FamilyGuy

Any of you guys interested in it? Car and Driver has an artile on it here:
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....rticle_id=6848 (beware pop-ups).

Inline-5, turbocharged and intercooled, 300 horsepower, 295 torque available from 1950-5250, 6500 RPM redline.

Of course, the base price is in the higher 30s and it isn't exactly exciting to look at... but damn if I wouldn't take one :D

Hercules

It's 42 grand but sadly, the rates on the leases are so poor it's not worth looking at for me.. I stopped into the Volvo dealership and just got some numbers, and the price was ~700 a month with $2000 out of pocket which was just obscene.

I will stick with my RX-8, thanks very much.

FamilyGuy

Oh, it's way out of my price range... but then so is the RX-8

I just figure that those performance numbers are fairly nice. If they prove to be reliable, it might be worth some consideration as a used car. Let someone else pay a fortune for the lease and own the thing during the worst depreciation period, then pick it up at half the sticker price or less.

Schneegz

The price is way too much for me, and the reliability is an issue also. Volvos have a bad rep in reliability. Their engines last for ever, but they seem to have problems with everything else.

Think about it, though. Wouldn't it be a hoot to pull up next to some mullet-wearing punk in a Camaro and smoke his greasy butt with a Volvo?!

Red Devil

My family has always been big on Volvo's, and from a handling standpoint, you can't expect much. I like the idea of the R, but I imagine the car would be overweight.

I think it's a step in the right direction, kind of like the Crossfire, but still not quite where it could be.

That being said, most Volvo's were built to handle Ford/Chevy small block V8 conversions with almost no modifications. That's a sleeper.

FamilyGuy

You are a wise man. :D

That's what I was picturing, too.

rx-7~rx-8

Volvo C70 is real nice car, my mom has one, but its fwd.. man that sux ... but the power of volvos and handling and all that is very nice.
I actually would the buy the volvo s60 R over the audi s4 becuase it cost 55 grand 15 grand more over the volvo. Also the s60 R has 0-60 in 5.4, starting at 35.. you cant go wrong.
then again the rx-8 .. is actually the best car under 60 grand. if y ou really think about.
anyways... s60 R = bad azz volvo ... it also got some euro award.

Kawi

I had traded an S60 T5 for the RX-8. I had considered the S60R since it does seem impressive. But obviously the price is way up there which is the first and main hurdle.

What's appealing about the R is its comfort value and ride quality. My T5 was very comfortable to drive some distance and I could only imagine the R with its new electronic suspension system would be as much so. What isn't exciting is the feeling of heft. Even with almost 250 hp and a high pressure turbo, the weight of the car was very evident when accellerating. Again, that probably wouldn't change much with the R. In fact it could feel heavier with the extra weight from the Haldex all-wheel drive system.

The other downside is the overboosted steering. It sort of makes me laugh when I read some think the RX-8 is overboosted. They've never driven a Volvo. It's set to make turning easier for suburbanites, not for serious cornering. When I first got the car, and on new tires it almost felt like the car was on glass. It took a little while until the tires broke in to feel confident that it had proper road holding.

Reliability could be a problem. I had several minor, but annoying, electrical problems when I first owned the car. With all of the added electronic controls in the R, I'd be very concerned about possible problems popping up.

Unfortunetly I didn't drive the R so I can't give a true opinion of it, but based on my experience with the T5 I'm sure the R is a decent vehicle. It certainly has handsome styling and some cachet with an entry-level luxury crowd. But I'll still take my RX over it. :D

FamilyGuy

I'm pretty sure the S60R (and V70R) are AWD.

I would worry about the reliability too. If I shelled out over $35,000 for a car, it damn well better run like a top. If I wanted something that broke down a lot, I can get it for a lot cheaper than that. :D


It's a shame, really. There are a lot of really sweet luxury cars made in Europe and the US, but if you want one that doesn't break down often you're generally better off buying Japanese. While I wouldn't turn down a Lexus, an Infiniti, or an Acura if someone were to give one to me, they wouldn't be my first choices either.

Spining Ncnratr

Only would run me $29,650 before Tax Title and Reg.

But this is with Z plan pricing.:D

ZoominDan

I have a V70R, the station wagon version of the S60R. It's a good car, but not a great one. The V70R is more appealing IMO because it doesn't have direct competition. The S60R has to face off against cars like the M3 and S4, but there's no competition with the size and performance of the V70R at anywhere near the price point.

There are still teething problems with the tuning. Between the DTSC stability control, Haldex AWD, 4C suspension, and ECU there are a lot of electronic systems in the car that have a big impact on the driving experience. Many people feel that some or all of these could still use some tweaking; people have complained the car runs too rich or too lean under different circumstances, that the rear end hops or wiggles too much in certain circumstances, that the electronic shock tuning isn't always a good match to the spring rates, etc.

Also, stay away from the automatic version unless---as as happened to certain owners---your wife makes you buy it. Volvo admits that it has been dropped from 295 ft-lbs to 258 ft-lbs (still with 300 peak hp at a higher RPM) to protect the transmission, but there seems to be a lot more than that going on. Volvo claims a 0-60 time of 7.4s, and an owner with a GTech got 7.6 with a 15.8 quarter. That's ridiculously slow for a 3,700 lb car with 300 hp, even with an automatic. I've had mine on a dyno, and got a peak 200 hp with substantially reduced torque in 1st and 2nd gear, with the auto also enforcing shift points much lower than the engine redline (rumored to be more unadvertised protection for the torque converter).

Hypercritical owners aside, the car performs quite well. The turbo has minimal lag and serves up power at any RPM. The suspension does a great job of keeping such a big car feeling as light on its feet as possible. The steering and suspension are too numb, but somehow the car always does what I ask. For a big people-hauler, it doesn't get much better.

FamilyGuy

First post? Welcome to the forum.

Before I start, be warned that I'm relatively short on theory and even shorter on practice in this kind of thing. That said, I believe if the car is shifting lower than redline that'll really hurt your 0-60 performance and reduce the ratings on the dyno.

Still, it's got to be faster than 97% of the cars on the road and have more people and cargo-hauling capacity than anything else on the road that is faster.

ZoominDan

Thank you. I'm also a Miata owner and wandered over from miata.net to find out more about the RX-8 hp scandal. I'm curious about what it takes to convince a manufacturer to admit that a car is over-rated, in case I need to go that far with Volvo.

This could be part of the problem, although the R has such a flat torque curve that shifting early isn't as big a problem as in some cars. The engine is supposed to redline at 6,800 RPM, but the auto shifts about 5,700 in 1st, 6,400 in 2nd, and somewhere between 5,700 and 6,100 in 3rd (assuming the tach is accurate). According to the dyno, it also makes only 150 ft-lbs in 1st, 180 in 2nd, and 195 in 3rd. We specifically tested in different gears because of a rumor that the car had extra limits in 1st and 2nd. Weird stuff.

Anyway, I want to do my own GTech runs before calling foul, but if my car also turns up slow I might want to pursue this with Volvo. Production of the V70R is so limited (500-800 units for the US) that almost all the 2004 cars were pre-sold to people who bought mainly based on the specs, so like Mazda with the RX8, Volvo has an extra obligation to be honest.

FamilyGuy

I read elsewhere on the forum that dynos are most accurate when you're running close to a 1:1 ratio in the gear. I don't know if that's true or not, but it's something to keep in mind. I can't think of any other reason why you'd have less torque in lower gears.

You typically lose around 15% of your power through the drivetrain through friction and heat with a standard transmission and 19-20% with an automatic, right? So in 3rd, with 195 torque... if that's a 20% loss, then your peak torque would be 243.75 (at 19%, it's 240.75). If you're supposed to have 258, that's a 14-17 point gap.

It's not as bad as comparing 258 to 195, but I'm sure it's still irritating as hell. I'd feel cheated. Good luck dealing with Volvo over it. Keep us posted with what happens.

If it turns out that the Volvo R cars AND the RX-8 are both underpowered, Ford is going to have a lot of explaining to do. It's not like they have a good reputation for sporty cars as it is.

ZoominDan

Thanks for the advice. Incidently, if you want to see the dyno results they're on the web here.

The rumor about the gear ratios is that Volvo is afraid of the reliability of their automatic transmission, so they cut torque in 1st and 2nd to help protect it. It seems likely that all turbo versions of the V70 including the R make nearly the same amount of power in 1st and 2nd, and any difference in performance is due to weight, drivetrain, gearing, etc. The test numbers generated by the owner with the GTech are slower than the T5 and 2.5T, and a bit faster than the XC70 and 2.5T AWD.

The only "good news" is that this is all done via ECU tuning and can be changed, provided you're willing to risk fragging the transmission.

P00Man

"the ultimate driving machine, outdone, by a volvo?"

lol

volvos are great, the s60r is sweet, and the best thing about volvos, are the seats, quite possibly the most comfortable seats in the industry, and the new leather in the R's is beautiful
________
VAPORIZER WIKI

carnut

I drove a new S60R before my RX-8 came in. It was great, but I was gentle with it; it had about 10 miles on it and was one of two our dealer will get this year. I like the idea of all wheel drive, but I have to confess I like the attention drawn by the RX-8. Except to real enthusiasts, the S60 R looks aout like any other Volvo. This one was a dark, dark blue. If it had been red, I may have had to reconsider . . . .

FamilyGuy

I can respect that.

See, I was drawn to the RX8 because the rotary engine is an unusual thing. I like to see the march of progress in auto engines, and I think the RX8 is part of that.

Looks? I am not as concerned with looks as many people. I wouldn't buy something whose look I downright detested, but that's it. In fact, I would much rather have a sleeper car. When people see the RX8, the styling screams "fast". I'd much rather have a boring looking sedan I can occasionally shock people with while pulling away from an intersection or whizzing down an on-ramp.

The S60R fits that bill nicely. I can't afford a skateboard right now, though so it's a moot point.

Donny Boy

Yes, I do appreciate this car. Especially with the 6 speed manual tranny. Hope it is built to traditional Volvo standards.