SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner

XC90 vs Tesla Model X

137K views 1.4K replies 111 participants last post by  Trevlig  
#1 ·
As you have probably seen in the news today, the Model X is being named the safest SUV according to the NHTSA:
https://www.tesla.com/en_CA/blog/tesla-model-x-5-star-safety-rating

I am happy to see safer cars on our roads, but I was curious to see how it compared against our XC90. Both cars performed very similar, except in the rollover category, where the Tesla has 5 starts and the Volvo 4, despite the impressive video:
https://www.nhtsa.gov/ratings#VehicleCompareModal

Apparently the NHTSA does a limited set of crash test that doesn't include a small overlap test. The Model S performed poorly in this test, so I am not sure you can considered a car the safest one, if you don't perform this test:
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/tesla/model-s-4-door-hatchback

What do you think? No fanboy responses, please!
 
#2 ·
The rollover is resistance to it, not only crash results. Function of weight and height.
 
#3 ·
As Big Oil's friends would say oranges to apples.

Since I have been Tesla motoring for two years I can offer insight.

Skipping the engine is the greatest improvement, no more noises, zillion parts to break down.

Software implementation in Teslas is ahead of the industry. Never a glitch, running like a tank,
17" screen.

Tons of room in the Model S, unless you are arthritic you should also test drive that car also.

Autopilot 2 introduces multiple cameras at all angles and stereo front camera, you can now just hit YES when the car alerts you to your meeting (phone calendar sync)
and it will literally drive you there without any input, also closes the garage nicely. Updates occur over the air.

You get to incur the wrath of platform-shoe midgets driving elevated suspension 10mpg farm trucks, they will coal roll you at every turn, just hit recycle on the AC:)

Two years and I only had a defective retractable door handle sensor and a stuck sunroof track.
 
#5 ·
As Big Oil's friends would say oranges to apples.

Since I have been Tesla motoring for two years I can offer insight.

Skipping the engine is the greatest improvement, no more noises, zillion parts to break down.

Software implementation in Teslas is ahead of the industry. Never a glitch, running like a tank,
17" screen.

Tons of room in the Model S, unless you are arthritic you should also test drive that car also.

Autopilot 2 introduces multiple cameras at all angles and stereo front camera, you can now just hit YES when the car alerts you to your meeting (phone calendar sync)
and it will literally drive you there without any input, also closes the garage nicely. Updates occur over the air.

You get to incur the wrath of platform-shoe midgets driving elevated suspension 10mpg farm trucks, they will coal roll you at every turn, just hit recycle on the AC:)

Two years and I only had a defective retractable door handle sensor and a stuck sunroof track.
no let's be fair here - autopilot was not working so well until a recent update (it had been working well before and then kinda pooped out) - new update includes a "silky smooth" update. And we finally get auto-dimming on our center stack.

I will say that the lack of a motor is insanely quieter and even less vibrations. But I do not like being bootstrapped into a "must stop" situation when we go from NoVA to North Fork Long Island. XC90 if wife is driving hits about 410 miles
 
#6 ·
Crash tests are good guidance but not same as real life. How often people crash at these exact same speeds and same angles? Thinking can change a lot by changing one variable.
Personally I’m very interested in how quickly the car can react and prepare for possible crash. Makes huge difference if it hits the breaks for you 2 seconds earlier.

BTW Tesla drivers, is there any official documentation on the level of EMF in these cars?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#8 ·
Crash tests are good guidance but not same as real life. How often people crash at these exact same speeds and same angles? Thinking can change a lot by changing one variable.
Personally I'm very interested in how quickly the car can react and prepare for possible crash. Makes huge difference if it hits the breaks for you 2 seconds earlier.

BTW Tesla drivers, is there any official documentation on the level of EMF in these cars?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here is something else to think about:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lianey...yvkoff/2017/06/05/why-aaa-will-raise-tesla-owners-insurance-rates/#7ef1bb3c5d1b

"The Model S has 46 percent more claims than other vehicles average, and a staggering 315 percent more losses, reports the HLDI, which is affiliated with the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). Compared to large luxury vehicles, it found that the Model S has 29 percent more claims and 84 percent more collision losses."
 
#9 ·
NHTSA only does stilted and simplistic crash tests. Volvo does real world crash testing, using a database of 10s of thousands actual accidents. And no one has a crash test facility like Volvo has. At least the IIHS moved out of the predictable and simplistic crash test when they surprised the automotive world with the 'small overlap crash test'. Only Volvo has performed with all 'good' scores from the beginning of the 'small overlap test', which vindicates the Volvo approach. C'mon IIHS, think up another surprise test, like a 45 degree side impact with both cars moving. Oh wait---you're unable to do that crash test because your facilities can't do that type of test like Volvo's can.

And I almost forgot. No body does rear crash tests to test third row safety--except for Volvo.


I think I'll take an XC90 over a Model X for safety.
 
#11 ·
The number of claims is not a good indicator. It is like the research that mentioned the 10 cars with zero deaths, and included the Mazda CX9 with its horrible crash test. If nobody has died in that car, it is because the people that drive them never had a bad accident. At the same time, there were deaths in Porsche Cayennes, a car with a supposedly good crash test rating if we look at its cousin the Q7, but it is usually driven more aggressively.

Maybe the Tesla has more accidents because they are driven by people that take more risks in more problematic areas in terms of car accidents?
 
#12 ·
The number of claims is not a good indicator. It is like the research that mentioned the 10 cars with zero deaths, and included the Mazda CX9 with its horrible crash test. If nobody has died in that car, it is because the people that drive them never had a bad accident. At the same time, there were deaths in Porsche Cayennes, a car with a supposedly good crash test rating if we look at its cousin the Q7, but it is usually driven more aggressively.

Maybe the Tesla has more accidents because they are driven by people that take more risks in more problematic areas in terms of car accidents?
I would guess that the majority of Tesla's are owned in dense cities, where more fender benders and smaller accidents would happen. Tesla is being targeted by a specific demographic right now, that will most likely result in some skewed numbers.
 
#16 ·
:thumbup:

"The NHTSA agrees that Volvo is the leading company in automotive safety technologies, as it looks for the most cutting-edge safety systems and holds its cars to the highest standard of protection."
 
#34 ·
Do you even consider the Model X an SUV? Technically yes however actually it's basically a Model S with a tall greenhouse.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Do you even consider the XC90 an SUV? Technically these are all crossovers. Why? No 'body-on-frame' construction.

One of my pet peeves is when people call the XC90 a 'truck.' It is not. It is a large car.

Trucks and SUVS:
- Body on frame
- Rear wheel drive
- Very heavy
- Tow 10k lbs or more
 
#20 ·
I was very excited about the Model X and had it on reservation pretty early on. When I finally went to a showroom to check it out, I was disappointed. They really shouldn't call it an SUV. It's a crossover. The sloped roofline and lack of folding second row really take the "utility" out of it in my opinion. But it is fast.
 
#27 ·
''Musk is talking about this happening by 2020.''
Musk is talking a lot. but...facts

Tesla losses soar to $889m - but shares jump as Elon Musk forecasts a profit
Electric car company's losses approach $1bn but Elon Musk's electric dream remains undimmed.

and comments:

Professor David Bailey, a car industry expert at Aston University, added: "The big, big question for Tesla is whether it can make a success of the Model 3. It's the car that will make or break the company and Tesla has a poor record in delivering on time."
He said the economics of the Model 3 - expected to cost about $35,000, about a third cheaper than the Model S - will also be crucial to Tesla's survival.
"The economics of making electric cars such as the Model S in the luxury segment might stack up in the long term but they have to be made to work for the Model 3," Mr Bailey said.
"Tesla also has to make them work quickly - it has a big headstart but the giants of the car industry are catching up and if Mr Musk's money runs out, then Tesla could be another car company consigned to history."


TESLA is the dream of a successful billionaire who happens to be also a marketing genius, but make no mistake Musk IS NOT Steve Jobs.
the biggest joke of all times is that TESLA stock is now above GM or FORD!if people like to put good money into bad money just because MUSK keep telling ''no worries it will work'' good for them. but as far as I'm concerned I will start looking at TESLA when I will have facts and visibility.
 
#28 ·
The ovarian logo and the Tesla cars themselves are nonsense and look out of date despite trying to be cutting edge. Their high price tag and aura of exclusivity are the only things they have going for them otherwise they would be laughed at if they had a GM or KIA badged priced much lower.

The Model-S looks like what a Mercury Cougar would look like today if weren't discontinued:
Image

Image


The Model-X looks like the Honda CrossTour with novelty doors:
Image

Image


The designs of the Tesla products do not surprise me since the designer was the lead designer over at GM/Pontiac and was manning the ship when the glorious Aztek debuted and failed. I believe what makes people flock to the Tesla products are the tech and high price tag and the guise of being "green". Outside of that any other brand pushing these vehicles would have been lambasted and dragged through the coals.

In case any one is really cross-shopping the two... A picture is worth a thousand words:

Image


Image

Image
 
#31 ·
Loved the exterior shape of the S. X on the other hand can't grow on me, its like a Pontiac Aztec.

IC0N0CLAST, You say "high price tag and aura of exclusivity are the only things they have going for them". Unless you actually owned any of them before I'll take your opinion with a grain of salt.
 
#41 ·
There was a recall on the ABS sensor for the RWD versions however parts were not available and people were told to continue driving as usual in addition many Tesla drivers complained of uneven wear and rapid wear on their tires in general. It created a lot of bald tires (Tesla told drivers to expect to get 7k miles out of their tires)... Bald tires in the rain and snow create accidents. Accidents are costly on Tesla vehicles. Most of the claims are total loss (iirc).
 
#45 ·
Perhaps you were not affected by the issue or did not have the larger wheels with performance pkg? Other owners had different experiences with excessive wear in general or on the inner shoulder.
My experience was not from ownership but with a day of play however what I read is that others had issues with sensor failure which lead to excessive tire wear and / or had excessive wear from the factory to begin with and they gave them the round around about resolutions...

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/ok-tire-wear-is-past-ridiculous-photo-attached.71844/

Image



Edmund's "long term" review experienced the same issue:
https://www.edmunds.com/tesla/model.../model-s/2013/long-term-road-test/2013-tesla-model-s-tire-wear-post-mortem.html

Image

Image


6k miles:
Image


https://www.google.com/search?site=...21j4.25.0....0...1.1.64.hp..0.27.2078...0i131k1j46i131k1j0i131i46k1.xax9e_4xKOE
 
#46 ·
I've had a 2016 XC90 T6, now a T8, and also a Tesla Model S 85 and P85D so can write from some first hand experience here. Style-wise I think the XC exterior is a culmination of classic SUV design that started with the first-gen BMW X5 ie boxy and sporty -- so I like it and can't imagine the design getting too much better for this theme. Interior-wise, the XC has further pushed the level of design harmony with its use of multiple types and layers of quality materials in a tasteful, modern way that few can argue against.

The Model X is... different. It's exterior design is compromised by the need to optimize aerodynamics to increase energy eficiency ie these are just variations on a Prius type of profile (even the Model S). It's interior design is minimalist, clean, futuristic, imo. Just as in the post above, styling is completely subjective (yes, we can all agree on some things that are ugly or beautiful), but this is how I would describe Tesla styling in its first generation of independent design. The front and rear look cool to me, the side profile is... lacking (and a reason I did not initially buy an X). I would only recommend that Tesla consider a design that would be a bit more inclusive of more traditional or "tasteful" interiors/exteriors, rather than be too polarizing, simply because that would lead to more sales. Having said that, I would never want a Tesla to not be minimalist, modern, or "futuristic".

I'm not sure why a car would be more desirable if it was more expensive (as posted above), but in my opinion, the main reason I paid a lot more for my Model S is simply because it is a better car. Assuming an X is mostly the same as my S, compared to an XC90 T8 -- it accelerates quicker and twice as fast to 60, uses no gas, has no emissions, has a better driver interface, and is ridiculously more fun to drive. Then there's over-the-air updates, having a full battery every morning with home charging, and autopilot, which is highly useable. Honestly, I like my T8 a lot especially its style and luxury -- but running on it's 18 miles of battery range, using its rear axles to put out 90 hp, then romping through a slew of shenanigans to activate/deactivate its ICE engine just to make it to 50 mph or up a hill seems a little antiquated; not to mention its low range (I guess about 330 miles, but not sure) due to smaller gas tank -- and this is all an improvement on my experience with the T6. The Tesla? Battery-powered, 250-300 miles of range on a single charge, 400-500 hp driving front/rear axles, instant torque, no engine sounds, no gas, superchargers up/down the coast -- pretty nice.

There's a reason why MB, VW/Audi, Volvo are clamoring to add electric and self-driving to their range of vehicles and there's a reason why they keep releasing press releases about some date in the future that they'll do it (2020 seems to be the common theme) -- because BEV are and Tesla is doing it the best right now. You guys can nitpick all you want, but trust me I've got just as many stories and links about my previous ICE vehicles. My Tesla? Not so many stories, just fun and simple living. There is negative press (many which are thereafter debunked) and forum rants that seem to come out every other week about Tesla or it's cars -- trust me, the impact that these have on the daily lives of the vast majority of owners is next to nothing and customer satisfaction surveys echo the same thing. I speak from personal experience, involvement in forums (just like everybody else here), and talking with many fellow owners over the past 4 years. And if (knock on wood) something were to sideline my car, I'm a big boy, and can pick up my phone and get an Uber or roadside, just like I did when my T8 refused to change over to ICE power from battery.

Why did I lease a T8 then? imo, it's the best traditional ICE SUV for my use case (suburbs, family hauler, Costco, lol) and I'd prefer to not spend more than $100k on 2 cars. A used Model X 90D can be purchased at about $85k now, and that is looking more feasible.
 
#56 ·
I'm not sure why a car would be more desirable if it was more expensive
The recognition and prestige that comes with the premium luxury badge and the aura of wealth/success. The same reason why most people look down on a Kia or the like...
While most people in general do not think like this there are many that do. They will buy something that may be inferior to a product from a brand that is not associated with luxury.
 
#49 ·
Both cars are good, but each have their failing points:

The Model X is a good car. The electric only setup is very enticing- no emissions and astounding acceleration. Also, the quiet and calm of having no engine noise is nice. But I find the styling a bit meh, especially the interior. It is also smaller than the XC90 and the third row suffers from this.

The XC90 is beautiful inside and out. The third row is very good. It is absolutely massive inside. But I do miss a V6 and Sensus needs some work. The T8 battery range is limited. I am excited for the proposition of an all electric XC90, even if it is next generation.