SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner

Very few XC60s in our area, why?

7K views 85 replies 26 participants last post by  butterfly 
#1 ·
I am new to this forum, however for the last several months were reading your helpful post/replies on various subjects.

We are planning to replace my wife’s 20-year old RX300 Admiral Edition and among all other SUVs selected XC60 AWD. We were thinking even to go with OSD or place the order on what we want in US.

However, I am really puzzled why there so few of them on the road. We live in the Bay Area CA, where there is no lack of luxury or expensive cars on the road but during the entire week of one hour commute twice a day I barely see one XC60 on the road. There are probably hundreds of RXs, Q5s, X3s, GLEs and CLCs, even Land Rovers, but no Volvos.

I think XC 60 is the most classy and beautiful looking cars in its class, so why it is so few of them in our expensive area?

I would appreciate if you can share your opinion. What is your take on it? Is it car reliability issue for the price, or lack of dealerships or what?
 
#2 ·
In my bit of Ontario I see plenty of XC90s of various ages but very few XC60s. Like your area Audi, MB and BMW SUVs and CUVs are like cockroaches.
Don’t know why, the local dealer is long established but certainly did nearly disappear when Ford owned Volvo. Now the dealer has a new showroom and workshop.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
#3 ·
We’re from the SF Bay Area as well, and you can definitely see Volvos and XC60 around, although not as many as XC90 or not nearly as many as other European brands. I have noticed they are more rare in the east bay compared to the peninsula... Are you also on the east bay by any chance?

Geoff
 
#5 ·
This is still the second year for the new model. More will show up in third and fourth year.
I see some XC60's late this year in my area, while XC90 is very easy to find now, several times a day when I wait at traffic light.
 
#7 · (Edited)
I'm in Berkeley and don't do a lot of driving, but I do see XC60's (almost every time I hit the highways.) I have an XC40 and have only seen two of those in the last year. I visit Orange County frequently and noted that I never see XC40's there, but then realized I don't see Volvos of any kind down there. All completely anecdotal, of course.
 
#8 ·
BigBang, thank you. Really interesting statistics that could explain the lack of XC60s, but still not clear why? Each of its competition has some really visible concerns: X3 does not have a spare tire (with special order you could get it sacrificing 3 " in the trunk), Q5 is bumpy, has really firm ride and is small for me (6'4"), GLC does not have a spare tire and no provision for the towing hitch.
 
#10 · (Edited)
FYI: In the EU market in most countries spare tire is not standard equipment but is available at extra cost
I know about the US market is standard ( Volvo and Audi )

Volvo has the smallest cargo compartment in the class: 505 liters, others have 550 liters

With a spare wheel, that space is even smaller

 
#9 ·
I wonder if the Volvo still has a counter-culturalish vibe to it. I've mentioned my purchase of a Volvo to people and they all had this conception of the boxy, outside the mainstream car of olde, and are pretty surprised when I show them pix. Actually, that probably also explains why I see so many Volvos in Berkeley.
 
#12 ·
I'm in Detroit where it's almost a crime to be seen in non-American cars.

I see new and old XC60s all the time.

New and old XC90s all the time.

Several XC40s on a regular basis.

It's just a perspective thing.
 
#15 ·
I can understand why people aren’t buying the XC60. Right now, I’m shopping comparison between the X3 and a XC60 and believe it or not the BMW is the better bargain for me. These are some of my must have features....

Thigh support seats... BMW is standard... Volvo must purchase Inscription model
Adaptive suspension... BMW $1000... Volvo $1850
Trailer Hitch... BMW $550... Volvo $1650 (is this gold plated?)
6 sec O-60 acceleration... BMW is standard... Volvo must purchase the T6 model

Plus, I’ve been reading the BMW Xpost forums and apparently BMW dealers are willing to negotiate a little more than Volvo dealers. In the end, the BMW X3 is cheaper (and more fun to drive) for me. Your mileage may vary of course.
 
#18 · (Edited)
Osetleo, I am in the SF Bay Area as well. I do see SPA XC60s daily. I drive 40 miles, on the peninsula, per day, minimal for my commute ending in Santa Clara, I most often see T8s zipping by me in the High Occupancy/Carpool lane. As mentioned by others, I see a lot more SPA XC90s than XC60s. But one of the reasons I chose the XC60 was that I didn't see so many compared to the ubiquitous X3/X5s and Q3/Q5s in this area...both are very nice cars but so many here.
 
#23 ·
Here in Central NY, my wife bought her white XC60 and there really weren't any others in the area. After she bought hers, three other white ones popped up within a few miles of us within a couple months, and we're seeing more and more. They're gaining a lot of traction around us.
 
#24 ·
As for market share, Volvo is growing, but it's starting at a smaller percentage. If you look at a Volvo from a few years ago the brand has really stepped into a different class. Some older Volvo customers can't or won't make the jump in pricing for the newer more luxury cars, and much of the competitive customers aren't aware of the change. The Youtube reviews are good and driving business. I still get friends surprised "how nice Volvo is" when I take them out in one of the demo cars I get.

Air suspension does not affect spare tire, the T8 does. Compared to most plug in hybrids the Volvo does a pretty good job not giving up cargo space other than the center console and spare tire area.

The Volvo trailer hitch is the only one that folds up when not in use. So it's not gold plated, but it is certainly a more advanced system.

X3 compare... your points are valid.. but XC60 has standard pano roof, lumbar support, mobile app, android auto (not even available on X3) all standard. Generally speaking a comparable spec'd XC60 is less than the BMW. You may not need those features, but they are there. Likely others as well. It's impossible to have a blanket statement on which is a better deal for all customers.
 
#31 · (Edited)
I almost purchased an X3. Couldn't live with the seats though. Bottom seat bolsters dig into my thighs. The absence of Android auto and some cheap features in the interior were other downsides.

It was no cheaper when equipped similarly to the T6, let alone the T5.

If you can live with those issues, it's a better vehicle overall, imo.

The XC60 seats are way more comfy and the interior and visibility are vastly superior.
 
#32 ·
We see both SPA and the older generation XC60s from time to time in the west suburb of Chicago. I have stopped pointing to the other car and telling my wife "look, another XC60" whenever I see one on the road. Of course, there are even more XC90s around here. However, when I go to northwest Indiana for work, there are rarely any new Volvo cars. I have seen XC60 parked on the side of road only once, and it's quite possible to be from out of town just like mine.
 
#33 ·
There will always be pros and cons, there is no perfect car

BMW is more oriented towards the sporty way of driving and is unrivaled in class

Volvo has a terrible gearbox, the worst in the class
How much is the gearbox of Volvo is bad, shown by the fact that the BMW X3, Mercedes GLC and Audi Q5 all have better acceleration 0-100 km / h and the final speed is better for 16-20km / h which is an amazing difference for a car with similar weight and almost of the same power. All models have engines 245HP up to 252HP
How bad is the gearbox indicates the fact that the XC60 T6 with 310 HP has a maximum speed of 230 km / h, competitors in the class with 58-65HP less have a higher top speed
 
#34 ·
I don't know why the top speed even matters. I test drove the X3 five times and I owned a BMW for almost ten years. I had zero complaints related to the transmission. Smooth as silk.

However, I've also got no issues with the Xc60's transmision. Shifts smooth and quick and always in the right gear.

The T6 is probably 2 seconds quicker than the X3 in 0-60 times, which are way more relevant than a top speed I'll never approach.

With regard to handling: I test drove everything in the class multiple times. The X3 and RDX seemed the most sporty to me followed by the Q5 and the XC60. However, is wasn't all in BMW's favor. BMW's electronic steering still feels novacaine numb to me - easily the worst in the class.

Honestly, the only place I see the X3 as far ahead of the XC60 was ride quality. X3 is quite smooth in comparison.
 
#43 ·
I don't know why the top speed even matters. I test drove the X3 five times and I owned a BMW for almost ten years. I had zero complaints related to the transmission. Smooth as silk.

However, I've also got no issues with the Xc60's transmision. Shifts smooth and quick and always in the right gear.

The T6 is probably 2 seconds quicker than the X3 in 0-60 times, which are way more relevant than a top speed I'll never approach.

With regard to handling: I test drove everything in the class multiple times. The X3 and RDX seemed the most sporty to me followed by the Q5 and the XC60. However, is wasn't all in BMW's favor. BMW's electronic steering still feels novacaine numb to me - easily the worst in the class.

Honestly, the only place I see the X3 as far ahead of the XC60 was ride quality. X3 is quite smooth in comparison.
You have to take into account which forum user said this.

BigBang has a hard on for crapping all over Volvo.
 
#35 · (Edited)
The final speed is not essential but is an indicator of the possibility of engine and gearbox
The 20km / h difference is huge in a car of the same weight and class

The T6 is probably 2 seconds quicker ?????????? :partywave: This is a good joke.

Even the T8 with 400HP has better acceleration in just 1.1s Speed 0-60 MPH 5.1 Seconds
Maybe you'll understand something from this X3 M40i with 382HP ACCELERATION 0–60 mph 4.4 Seconds

X3 xDrive30i 250HP 0-60 MPH 6.0 sec
Volvo XC60 Momentum T6 310 HP 0-60 MPH 5.6 sec ( with 250HP 0-60 MPH 6.6 sec)

The T6 Momentum is $ 3,500 more expensive than the X3 3.0i

For me personally, the transmission in the Volvo is awfully slow, especially when it switches to manual mode, when you want to change gears quickly, this is slow compared to the competition

After all, read the opinions of the experts who tested the T5 / T6, at least in Europe everyone has a complaint about gear changes and especially applies to acceleration 80 - 120 km/h
 
#37 · (Edited)
The final speed is not essential but is an indicator of the possibility of engine and gearbox
The 20km / h difference is huge in a car of the same weight and class

The T6 is probably 2 seconds quicker ?????????? :partywave: This is a good joke.

Even the T8 with 400HP has better acceleration in just 1.1s Speed 0-60 MPH 5.1 Seconds
Maybe you'll understand something from this X3 M40i with 382HP ACCELERATION 0-60 mph 4.4 Seconds

X3 xDrive30i 250HP 0-60 MPH 6.0 sec
Volvo XC60 Momentum T6 310 HP 0-60 MPH 5.6 sec ( with 250HP 0-60 MPH 6.6 sec)

The T6 Momentum is $ 3,500 more expensive than the X3 3.0i

For me personally, the transmission in the Volvo is awfully slow, especially when it switches to manual mode, when you want to change gears quickly, this is slow compared to the competition

After all, read the opinions of the experts who tested the T5 / T6, at least in Europe everyone has a complaint about gear changes and especially applies to acceleration 80 - 120 km/h
The T6 0-60 is roughly 5.5 to 6 according to good sources (like Motor Trend, Consumer Reports, C & D).

For the X3, its between 7.5 and 7.7 seconds. Under ordinary conditions, its not going to do anything close to 6. I'm not talking about the speeds published by the manufacturer or generated via neutral drops or rolling starts. I'm talking real world tests pulling away from stop (like in Consumer Reports).

Per CR, the difference in acceleration between the XC60 T5 and X3 is about .3 seconds. So, the X3 is not all that much faster than even the base Volvo engine.

The T6 is a good deal faster than the X3. 1.5 to 2 second easily.

And, not only is top speed not important - it's irrelevant and has nothing to do with the transmission or the motor. It's limited by the programming not the transmission and none of us will ever get even close to top speed.
 
#36 ·
At some point you have to question the rationality of placing performance as a top consideration when buying an SUV.... BMW or Volvo. They aren't really all that good on a track and you can get a quicker/better handling car from either company for less money. Top speed is computer limited rather than gear limited and next year it will be 180km/h, and that really has zero to do with the transmission. Given you can greatly improve the Volvo performance with a factory PoleStar tune it should be self evident that Volvo is not marketing these cars for blistering performance but rather refined comfortable driving and the mechanical limitations are not significant factors in their specs.
 
#38 ·
It's not about extreme speed at all
The gearbox, ie its capabilities and performance, affect speed in every way
This I took as an example of how is the bad Aixin gearbox that that uses Volvo

Then by your logic why should you need a 400HP in Volvo XC60, 150HP is enough for normal driving, possibly 180HP , max 220 HP

Top speed in Europe is limited to 250km / h except for sports cars and some exclusive models BMW, Audi, MB
Only Volvo will limit the speed to 180km / h next year, though I doubt it
A year ago, they said they would no longer produce diesel engines, and a few months ago they said they were continuing to produce diesel.
 
#40 ·
Any car do 0-60 in 6sec or even 7sec is quick enough for everyday life, running up ramp to freeway, passing on two lane roads, etc.

Quicker than that is only necessary on tracks. But many people are still willing to pay more for quicker acceleration. It is part of the luxury they would like to spend money on. So quick acceleration is preference, not really requirement of a car.

Sent from my Z978 using Tapatalk
 
#45 ·
HELOOOO

Motor Trend, Car & Driver, etc do indeed get 6.2 - 6.7 for the X3
Where did you see 7.5-7.7s I'm still waiting for the link on time 7.5s - 7.7s :p





Cars are compared with engines of similar power and similar prices: BMW X3 250 vs XC60 250 NOT T6 310HP

Then compare the X3 M40 with the XC60 T6 :p

Quality is your opinion, among other things the sales results say it all

Times for T5 are from 6.2-7.3s
Times for the T6 are from 5.5-6.6s

More different times than the same magazine, so much about your verified source of information

 
#46 ·
Did we all forget your original beef of the XC60 having a horrible transmission?

I, for one, did not.

A beef which 0-60 numbers do not equate to a "horrible transmission"... ever. In any discussion. For the history of the automobile.

Yet here you are, prattling on like a twit on 0-60 times as if Volvo was ever going to try to compete with BMW in that regard.

Yet another example of your unbound bias for some reason.

I have to ask why you even post here other than to troll...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top