View Full Version : 2016 XC90 Fuel Economy numbers are on the Volvo site today



Pages : 1 [2]

citivas
04-11-2015, 06:21 PM
The point is better substantially better gas mileage. So you have to do the math of the cost of the fuel versus what in some cases is a major improvement in MPG. That's great that premium gas is only $0.20 more expensive where you live. I just got back from shopping for gas here and it was a minimum of $0.40 everywhere around where I live in Central NJ (I don't have a diesel but was curious so I was checking rates). Diesel was $0.05 more than the premium gas here right now. Using the current BMW X5 as an example, it gets 21 combined average with premium gas and 27 with diesel. That's over a 30% fuel efficiency improvement. Whereas the cost of the diesel itself is less than a 10% uncharge over premium gas.

citivas
04-11-2015, 06:25 PM
I got the price for the station closest to me, so it is true. I didn't look for other stations but that does not make the price of it where I live false.

Do you live in Manhattan? It seems to be a bubble for poor diesel rates. Cross off the island in either direction and you're immediately paying $0.35-0.55 less per gallon. In any event, it doesn't represent the typical market.

I work in Manhattan, FWIW, but live in NJ.

adp
04-11-2015, 06:42 PM
I got the price for the station closest to me, so it is true. I didn't look for other stations but that does not make the price of it where I live false.

yes, agreed - that's fair

didn't mean to sound like a dik

In the U.S., it's not uncommon to have to drive a little to get access to diesel, at ALL.

I'm not someone who drives 5 miles to save $.20/gallon. My wife is happy to use her time that way, and will manage it into her errands so that it fits in efficiently. I get gas at the station that is most convenient for me.

BrianV
04-12-2015, 11:19 AM
Be mindful that when comparing diesel vs unleaded prices, the ranges swing wildly during different seasons. In Austin, TX it usually ends up being like this:

- In late Fall through early Spring - Diesel costs ~$1 / gallon more than regular unleaded and $0.50-$0.60 more than premium
- In Spring through late Summer - Diesel costs about $0.40-$0.50 / gallon more than regular and generally is within about $0.10-$0.20 premium (sometimes every so slightly cheaper).

Diesel competes strongly with Eastern US heating oil and as such prices vary significantly here.

Here's my local station:
http://www.austingasprices.com/Shell_Gas_Stations/Austin_-_NW/28185/index.aspx

Here's a good historical pricing of Diesel in Texas:
http://www.aggregatehaulers.com/diesalprices.aspx
Pay note to pricing around New Years, diesel was well over $3/gallon. At New Year's, gas price average for regular unleaded was less than $2/gallon.
http://www.austingasprices.com/Retail_Price_Chart.aspx (Change to 6 month view)

I owned diesel cars for several years from 2009-2013 (Jetta TDI and X5 35d), diesel prices were consistently high during winters and would very rarely dip below premium. In California were all fuel is way too expensive, I've regularly seen diesel less than regular however still way more than any fuel in Texas.

Another obersvation about diesel was that when retail gas prices would fall suddenly (based on crude-oil news, wars, over-supply, etc.), it would take much, much longer for diesel to drop. During these times when people were celebrating cheap fuel prices, diesel drivers weren't seeing those joyous times for seemingly months later. Alternatively, when crude-oil prices would spike suddenly, it seemed diesel prices would raise in parity with unleaded making the equalizing trend not real for diesel (screwed on both sides of spikes and dips).

Having had diesel cars for so long, I've found that in Texas, the fuel economy better be significantly better to overcome the significant cost differences (on a yearly average basis). I just did and plan to continue doing regular 2,000+ mile trips to Colorado every Christmas, right when diesel is the highest. There are also shortcomings on diesel including NVH, diesel fueling stations aren't as common, fueling pumps are way dirtier, there are less pumps at stations and sometimes you have to wait to get that one pump which is in the middle of unleaded pumps. Then there's possibly ad-blue additives, HPFP is very exotic and on some cars when it breaks, it is catastrophic. Starting when cold can be a problem in very cold places, etc. While the torque is good and cool, most modern forced induction petrol engines behave similarly and still have the horsepower and legs to be actually fast.

PhatboyC
05-04-2015, 08:42 AM
My local dealer website has a handy comparison tool that the Volvo Canada website doesn't seem to have. Might be a mistake but to my surprise they say the recommended fuel is Regular?

http://www.carlingmotorsvolvo.com/2016/XC90Specifications.aspx?lng=2
http://i58.tinypic.com/149bjlw.jpg

Adrian-C30R
05-04-2015, 02:38 PM
My local dealer website has a handy comparison tool that the Volvo Canada website doesn't seem to have. Might be a mistake but to my surprise they say the recommended fuel is Regular?

http://www.carlingmotorsvolvo.com/2016/XC90Specifications.aspx?lng=2
http://i58.tinypic.com/149bjlw.jpg

That has to be incorrect, the Drive-E T6 is recommended with Premium fuel (min 91 octane rating) on all other models. I've got no idea why you would put anything but premium when you've got a forced induction engine making +200HP anyways......

9Volvos
05-04-2015, 03:41 PM
Looks like he was wrong, and may not be the most reliable source.

whizkid
05-04-2015, 04:20 PM
Remember that this is a GDI engine. It uses that to provide a cooler charge and this allows many GDI Turbo engines to run on Regular 87 Octane gas with no issues and still have higher compression ratios. That may or may not be the deal with the new SC/TC 2.0L from Volvo. It may require Premium IDK.

FWIW: My 2.0L Turbo Optima is the same way, factory says it runs fine on Regular 87 octane, yet factory folks will say it generates ~10HP more when run on 93 octane (ECU adjusts the timing). Stock is 274HP on Regular gas. Very fun!

Gc52
05-04-2015, 06:12 PM
The T6 Drive E is definitely recommended to run on premium. Even supposed to look for "detergent" gas stickers. Yes it will run on regular and not damage it but to optimize performance, including fuel economy, premium is recommended. Love that someone took the time to make that chart but didn't bother to take the time to research what they put into it. Its in the manual which dealers had better have handy by now.


Remember that this is a GDI engine. It uses that to provide a cooler charge and this allows many GDI Turbo engines to run on Regular 87 Octane gas with no issues and still have higher compression ratios. That may or may not be the deal with the new SC/TC 2.0L from Volvo. It may require Premium IDK.

FWIW: My 2.0L Turbo Optima is the same way, factory says it runs fine on Regular 87 octane, yet factory folks will say it generates ~10HP more when run on 93 octane (ECU adjusts the timing). Stock is 274HP on Regular gas. Very fun!

JOHN T SHEA
05-04-2015, 06:53 PM
Page 347 of the North American handbook warns:-
"Vehicles equipped with the high performance 4-cylinder engines (B4204T9 and B4204T10) require premium fuel2."
But it gives no further information!

Gc52
05-04-2015, 07:41 PM
Page 347 of the North American handbook warns:-
"Vehicles equipped with the high performance 4-cylinder engines (B4204T9 and B4204T10) require premium fuel2."
But it gives no further information!

Right, I just looked at my manual again (the volvo manual app)

It is kind of misleading actually. It says "volvo recommends premium fuel for best performance, but using 87 octane or above will not affect engine reliability"

then has a big minimum 87 graphic, then that confusing note about B4204T9 etc.

I interpret it to mean you can use anything 87+, but to get optimum performance, including fuel economy, use premium. I'm not going to test it with anything but premium. Even if fuel economy doesn't take a huge dive, I really don't see the point of saving whats going to amount to a few dollars per tank. Either way, the recommended octane is not 87.

brandeeno
10-02-2015, 12:59 PM
So I am still confused by statement about the two engine models requiring premium.

Link: http://support.volvocars.com/en-ca/cars/Pages/owners-manual.aspx?mc=v526&my=2016&sw=15w05&article=15a5f41f66a41b95c0a80151530c6676

How do I know which engines these are? I plan on getting the 2016 XC90 T6 AWD (the base/cheapest)... does that car have these two engine models mentioned on the site which require premium? Or will I be fine with regular?

iron_man
10-02-2015, 01:07 PM
It is confusing but you can use 87 octane fuel (regular gas) and it will not harm the system. But me personally will use the high octane fuel to get the best performance.

GrecianVolvo
10-02-2015, 02:56 PM
So I am still confused by statement about the two engine models requiring premium.

Link: http://support.volvocars.com/en-ca/cars/Pages/owners-manual.aspx?mc=v526&my=2016&sw=15w05&article=15a5f41f66a41b95c0a80151530c6676

How do I know which engines these are? I plan on getting the 2016 XC90 T6 AWD (the base/cheapest)... does that car have these two engine models mentioned on the site which require premium? Or will I be fine with regular?

You should use Premium fuel in the XC90.

brandeeno
10-02-2015, 03:05 PM
But the site says regular "will not affect engine reliability" which is what I really care about. Base on what I have read in the past on modern day cars... the performance difference would only be noticed in fast acceleration and other high performance scenarios. Getting a volvo is already a stretch (I am Honda type of guy) and having to use premium, may be a deal breaker for me.

Would like to learn why you feel otherwise.

GrecianVolvo
10-02-2015, 05:08 PM
But the site says regular "will not affect engine reliability" which is what I really care about.

Nobody has written that using 87 octane will affect your engine's reliability.


Base on what I have read in the past on modern day cars... the performance difference would only be noticed in fast acceleration and other high performance scenarios. Getting a volvo is already a stretch (I am Honda type of guy) and having to use premium, may be a deal breaker for me.

If you want to get the optimum performance and fuel economy out of this car, you should use Premium. What you think you may be saving by using regular gas on this car or getting another car that has no such requirement but worse fuel mileage rating, it will be a wash.

sam818
10-02-2015, 05:21 PM
Nobody has written that using 87 octane will affect your engine's reliability.



If you want to get the optimum performance and fuel economy out of this car, you should use Premium. What you think you may be saving by using regular gas on this car or getting another car that has no such requirement but worse fuel mileage rating, it will be a wash.

Can we please be specific?
Premium and Regular are meaningless "marketing" terminology.
Which minimum octane ratings are specified?

citivas
10-02-2015, 05:29 PM
Nobody has written that using 87 octane will affect your engine's reliability.



If you want to get the optimum performance and fuel economy out of this car, you should use Premium. What you think you may be saving by using regular gas on this car or getting another car that has no such requirement but worse fuel mileage rating, it will be a wash.

Why do you say the Honda with regular fuel will have a worse mileage rating? The nearest comparable Honda (poster said he was a Honda guy), the 2016 Pilot, has a 27/19/23 rating on most models and 26/20/22 on the most deluxe AWD model that would be the nearest equivalent to the Volvo (if the Volvo had most of the available packages included). That compares to 25/20/22 for the Volvo. They seem effectively dead even on mileage. So the Honda isn't worse but does use regular fuel to achieve those averages. I'm not suggesting they are comparable in every way. But a mileage advantage is not one of them.

brandeeno
10-05-2015, 08:03 AM
Is there any evidence that different octane will effect MPG? Sounds like somebody needs to tell the Mythbusters to work on this one :-)

XC60 RD
10-06-2015, 01:26 PM
Can we please be specific?
Premium and Regular are meaningless "marketing" terminology.
Which minimum octane ratings are specified?

91 octane

zyrex
10-07-2015, 05:37 AM
Here in Europe we don't use "regular" or "premium" designation, but use the actual octane rating.
The XC90 is rated for RON95 for normal use, and RON98 for high performance driving and the best fuel economy.
(source is the manual)

So, 95 RON would be ~91 octane for you guys then, aka Regular.

waynerm002
10-07-2015, 06:15 AM
87 octane is considered regular here in the US. Some gas stations have 87/89/91, some have 87/91/93 and I've seen Sunoco with 87/89/91 and 93. Back in the day there were Sonoco stations some that carried 95 and a couple that had 100! I tried a couple gallons of that mixed in with some 93 and that A4 with the 1.8T was a different car with that mix! Couldn't do it a lot as it was in Baltimore which was 50 miles away from where I lived but after a weekend hang out with a girl I was seeing, I worked on getting the tank empty when I was there so I could get some.

PhatboyC
10-07-2015, 07:00 AM
Here in Europe we don't use "regular" or "premium" designation, but use the actual octane rating.
The XC90 is rated for RON95 for normal use, and RON98 for high performance driving and the best fuel economy.
(source is the manual)

So, 95 RON would be ~91 octane for you guys then, aka Regular.

That is interesting the way your euro manual states it. Different from NA for sure. The question remains, is the fuel economy from Ron98/91 Octane warrants the higher cost if one doesn't care of the lost in performance? Someone should test it. :)

zyrex
10-07-2015, 07:11 AM
My V70 manual has the exact same statement, and I've always used RON 95. Works quite alright for me. But maybe I should try and use 98 for a bit, and see how the fuel economy part goes. I've got several years of data with RON95 on Fuelly.

PhatboyC
10-07-2015, 07:23 AM
Sure but your findings would only be true for that engine. Which is different than the 2016 XC90's. Obviously different engines performed differs in performance but are also programmed differently depending on application and target goal.

citivas
10-07-2015, 07:48 AM
87 octane is considered regular here in the US. Some gas stations have 87/89/91, some have 87/91/93 and I've seen Sunoco with 87/89/91 and 93. Back in the day there were Sonoco stations some that carried 95 and a couple that had 100! I tried a couple gallons of that mixed in with some 93 and that A4 with the 1.8T was a different car with that mix! Couldn't do it a lot as it was in Baltimore which was 50 miles away from where I lived but after a weekend hang out with a girl I was seeing, I worked on getting the tank empty when I was there so I could get some.

Where I live it's always 87/89/93. I never see 91. So I have to get 93.

zyrex
10-07-2015, 08:19 AM
Sure but your findings would only be true for that engine. Which is different than the 2016 XC90's. Obviously different engines performed differs in performance but are also programmed differently depending on application and target goal.

Naturally, but I would assume it would correlate. At least the wording is the same.

But yes, would be interesting if someone did check it out on their XC90.

Paradox
10-07-2015, 05:14 PM
Where I live it's always 87/89/93. I never see 91. So I have to get 93.

I mentioned this once but on the NJ Turnpike the Sunoco's have 87, 89 and 91. Then they also have 93 which is only 2 cents more than the 91 octane. So if you fill up on the turnpike be specific as which one you want when telling the gas guy. At least this is how it was during the spring and summer while on the turnpike taking road trips.

waynerm002
10-08-2015, 07:58 AM
It sucks that they dropped the higher options an make 93 an extra cost. A few years back it wasn't that way, and yes, when you specify premium, you have to make sure you give them the octane number or you get 91. Made that mistake the other day. I now use the best gas I possible can get, I look for Shell or other top tier companies for gas and will drive a bit more to get to one.

jowillie
10-08-2015, 08:39 AM
It sucks that they dropped the higher options an make 93 an extra cost. A few years back it wasn't that way, and yes, when you specify premium, you have to make sure you give them the octane number or you get 91. Made that mistake the other day. I now use the best gas I possible can get, I look for Shell or other top tier companies for gas and will drive a bit more to get to one.

Me too. Even if "Top Tier" gas is 10 cents more per gallon, that's only $1.50 more for 15 gallons.

Automojo
10-12-2015, 03:49 PM
In case this hasn't been noted yet, I just noticed new MPG figures on the EPA site for new 2016 XC90 models:

2.0 turbo AWD = 22 city / 25 highway / 23 combined
2.0 turbo FWD = 22 city / 26 highway / 24 combined

I assume these are the regular Drive E turbo engines?

But those ratings are on premium, when I thought that engine was on regular.

When are these models coming out?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Brutus99
10-12-2015, 04:03 PM
When will they release actual numbers for the T8??

Paradox
10-12-2015, 04:10 PM
In case this hasn't been noted yet, I just noticed new MPG figures on the EPA site for new 2016 XC90 models:

2.0 turbo AWD = 22 city / 25 highway / 23 combined
2.0 turbo FWD = 22 city / 26 highway / 24 combined

I assume these are the regular Drive E turbo engines?

But those ratings are on premium, when I thought that engine was on regular.

When are these models coming out?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The AWD model has been out since the First Editions showed up here in the US in May of this year. I am not as current as I was pre delivery with info but I don't know if the FWD version of the new XC90 can even be ordered yet. Still, only 1mpg better on the highway. Unless you live in an area that simply doesn't get snow and AWD is unwarranted I'd still go for the AWD just to have it. BUt that's coming from someone who does get snow.

Yes, the new XC90 only comes with Drive-E engines. And the T6 engine in the XC90 (turbo and supercharger) requires 91 octane or Premium, not regular.

Automojo
10-12-2015, 04:34 PM
Paradox - am aware of the current T6. These models are different from that, and are not out yet. Would assume they would have the T5 designation, because they lack the supercharger (at least, according to the EPA site).

I would be interested in the FWD version. I ordered a T6 in May and it's due any day now, but don't need AWD or all that power necessarily. Am in California, and FWD provides plenty of traction for our weather (since I don't ski).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Paradox
10-12-2015, 05:21 PM
Paradox - am aware of the current T6. These models are different from that, and are not out yet. Would assume they would have the T5 designation, because they lack the supercharger (at least, according to the EPA site).

I would be interested in the FWD version. I ordered a T6 in May and it's due any day now, but don't need AWD or all that power necessarily. Am in California, and FWD provides plenty of traction for our weather (since I don't ski).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Oops, yep, 22 city is certainly different from the current 20 city with the AWD, wasn't even paying attention to that. Good to see the EPA has tested a T5 XC90, guess we'll be hearing news about ordering a T5 soon then?

California was just the place I was thinking of for one who doesn't need AWD so I don't blame you. Though I must admit I like the feel of the T6 engine in this vehicle. I just rented a BMW X3 while on vacation and while a different vehicle it had a turbo only 4 cylinder and man did I miss my XC90 driving that thing...