Last post on Jul 19, 2010 at 5:36 AM
You are in the Volvo V70
What is this discussion about?
Volvo XC70, Volvo V70, Future Vehicle, Wagon
#65 of 98 Re: Volvo 08 XC70 update [nibs]
Sep 23, 2008 (9:10 am)
If I understand you correctly, each and every time you start the car, the PS is inactive unless you start it, shut it off and then restart it?
And the dealer has not been able to correct this?
That would be a completely unacceptable condition to me, and I think I am reasonable and have no axe to grind about Volvo. Does the 2008 XC70 have electric PS?
Suppose you switch the key to the run position, pause momentarily (try different delay times) and then switch to the start position. Is the PS active? That is I am suggesting testing whether a brief time delay would make a difference.
The reason I suggest this is that with my 04 V70, if I use the key to unlock the driver door, and then quickly open the door, then the alarm begins sounding. But if I pause before opening the door then the alarm isn't triggered. So it may be that there are some timing delays in inactivating, or in the case of the PS, activating some systems. If this were the case it would not be ideal, but it would be much better than having to use the starter twice.
#66 of 98 Re: Volvo 08 XC70 update [jim314]
Sep 23, 2008 (3:23 pm)
The 08 model does not have the same ignition type as the outgoing model. It has a key fob and a push button start like a beemer. Yes you understood me correctly. I sometimes have to start it three time before the steering is corrected. The local dealership said that they have had one other key in for the same problem. Apparently that car's owner drove more than a 100 miles with the stiff steering so he could show them the problem.
#67 of 98 Re: Volvo 08 XC70 update [nibs]
Sep 23, 2008 (4:50 pm)
Push button start - now there's an "advance" nobody asked for. Let me guess, it makes the new Volvo driver feel like Stefan Johansson for a moment.
#68 of 98 Re: Volvo 08 XC70 update [fedlawman]
Sep 24, 2008 (12:19 pm)
I'd like to push that button you know where.... still waiting to hear back from Volvo. If the price of gas continues to climb I'll trade it for a Smart Car. A friend of mine had one for three years and put 150k kms on it. The motor burnt out at that point. For 20k that's a pretty good return. All he did with it was change the oil and put fuel in it.
It is that or put solar panels on the XC70. I might be on to something here.
#69 of 98 Re: Volvo 08 XC70 update [nibs]
Oct 18, 2008 (2:26 pm)
UPDATE: Steering repaired and they were looked at the creaking coming from the rear hatch. Dealer kept the vehicle for a week and I was given a rental. Volvo Canada had requested that I give them the opportunity to repair and reassess the XC70. For all of it I am not confident with the vehicle and as someone who travels a fair amount need reliability. As the Volvo Canada representative said "this may be a Monday vehicle". If so I will ask that they take it back.
On another note, while at the dealership today another gentleman was picking up his new XC70 that had 20 KMs on the odometer. He hadn't left the parking lot when he returned complaining about noise.
Are these vehicles inspected at all before being sold to the comstomer?
#70 of 98 XC70: Old or New Version?
Oct 19, 2008 (5:41 pm)
I've posted on other Edmunds Forums about the conundrum we have with my wife's 01 XC. When everything is right it is a stylish, fantastic all weather (we run up to Montreal regularly in it) highway tourer with very comfortable seating, lots of room, etc. But there were lots of problems with it and a not very attentive local dealer. Now at 95,000 somewhat eventful miles, we have started looking at the new '08s. Then we yawn. More money, more introductory first year problems, no big advances in fuel mileage, less luggage area (they expanded the second seat area), etc.
Moreover, neither the car nor the dealerships are a luxuy experience. If you want that, you should buy an Audi Avant, BMW 5 Series or an E Series Wagon. However, you will wind up spending upwards of 20K more. But for what we want an AWD wagon for, the XC70 is ideal. However, after a lot of research, I think that the best deal by far is a gently used '06/'07 old style XC70.
I'd welcome any comments especially if you think I am off base in my assessment.
#71 of 98 Re: XC70: Old or New Version? [blckislandguy]
Oct 19, 2008 (6:24 pm)
Advantages of the new XC70:
(1) engine: new naturally aspirated 3.2L inline-6; 235 hp and 236 lb-ft torque with no turbo hassles. My wife's 2007 XC90 3.2 FWD gets 24 - 26 mpg hwy. Driven carefully an XC70 3.2 might get 27 mpgUS hwy (32 mpgUK or 8.7 L/100km).
(2) 6-spd auto stick tranny made by Aisin in Japan
(3) turning radius much shorter than the old version -- 37.7 ft compared to: 39 ft? 40 ft?
#72 of 98 Re: XC70: Old or New Version? [jim314]
Oct 20, 2008 (1:17 pm)
not sure what "turbo hassles" are, but someone posted their thoughts in another thread at how the new one feels more sluggish than their 1 year older 2.5T. My response was that, with 400 more lbs and the same torque (yet peaking at a higher RPM), I'm not surprised. And the EPA rates it 1mpg worse. So, personally, I don't see the advantage.
And as far as what YOU may get in mileage, that does not mean everyone would. We can't get anywhere near the mileage in our XC90 that other folks report. Even with the cruise set at 45mph on flat ground, we JUST approach what others in other parts of the country claim they get at a steady 70mph. One person speculates this is due to the additives used in NJ gas. I would also add that your climate, elevation, asphalt material, etc, etc, change results, too.
Anyway, my point is, yes, most likely a 4k lb XC70 is going to outmileage a 4700lb XC90 with the same drivetrain. However, since the EPA found that the 3.2 doesn't do quite as well as the 2.5T, I'd say that would hold true for owners, too. ALTHOUGH, if Volvo hadn't added 400lbs to the new model... who knows?
#73 of 98 Re: XC70: Old or New Version? [qbrozen]
Oct 20, 2008 (2:04 pm)
Totally agree with you qbrozen. Although I like the looks of the new XC, I certainly feel that Volvo did little to make it a better car than the older model. I think a six speed inline five turbo would have been fine for this car. Better yet, why not a twin turbo? While keeping comfort in mind, Volvo could certainly have made this vehicle more sporting than it is and certainly more of a driver's car.
I doubt anyone will get 27 mpg from this car unless it is being towed.
#74 of 98 Re: XC70: Old or New Version? [qbrozen]
Oct 20, 2008 (2:51 pm)
The turbocharger is a mechanical device which can fail, or the controls can fail. Don't get me wrong, I think a small engine with a turbocharger can be a useful route to relatively high efficiency under light accelerator pressure, and relatively high output under heavy accelerator pessure. So the 5-cyl light pressure turbo is EPA rated as slightly more efficient than the 3.2L naturally aspirated I-6.
But a inline 5-cyl engine is not as well balanced as an inline 6-cyl and Volvo does not use balance shafts in its I5-cyl engine as it did in its I4-cyl engines. The result is more vibration at idle with the 5-cyl compared to the silky smooth 3.2L inline 6-cyl. The inline 6-cyl is the gold standard for a relatively efficient smooth running engine. The I-6 configuration is common in Mercedes and BMW performance cars. Of course these are RWD. Volvo designed their I-6 (the short inline six or si6) to be short enought to fit transversely for FWD.