Author Topic: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription  (Read 8014 times)

Offline Autos_Editor

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 8326
  • Carma: +91/-560
  • member
    • View Profile
Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« on: August 04, 2015, 06:30:38 am »

Super-turbocharged and ultra-luxe.
 
Read More...

Offline KD

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 11402
  • Carma: +359/-263
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2017 Frontier Pro-4X, 2013 Lexus GS-350
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2015, 08:30:27 am »
All good except for the actual mileage figures.  Nothing to rejoice about there imo.

Offline mmret

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 14603
  • Carma: +240/-570
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2015, 08:35:47 am »
How does the FE compare to the MDX, gasser versions of the X5/ML etc?
I chortled when I saw the 10.x city rating.  I think that's what my 2006 TSX was rated at...on the old measurement too.

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk

You can't just have your characters announce how they feel.
That makes me feel angry!

Present: 15.5 V60 T6 + Polestar, 17 MDX
Sometimes Borrow: 11 GLK350
Dark and Twisted Past: 13 TL AWD, 07 Z4 3.0si, 07 CLK550, 06 TSX, 07 Civic, 01 Grandma!

Offline SKYMTL

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1806
  • Carma: +30/-77
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2019 BMW 440i, 2014 Mazda 3 GT Sport
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2015, 08:51:01 am »
That touch screen is just atrocious.  I hate to say this but I think vehicle manufacturers need to be regulated into eliminating touch screens from cars altogether or at least have an alternate input method like BMW's iDrive or Mazda's system. 

Offline mmret

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 14603
  • Carma: +240/-570
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2015, 09:17:00 am »
That touch screen is just atrocious.  I hate to say this but I think vehicle manufacturers need to be regulated into eliminating touch screens from cars altogether or at least have an alternate input method like BMW's iDrive or Mazda's system.
I would agree with that. I just don't understand the move towards not having hard buttons for most of the common functionality.

I also find it funny that the people who advocate touchscreens seem to be 40-50 somethings. Young enough to be reasonably knowledgeable about computers but maybe their memory or muscle control or eyesight or something isn't very good any more so they hate buttons? I just don't get it.

Specific setting that 90% of people will never see... Sure bury it in some menu. But changing radio stations?

At least in Volvos defence if its anything like my V60, 90% of the menus can be accessed via the steering wheel roller knob thing.

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk


Offline Noto

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 13593
  • Carma: +774/-2132
  • This forum is making me almost as bitter as SirO
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '23 Mazda CX-50 Turbo; '24 Crosstrek Wilderness
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2015, 09:30:16 am »
When Lexus went to the mousey instead of the touchscreen, I was pissed.  I'm not a fan of the remote controls and much prefer touchscreens.  To avoid fingerprints, I use steering wheel mounted controls, but don't mind using a cloth every so often to clean up some 'prints.

Quote
In terms of fuel economy, Volvo claims the XC90 will manage 11.8 l/100 km in the city and 9.5 on the highway, although in my experience it’ll be tough matching the city number. My test car was showing a 15.2 l/100km long-term average after a series of corporate demonstration drives, and I was seeing very similar numbers during my first couple of days around town. A trip to the suburbs and back netted 13.9 l/100 km, and my best result was 10.5 on a relaxed drive along a highway with a 90 km/h limit.
I'm interested to see the T8 numbers.  This is pretty beastly and I'd wager the X5 xDrive35i does better (and has similar power output).  Maintaining a car in boost at all times simply won't give good #s.  I'm hesitant to believe that the addition of the PHEV powertrain will help all that much in spite of the cost and complexity.

Where I will give Volvo some true praise here is in the 'luxury' department.  I mean, look at this - even the speaker:



That looks damn fine crafted.

Offline redman

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 3296
  • Carma: +100/-298
  • Gender: Male
  • Make mine a flat white, triple shot.
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee, 2010 Subaru Legacy Limited, 2009 Pontiac Vibe GT son's
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2015, 09:49:26 am »
Volvo XC90 has stood out in SUV design since it's inception. The amount of copy cats of the rear lighting design since is a testament to Volvo's stylistic leadership.
Safety engineering has also been at the forefront in the industry. The quality of materials and fit and finish are also of a luxury vehicle.

The big downfall here is the XC90 drive train. A hyped turbo 2.0 in a vehicle of this size and weight ? really !!. I'd almost get it if the fuel economy figures were favourable, but they're not.
The only advantage I see here in the engine is in Volvo's favour, maybe some metal savings but at the cost of a strained 2.0 4 banger. Just like people, high blood pressure eventually comes with a downfall.

Maybe Volvo should consider buying complete drive trains from well established manufacturers. Something similar to what Lotus has done with Toyota. Heck, Magna could supply the complete configuration.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2015, 10:39:38 am by redman »
Past New (8yrs) Car Dealer for : BMW, Lexus, Nissan and Toyota<br />Past Used Vehicle Dealer: All Makes and Models. Seen a lot of it. Drove a lot of it. <br />Four-stroke Otto Engine 1876. Modern timer, pop-up toaster 1919 keep convincing yourself that you have the "latest appliance".

Offline SKYMTL

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1806
  • Carma: +30/-77
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2019 BMW 440i, 2014 Mazda 3 GT Sport
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #7 on: August 04, 2015, 10:02:53 am »
Again an area where a diesel would shine.  The new XC90 D5 has been getting ~50MPG in publications:  http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/volvo/volvo-xc90-review/

Offline Railton

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 13713
  • Carma: +243/-156
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2017 Infiniti QX60 Touring, 2010 Infiniti G37S 6M, 2020 Hyundai Kona 1.6T Trend
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #8 on: August 04, 2015, 10:13:54 am »
Where's the check box for the V6 Turbo Diesel T6 AWD R-Design on the build and price? 4 cyl only? Pass.
Nice looking though.
Railton
Do you realize that in about 30 (updated as requested) years, we'll have millions of old ladies running around with tattoos?

Northernridge

  • Guest
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #9 on: August 04, 2015, 10:14:41 am »
Makes me almost want a CUV...almost.

Love that interior...and exterior.

Offline OliverD

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 18834
  • Carma: +257/-777
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 BMW 328i Touring, 1998 Jaguar XJR, 2024 Mini Cooper S
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #10 on: August 04, 2015, 10:18:40 am »
Again an area where a diesel would shine.  The new XC90 D5 has been getting ~50MPG in publications:  http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/volvo/volvo-xc90-review/

Isn't that just the hugely optimistic Euro rating, in imperial gallons?

Offline Noto

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 13593
  • Carma: +774/-2132
  • This forum is making me almost as bitter as SirO
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '23 Mazda CX-50 Turbo; '24 Crosstrek Wilderness
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #11 on: August 04, 2015, 11:10:50 am »
Again an area where a diesel would shine.  The new XC90 D5 has been getting ~50MPG in publications:  http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/volvo/volvo-xc90-review/

Isn't that just the hugely optimistic Euro rating, in imperial gallons?
50 imp mpg = 42 US mpg...still spectacular #s, if true (doubtful).

Quote
Engine:   1969cc four-cylinder turbodiesel, 222bhp @ 4250rpm, 347lb ft @ 1750-2500rpm
Transmission:   Eight-speed automatic, four-wheel drive
Performance:   7.4sec 0-62mph, 137mph, 49.6mpg, 149g/km CO2
I mean, great #s for a diesel, and if 7.4s 0-60 is true, then plenty powerful enough...but I doubt the $70k large luxury CUV market is willing to deal with 'only' 222hp.

Offline JacobBlack

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2593
  • Carma: +440/-499
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2008 Ford F-150
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #12 on: August 04, 2015, 11:14:01 am »
That touch screen is just atrocious.  I hate to say this but I think vehicle manufacturers need to be regulated into eliminating touch screens from cars altogether or at least have an alternate input method like BMW's iDrive or Mazda's system.

I really, really prefer the older system - it could all be controlled (every single menu option) from the steering wheel and I liked that.

But as far as touchscreens go, this is one of the best. I'm with you though, puck-controller FTW!

Offline OliverD

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 18834
  • Carma: +257/-777
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 BMW 328i Touring, 1998 Jaguar XJR, 2024 Mini Cooper S
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #13 on: August 04, 2015, 11:19:36 am »
Again an area where a diesel would shine.  The new XC90 D5 has been getting ~50MPG in publications:  http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/volvo/volvo-xc90-review/

Isn't that just the hugely optimistic Euro rating, in imperial gallons?
50 imp mpg = 42 US mpg...still spectacular #s, if true (doubtful).

Quote
Engine:   1969cc four-cylinder turbodiesel, 222bhp @ 4250rpm, 347lb ft @ 1750-2500rpm
Transmission:   Eight-speed automatic, four-wheel drive
Performance:   7.4sec 0-62mph, 137mph, 49.6mpg, 149g/km CO2
I mean, great #s for a diesel, and if 7.4s 0-60 is true, then plenty powerful enough...but I doubt the $70k large luxury CUV market is willing to deal with 'only' 222hp.

The ML and Q7 diesels have 240 hp, so it isn't too far off. And in the US they sell the ML/GLE with a 200 hp four cylinder diesel.

Offline Noto

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 13593
  • Carma: +774/-2132
  • This forum is making me almost as bitter as SirO
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '23 Mazda CX-50 Turbo; '24 Crosstrek Wilderness
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2015, 12:27:08 pm »
The ML and Q7 diesels have 240 hp, so it isn't too far off. And in the US they sell the ML/GLE with a 200 hp four cylinder diesel.
Sales #s for those?  (diesel only...)

Offline OliverD

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 18834
  • Carma: +257/-777
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 BMW 328i Touring, 1998 Jaguar XJR, 2024 Mini Cooper S
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #15 on: August 04, 2015, 12:53:19 pm »
The ML and Q7 diesels have 240 hp, so it isn't too far off. And in the US they sell the ML/GLE with a 200 hp four cylinder diesel.
Sales #s for those?  (diesel only...)

From Mercedes' 2014 sales press release:

Quote
The diesel take rate for luxury light trucks was 77.9% for the month and 79.3% for the year

Note that includes the GLK, ML, and GL. In general diesel take rates in this segment are very high.

Offline Noto

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 13593
  • Carma: +774/-2132
  • This forum is making me almost as bitter as SirO
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '23 Mazda CX-50 Turbo; '24 Crosstrek Wilderness
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #16 on: August 04, 2015, 02:10:25 pm »
The ML and Q7 diesels have 240 hp, so it isn't too far off. And in the US they sell the ML/GLE with a 200 hp four cylinder diesel.
Sales #s for those?  (diesel only...)

From Mercedes' 2014 sales press release:

Quote
The diesel take rate for luxury light trucks was 77.9% for the month and 79.3% for the year

Note that includes the GLK, ML, and GL. In general diesel take rates in this segment are very high.
Well, yeah, because the diesel was the 'base' engine.  Vovlo wouldn't do that.

Offline OliverD

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 18834
  • Carma: +257/-777
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 BMW 328i Touring, 1998 Jaguar XJR, 2024 Mini Cooper S
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #17 on: August 04, 2015, 02:31:16 pm »
Why not?

Besides, it's largely irrelevant if the diesel is the base motor or not in this class.

The diesel take rate on the Touareg is 66%, where it isn't the base engine (http://driving.ca/volkswagen/touareg/reviews/road-test/road-test-2014-volkswagen-touareg-tdi-highline).

In the U.S. the Q7 diesel take rate is around 50%, and Canadians are typically more accepting of diesels so I wouldn't be surprised if it's even higher in Canada.

Even the Cayenne Diesel has a 20% take rate (http://www.wheels.ca/car-reviews/road-trip-2014-porsche-cayenne-diesel/).

Offline SKYMTL

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1806
  • Carma: +30/-77
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2019 BMW 440i, 2014 Mazda 3 GT Sport
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #18 on: August 05, 2015, 09:42:45 am »
That's my point.  This is a perfect segment for diesel engines, not these massively contrived dual charger or electric boost things.  I understand there's a need to push technology but adding a high mileage diesel as an engine choice is already being done by all the other competitors in this segment.  Even Jeep...

Offline OliverD

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 18834
  • Carma: +257/-777
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 BMW 328i Touring, 1998 Jaguar XJR, 2024 Mini Cooper S
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Volvo XC90 Inscription
« Reply #19 on: August 05, 2015, 10:13:17 am »
That's my point.  This is a perfect segment for diesel engines, not these massively contrived dual charger or electric boost things.  I understand there's a need to push technology but adding a high mileage diesel as an engine choice is already being done by all the other competitors in this segment.  Even Jeep...

Heck, even the Range Rover and Range Rover Sport now offer a diesel.