site), so I post it again without that link:

I agree Chrysler doesn't age well. Still if you drive one Pacifica you will fall in love. It has the 240 ability to make you become emotionally involved. Don't know why ... sturdiness, brick feeling, tank feeling ...

Also it's that impressive (and highest on the market) 1.33 NHTSA Static Stability Factor. They really have the lowest centre of gravity among anything non-car. You can feel it. I don't trust a VSC electronic system to do what simple physics easily and safely do. If it would be wider and lower centre of gravity (like Pacifica is), and without the electronic c..p, the XC90 would stay on my driveway now.

Volvo ages slower than myself ...

I saw yesterday a new boat for sale in a mall (I don't care about boats). Still when I saw Volvo" written on the engine I suddenly loved that boat.

chidoro · January 2005

I would guess the Freestyle wouldn't have the stability issues a typical SUV would.

Also, thanks for the fording info Lev.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

Personally, I will go with XC90 2.5T AWD ( and I have one) if you can afford it. I believe that authentic Volvo has better built quality and unique safety "know how" that is not shared with Ford.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

The traction control adds a lot more to the safe drive, especially during the cornering and braking on slippery surface, when it is mostly crucial.

wwest · January 2005

Regardless of how many of us feel, electronics and computers will continue to be added to our vehicles.

How many drivers know to stear into a skid when/if the rear end starts to come around?

Very few, IMMHO.

So, for the majority of drivers it would definitely be best if VSC were there to prevent a skid before any of us have a sensitive enough "seat of the pants" sensor to have detected it.

On the other hand I understand that the PSM on my C4 doesn't activate until it becomes clear that I am not.

Maybe in the future we will be able to control the mode, quick acting or delayed.

In any case my advice would be to stay away from any modern day vehicle that does not have some version of sability control, and especially if you expect to drive it into adverse roadbed conditions. And that includes those heavy rains down on the gulf coast.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

What I much more likely can write on you tombstone is that you tires did not wear equally, and you ended up under the upcoming truck during the emergency braking in a rain, or one of you front tires caught a slippery mud spot on empty back road @ 40 MPH, and you ended up on your roof in a ditch on a side of the road, etc., etc.

All those conditions are much more likely than a faulty sensor, and are perfectly preventable by the stability control.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

Good points,

I just want to add that some of us might know to steer into the direction of a skid, but how many of those who know, actually are trained enough to react?

Even fewer.

So, since I am not a race driver, I like fast reaction of my electronics.

I wrote it before, the roll-over prevention system has saved the lives of my family and I once already. Therefore, nothing is written on my tombstone just yet.

Hail Haldex and Continental!!!

jpouchet · January 2005

Ditto the idea to go with an XC 90 2.5T. I checked out and crossed off the list the Freestyle for my own reasons. Build quality being a major issue. We own a Ford Focus, 2001, for our daughter and though it is fine for around town I wouldn't want to live with the car for ten years. The aesthetics of the Freestyle are subject to your own tasted but the LTD actually looked worse to me in mono paint than the LE in two-tone. I do not like to spend good money for a leather interior to only get plastic in the third row. (I don't need or want third row anyway and Ford wont delete the seats like Volvo will.)

If you drive at altitude the 2.5T with turbo will retain more horsepower than than 3L V6. We go skiing and mountain biking at 7k feet+ and feel the turbo will do us better.

And I don't care what Ford says about the integrity of their design for safety - VOLVO - wins the safety battle hands down. I've got kids and family to protect.

tidester · January 2005

Very few, IMMHO.

You only hear about the ones who don't know how to handle it so the sampling is biased in the extreme. :-)

tidester, host

lev_berkovich · January 2005

But you only hear FROM the ones who know, or have a good stability control systems.

:-)

tidester · January 2005

Right - and 95% of drivers believe they have exceptional driving skills! ;-)

tidester, host

explorerx4 · January 2005

the 95%. they're the ones would will just slam on the brakes and hang on. it may not be their worst option.

rodut · January 2005

For real DRIVERS the VSC & the Roll stuff is an insult to intelligence.

For people who just transport themselves (incompetent drivers) the VSC is useful. The problem here is that the VSC will make them even dumber that they already are. Slamming the brakes and praying will soon be their understanding about what driving means. Incompetent drivers are NOT safe ! Put a good driver like Irv Gordon on his Volvo P1800 with no electronic gizmos and he will safely drive 1,700,000 miles (2,720,000 Kms !). Put one of those soon to be born brainless drivers on the fanciest XC9999 and he will break it into pieces at the 1st rain.

Lev_Berkovich in post 3812 you say: "The traction control adds a lot more to the safe drive, especially during the cornering and braking on slippery surface, when it is mostly crucial". There is no connection between Traction Control and braking and cornering because the Traction Control is not activated when you brake or steer without touching the gas pedal. About steering and accelerating at the same time, if you are dumb enough to do that hard enough to skid, the Traction Control will help you accelerate faster, so that won't make things safer anyway. So you are completely wrong when you say that the Traction Control will make things safer.

The Stability Control is supposed to make the car safer, if no component of the system will ever fail (what ?!) and the computer is programmed for the infinite range of skid patterns (infinite memory ?!?!).

Also in the safety biased post #3815 you say: "Hail Haldex and Continental!!!". Again the AWD Haldex system WILL NOT make driving safer ! Any AWD system will help people accelerate faster on slippery roads, which is NOT safer. Also the Haldex system will send power to the rear wheels making the car more prone to oversteer. Anybody who played in the snow with a RWD vehicle knows that sending power to the rear wheels make it oversteer prone, so a lot unsafer to drive for dumb drivers. Those commercials about the "safer" AWD driving count on the buyers total lack of understanding about what they buy.

By the way, why in the world you need AWD and Traction Control and Stability Control in the snowless California, and that after you drove those huge Russian warlike unstable trucks in x feet of mud ?!?!

stever · January 2005

why in the world you need AWD and Traction Control and Stability Control in the snowless California

Heh, ever heard of Tahoe (or Truckee/Donner Pass, Mammoth, etc.)? Seems like a couple dozen cars had to be towed out of the huge snow dump in the Sierra just a couple of days ago.

Steve, Host

wwest · January 2005

Well, let's see, I've been driving a 78 911, off and on, since about 1984. When I first got it I felt it was a lot like my Cessna 210, a lot of attention was required, constantly, no kicking back and relaxing there.

Over the years I've gotten better about it's unique handling charactoristics, to the point where I often find the time and place to really stretch it out.

But let me tell you, after about two or three hours in it I'm rather glad I now have an 01 C4 with all the bells and whisles that I can drive on those long tiring trips. You know, the ones where the car is a lot more forgiving as you grow tired and less attentive.

We can only be "real" drivers for reasonably short periods. That's one of the main reasons

we change out drivers at the 24 hours of Daytona every 2 hours.

Real drivers know, and readily acknowledge their limits.

guyf · January 2005

So Mercedes will be offering a Diesel in the next M serie. May not be such a bad idea after all.....

rodut · January 2005

Right Guy, let's change the subject.

Sorry Lev ... everytime I hear about a VSC system driving my car I loose my temper.

For me buying a new car doesn't mean buying what I like the most, but buying what I hate less.

So the selection is driven by hate, not by love. The problem is that these "safety" systems will soon be installed on all cars, so I could buy the Pacifica just to secure the last big car without them. I know Volvo is a lot better.

Cheers

lev_berkovich · January 2005

To keep the facts straight - Thank you for correcting me. I've meant a stability control, the one you hate so much.

The stability control does work during the braking.

bigeddy · January 2005

Well, rodut, some of the Southern California ski areas have more snow right now than those in Canada. In the Sierras they were looking at 19 feet of snow in 10 days. LA has gotten far more rain than Portland, Oregon.

As for Stability Control, it has been proven to prevent crashes because it can react in milliseconds, and control brakes and torque in ways a driver never could.

In Volvo's Drive for Life course for XC90 owners, we turned off DSTC on some runs and you could definitely feel the loss of control.

anotherwagon · January 2005

"It would apply to men only, because women rarely find cars exciting, so VSC or not they wouldn't care."

Hello! Personally don't know about all the techno jargon and what does what but one of the "rare" females that find cars exciting.

Couldn't help it!

lev_berkovich · January 2005

Rodut, not all of us use their cars to increase the adrenaline level, some of us use them just for the daily commute or for the business and PLEASURE trips.

And for those, who do not have enough excitement in their lives, there is enough RWD performance sedans and even SUV (like a new Cadillac) without stability system in the same price range as XC90.

So, leave these safe, unexcited utility vehicles to us and stick to the RWD and have all the fun you want on slippery roads.

wwest · January 2005

I guess, since it has PSM, I shouldn't be shipping my 2001 AWD Porsche to Daytona for the 24 hour race after all.

guyf · January 2005

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/05xc90v8.htm

beenjammin · January 2005

I don't think this guy gave even 1 negative comment about the V8. Interesting......

jpouchet · January 2005

Sure diesel for you folks in Canada and 44 US States but in the #1 automarket in North America, that would be California, NO CHANCE! MB USA does not want to get the motor certified until the 2007 motor year once the fuel supply meets the 2006 EPA standards. Too bad MB USA is so CLUELESS as all of the So Cal refineries are already meeting the standards.

Enjoy your diesel. The rest of us get to suck larger quantities of petroleoum out of the ground and spit noxious fumes in the air burning gas.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

It's kind of expected. The only complain I know was about a percievably small 2.5T engine or 4 gear transmission and T6, but with the new V8 and 6 speed transmission there is nothing more to complain.

jrynn · January 2005

Is there a recommended engine break-in procedure for the XC90? I didn't see anything in the manual, unlike previous cars (turbo and non-turbo) that I've owned.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

Take it easy for the first 1000 miles (do not go over 4500 rpm)

lovethexc · January 2005

I know only we can make the final decision but it's very difficult so I thought I would ask you all for some advice. We have ordered a 2005 T6 with versatility and back up warning. Getting it for $40300. We love the car's look and feel and want it very much. I have been reading this site for some time now and am very nervous about the problems that I've read about. We aren't exactly loaded but have saved enough to make purchasing this vehicle possible but I am worried that it might be a money pit. I'm concerned about the issues others have had with dealerships. I guess I want someone to say "this is the best car buying decision you can make". LOL.... Would you buy your XC90 all over again?

lev_berkovich · January 2005

The XC90 is by far the best car we ever owned. I will buy it again in a heart bit. Pure joy to drive. The great combination of the versatility, comfort, safety, sophistication, style, etc., etc.

Do not even think twice. All of the original problems has been resolved, and if you follow this board closely, you will see, that there is basically no complains about the later years production cars.

spiritinthesky · January 2005

My two cents for what it's worth:

(1) Your forum name suggests you are emotionally attached to the XC90. That's fine, but you might want to set aside your "love" and try to look at the factors important to you as objectively as possible.

(2) Based upon my research and a brief opportunity to drive the XC90 V8 with my brother and sister in law two weeks ago, I can strongly recommend the V8 over the T6 for several reasons. The V8 is projected to get better gas mileage, has far better and smoother acceleration with no turbo lag and, if you intend to keep the vehicle for a long time, will likely last longer with less maintenance. I am a pilot with an aerospace engineering background and know just enough about engine mechanics to be dangerous, However, in my opinion, the high efficiency Yamaha V8 / 6 speed transmission in the XC90 is a gem compared to the old T6. If you are only using the XC90 as a glorified minivan or station wagon, then I would probably recommend the 2.5 over the V8 to save money, but for any serious long term duty, the V8 is the ideal engine/transmission for a 5,000 lb vehicle with a GVW of over 6,000 lb. Especially if you are ever considering the possibility of towing anything.

(3) Presumably you have researched the reliability and maintenance factors relative to the Volvo and other vehicles you are considering and are comfortable with them. However, one suggestion would be to question what the older, higher mileage XC90's are experiencing in terms of repairs and what is the cost of those repairs. My brother was surprised to find that in his area, Volvo's repair costs are at or above BMW and Mercedes for many "routine" items. This has him concerned, in that they put 20k+ miles on a vehicle annually. Based upon his analysis, the projected costs of routine serive and minor repairs for an XC90 from 50,000 to 150,000 miles (i.e. after warranty) is roughly 1.5 to 2 times the cost of a Lexus GX470 and 2.5 times the cost of an Acura MDX. He did his calculations based upon dealer prices for routine services (15k mile intervals) after 50,000 miles, and antipated repairs such as brakes, water pump, etc. Also, the cost of a turbo replacement on a 2.5 or T6 is very high - he was quoted over $3,500 - and the likelihood of needing a turbo replacement before 150k miles (7.5 year of driving) was estimated at 20% to 33%+ by the three service managers he questioned. Another plus for the V8.

Sorry if this isn't what you wanted to hear, but it's an honest opinion from someone has no vested interest in the matter. From the looks of it, my brother may be throwing all rationality aside and getting a Land Rover LR3. And who am I to throw stones after buying a Cayenne TT in December? But, notwithstanding this irrational purchase, I vividly remember going through careful analysis when the difference of a couple of thousand dollars was a very big deal to us. I sincerely wish you the best of luck with whatever you decide, T6 included.

lovethexc · January 2005

Lev - thanks for your input. What about the brake problems that I have read about - were they all early model issues?

Spirit - you have it spot on... emotionally attached! My brain and my heart have been fighting over this for some time now.

I'm afraid the V8 is out of our range... just more than we are comfortable paying. I have considered going with the 2.5 though. Don't intend to do any towing. Mostly (as much as I know this will pain some folks) a soccer mom car. Would it be worth considering due to the shifting issues to just nix the T6 for the 2.5? We do intend to keep this vehicle for the rest of it's "life" and tend to look at it more as an investment in safety than just a depreciating vehicle.

jtla · January 2005

lovethexc,

To us, it was also "love at first sight", a year ago in Legoland .... (No, no, not the one built with lego.)

I think you are getting a terrific deal on the T6. Although V8's MSRP is essentially the same as T6 with versatility package, you won't be able to get any deal like that for quite some time due to the demand. On the other hand, the 2.5T may be a good alternative for "soccer mom", and save another $2,000 or so. The 2.5T's 5-speed transmission is quieter and smoother, and it burns less gas. As to the power, it is definitely adequate for your daily purpose, although my wife claims it as "very powerful".

Have you test driven both 2.5T and T6? If not, give 2.5T a try and see how you feel. Wishing you all the best in your purchase.

volvomax · January 2005

My .02 cents.

1 cost, your not going to get a V8 for $40,000.

Most will be $53-55,000 w/ little or no discount.

The base on the car is $46,000. The V8 is a better car, but not if your on a budget.

2, I think your being a little harsh on repair estimates. A properly cared for Volvo should never need a turbo replaced. I would put the percentage @ less than 5%.

Volvo parts are more expensive because they are unique. An Acura or Lexus uses alot of Honda and Toyota parts that are cheaper because there are more of them made.

For @ $2000 you can get a 100,000 mile warranty for the XC90.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

1. I am not aware of any "brake problem" besides of one or two anecdotal postings here on Edmunds.

(I use a word "anecdotal" in its direct sense - based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers <anecdotal evidence> and do not question a validity of the specific problem for the specific individual).

2. Purchasing Volvo is an emotional act. There are less expensive vehicles with the similar qualities. But, that what makes life in general so good - that we are not robots who act strictly on reason. Enjoy.

tidester · January 2005

You can get an idea of what the maintenance costs will be using True Cost to Own ratings at Edmunds .

tidester, host

lev_berkovich · January 2005

I found TCO figures grossly overstated:

"Repairs

This is the estimated expense for repairs not covered by the vehicle manufacturer's warranties over the five years from the date of purchase, assuming an average of 15,000 miles are driven annually. This expense is based on the cost of a typical "zero deductible" extended warranty for the vehicle, minus the estimated amount of that cost that consists of the warranty provider's overhead and profit. "

The cost of 0 deductible extended warranty for 100000 miles is about $2500.

Also, I have found the cost of maintenance is overstated as well. I have religiously maintained my S80 at the dealership and ended up paying just slightly over $3000 for all scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, including a new set of tires, all the bulbs, wiper blades, etc. @87000 miles.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

I will agree with all other posters suggesting 2.5T. It is absolutely adequate. And my wife, just like the other lady refers to her 2.5T of been very powerful.

We did an extensive test drive, before we have ordered our XC90 through the OSD - one hour for each engine - city, freeway, mountain roads (up and down of Topanga Canyon, if you are familiar with the LA area), and found T6 of is not worthing any additional cost and extra gas. I did feel the difference in the HP and torque - my wife and my daughter did not.

lovethexc · January 2005

Thank you everyone. I've emailed our dealer to get a price quote on the 2.5T AWD and we are seriously considering that. We have only driven the T6 so far but I will have to go for a spin in the 2.5T. You all have been doing wonders for my peace of mind and would love to hear any other input.

anotherwagon · January 2005

Let me know how it goes. We too love the xc. We were considering the Freestyle - hubby drove the xc t5 last week and loved it! We would want to drive it til it dies too. Still shopping..

aveghte · January 2005

Where will you be driving the XC90?

My wife and I test-drove the 2.5T AWD and found the engine to be noisy when pressed.

We live in Florida so the FWD version might be adequate for our driving needs and the lower weight may allow the 2.5T engine to function more effectively.

lev_berkovich · January 2005

The "noisy" is a relative term. It sounds just fine if you use to drive smaller 4/6 cyl. vehicles before, but will sound unusual if you use to drive bigger 8 cyl. vehicles.

We are driving our XC90 in LA basin. However, since we make quite a few ski trips every year, we opted for AWD. I will recommend AWD anyway, if extra couple of grand does not matter. It is safer during the rain too.

Volvo XC90 SUV

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles