XC60 T5 Drive-E or T6 Drive-E

DSN · Apr 8, 2014

Hi,

What do you think the pros/cons are between the T5 Drive-E and T6 Drive-E powertrains?

Thank you so much for your input!

Cyclops · Apr 8, 2014

I have had the T5 for about 2 weeks now. Plenty of power in my opinion, meaning I have never been in a situation yet where I wished the engine would give me more (including passing on the interstate). Transmission is very smooth. All in all I am very pleased! Can't help you on the T6 as I don't really know how that would compare.

TonyJag · Apr 8, 2014

We went through the same dilemma and ended up with the T6 because she wanted it to have similar performance to the 6 cylinder 2014 T6 we drove and to our 2004 Saab 9-5 Aero Turbo with 250HP, but less weight. We do mostly highway driving.

T5 pros: Available now; Probably less first MY risk with simpler engine
T6 pros: Significantly more power with only 1 MPG penalty; After 4 Saab turbos, never owned a supercharged engine before; All road tests very positive; Got to have it.

BTW, I also replied to your other post.

brissim · Apr 8, 2014

If it was my money I'd stick with the T5. While both engines are new the T5 is based on well proven technology. The T6 is much more technically complicated and IMO somewhat of an unknown quantity. I note with interest that VW have quietly dropped their 1.4l twin-charged engine in favour of a conventional turbocharged engine. Its simply less complicated.

From the International site its interesting to look at the official 0-100km/h (0-60 mph) times for the XC60 with the T5 and T6 engines - ie 6.9 sec for the FWD T6 vs 7.2 sec for the FWD T5. Not much in it.

Given what in my mind its a case of "diminishing return". In moving from the T5 to the T6, you pay extra for the T6 which only delivers a marginal improvement in performance, an increase in fuel usage (albeit only small), and you take the greater technical risk. Stay with the T5.

Tony

TonyJag · Apr 8, 2014

Good points!

brissim said:
The T6 is much more technically complicated and IMO somewhat of an unknown quantity. I note with interest that VW have quietly dropped their 1.4l twin-charged engine in favour of a conventional turbocharged engine. Its simply less complicated.

From the International site its interesting to look at the official 0-100km/h (0-60 mph) times for the XC60 with the T5 and T6 engines - ie 6.9 sec for the FWD T6 vs 7.2 sec for the FWD T5. Not much in it.

....

Tony

We discussed complexity in a different thread:
http://forums.swedespeed.com/showthread.php?208464-Volvo-Drive-E-Powetrains-Earth-Hour-March-29-2014
It was observed that adding a supercharger and clutch isn't that much more complex and gives a measure of redundancy to improve the ability to keep running.

Here is an interesting thread on the fate of VW twincharging:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/01/who-killed-the-twincharger/
I'm sure that the Volvo design team learned a lot from that and other twincharging implementations.

The Volvo Specifications and Technical data for US MY 15 lists 0-60 MPH times of 6.5 Seconds for the T6 and 6.9 Seconds for the T5, a bigger spread than the quoted 0-100 km/h numbers from the International site. With 302 vs. 240 or 26% more horsepower, I expect that higher-speed performance measures like 1/4 mile elapsed time will show a greater advantage.

The MSRP price difference (T6-T5) is $1200 US across Premier, Premier+, and Platinum trim lines. 26% more power for 3% more money seems to offer a lot of bang for the buck! Time will tell on the reliability; we will learn first-hand. I'm sure that Volvo will stand behind it.

Tony J

salr · Apr 9, 2014

Hi, this is my first post ever! I just ordered a 2015 XC60 T5 Drive-E FWD yesterday from my local dealership, it will be my first ever Volvo. It should be here in June, I'm very excited! The reason i chose the T5 over the T6 was basically I felt it was more than powerful enough when I test drove a T5 Drive-E XC60 that was in stock. The other reason was as brissim said, the T5 is based on proven technology and is a simpler design than the T6. To me, that usually means it will probably have a smaller chance of having reliability issues. I could be wrong about the reliability, but I expect the T5 engine to be a reliable motor because of the fact that it's based on technology that has been around for a number of years and it isn't all that ground-breaking in overall design (i.e. less chance of issues).

The T5 offers more than adequate HP and great MPG to boot, seems like a win-win if the reliability ends up being there. The T6 should be a very powerful and amazing piece of machinery itself, but for my own needs, as well as most people, the T5's power is plenty. I'd be a little leery of the T6 just because of the twin charging being so new to Volvo, but as someone already said, maybe Volvo learned from VW's twin-charging issues and made the necessary changes to make the engine better than VW's. I think these engines will be successful, and I wouldn't have bought the T5 if I didn't think so. Plus the starting price for a T5 Drive-E is $35,750 compared to $40,050 for the T6. With that savings I bought a bunch of extras and goodies that made my XC60 pretty well equipped. But at the end of the day it's up to the individual to decide what engine they want, we can only offer opinions.

Sal

TonyJag · Apr 9, 2014

salr said:
Hi, this is my first post ever! ..... Plus the starting price for a T5 Drive-E is $35,750 compared to $40,050 for the T6. ....
Sal

First, welcome to swedespeed! Second, congratulations on your decision. I don't think we will be disappointed by our first Volvos.

To be fair though, the pricing of the T5 and T6 in their lowest trim levels (starting price) is only partly due to the engine difference. The T6 starting level comes with more features (that may or may not be important to you): e.g. paddle shifters, fancier wheels, tinted rear glass, auto dimming, leather, sunroof, etc. At the Premier+ and Platinum levels, the difference is only $1200.

Has anyone else ordered a T6 Drive-E?

salr · Apr 9, 2014

TonyJag, Congratulations on your decision as well! Your T6 should be an amazing machine, I'll be very interested to hear your thoughts on it when it arrives in June. Very true, the T6 does come with more standard features than the T5. I ordered Ice White Exterior paint, off-black leather seats, Premier-Plus Package, built in Navigation, heated front seats and Dual Xeon headlights.

TonyJag · Apr 10, 2014

VW Twincharging

Thanks.
More about VW twincharging
http://www.caradvice.com.au/99056/volkswagen-1-4tsi-twincharger-to-be-phased-out-report/
http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...owthread.php?5222144-Pros-and-Cons-of-the-Golf-1.4tsi-twincharger-w-dsg-7-speed
Looks like the probelms were more with the 7 speed DSG transmission than with twincharging.
http://www.revotechnik.com/resources/uploads/files/TSB 1 4TSI Twincharger known issues Web.pdf

http://www.clubgti.com/showthread.php?257472-VW-s-Twincharger-System-Overview
Excellent explanation of how it works, with the same basic layout as the Volvo T6. The negative comments are all based on fear of complexity, not experience of failures. It looks like VW discontinued it mainly because of manufacturing costs. I'm sure that Volvo learned from the VW experience.

salr · Apr 10, 2014

TonyJag, I concur that the reason for VW's halt of twin charging production was the expense of manufacturing, not mechanical issues. I also agree that Volvo certainly studied VW's engine in great detail to design their own and corrected any potential issues they saw in the VW design. I will be legitimately surprised if there end up being major mechanical issues with either the T6 or T5 Drive-e engines, I expect Volvo's long tradition of reliable engines to continue. I owned a 2007 VW GTI which I traded in for my XC60 which is on order, I bought my VW new in 2007 and I can attest first hand that the DSG transmission is not the best, it's very jerky and has a multitude of other nagging problems, some of which are small while others are large. After 7 years I got to know the DSG transmission well, it's sporty and fun when it's working smoothly, but it's jerkiness and mechtronics unit seriously flaw it.

Pranner · Apr 25, 2014

Hi all. New member here, this is my first post.
I've always owned Japanese vehicles but have been seriously considering the XC60 Drive-E models. Your contributions and discussions have been very helpful.
Maybe someone can help me with an official answer: Does the T6 Drive-E require premium gas? This would be a decision maker for me. One mpg difference is totally worth it if it's the same type of fuel, but add to that another 11 cents/liter for every tank and the difference becomes much greater. I've read on other posts conflicting information on this. Edmunds.com states regular if fine. I've read the owner's manual and it says performance 4 cylinders do require premium. (...Are both Drive-E models "performance 4 cyl engines"?) My local dealership tells me regular is fine, but they would say that to sell the T6; the reps at BMW and Acura also tell me regular is fine when all their engines are clearly premium only. Who has the final word on this?

Warpedcow · Apr 25, 2014

Pranner said:
Hi all. New member here, this is my first post.
I've always owned Japanese vehicles but have been seriously considering the XC60 Drive-E models. Your contributions and discussions have been very helpful.
Maybe someone can help me with an official answer: Does the T6 Drive-E require premium gas? This would be a decision maker for me. One mpg difference is totally worth it if it's the same type of fuel, but add to that another 11 cents/liter for every tank and the difference becomes much greater. I've read on other posts conflicting information on this. Edmunds.com states regular if fine. I've read the owner's manual and it says performance 4 cylinders do require premium. (...Are both Drive-E models "performance 4 cyl engines"?) My local dealership tells me regular is fine, but they would say that to sell the T6; the reps at BMW and Acura also tell me regular is fine when all their engines are clearly premium only. Who has the final word on this?

If you want to actually get the advertised performance numbers from either motor, yes you need to run 91 octane or better.

TonyJag · Apr 25, 2014

Good Advice

Warpedcow said:
If you want to actually get the advertised performance numbers from either motor, yes you need to run 91 octane or better.

There is indeed some ambiguity on this subject, as we discussed in other threads. From the Owner's manual:

"Volvo recommends premium fuel for best
performance, but using 87 octane1 or above
will not affect engine reliability.
NOTE
Vehicles equipped with the high performance
4-cylinder engines (B4204T9 and
B4204T10) require premium fuel2."

The engines listed are both T6, just different emission specs. The reference "2 Refer to your Warranty and Maintenance Records booklet for additional information." Does not clarify anything, just repeats the same info.

As I noted in another thread, the T5 engine has higher compression than the T6.

Our dealer also says you can run regular, but I don't believe him. I will wait to see what the placard at the gas filler says, but will likely run premium.

If it's anything like our Saab Trionics, it will make good use of the increased octane for better performance and MPG.

Calhon · Apr 25, 2014

Warpedcow said:
If you want to actually get the advertised performance numbers from either motor, yes you need to run 91 octane or better.

The T5 Drive-E is EPA rated on regular gas while the T6 Drive-E is rated on premium.
http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=34840&id=34842

Pranner · Apr 25, 2014

Thank you. I'm a rep on the road and cover my own expenses, so the difference is important to me. I test drove the T5 and found it adequate, but I wouldn't mind more power if it can use 87. I understand that if an engine is designed for regular, premium won't make a difference and benefits are mainly psychological.
But if the engine is actually designed to run on premium, then mpg will be affected in a greater way. I used to have a Nissan that required premium and it felt like I was towing a Yak on the 2 tanks of regular I experimented with plus mileage was worse by over 25%. Clearly premium in that case was "required" as the sticker said, and was actually cheaper to run than regular.
Also, I don't know about Volvo, but some car manufacturers could make an issue regarding warranty if the proper fuel isn't used should a related problem come up.
When I read the ambiguous information that says (from what I gather) that it's ok with either fuel, to me the engine is designed to be safe, reliable and reasonably economical with the lower grade. Basically, I take it to mean 'use what you want' and the higher price of premium will yield a little better performance and mileage... whereas you'll 'save' at the pump using regular but won't go as far (or as fast). Kind of like six of one and half-a-dozen of the other. I'd love to hear from a Volvo engineer on this!
I guess like TonyJag says, we will have to wait and see what's written on the fuel cap, either "premium recommended" or "premium required". But by then, I might have already ordered a T5 with a tank filled with 87 octane!

Pranner · Apr 25, 2014

Thanks for the link Calhon, makes it clearer!

forkster · Apr 25, 2014

TonyJag said:
I'm sure that Volvo will stand behind it.

Just like they stood behind a design flaw in 01-04 P2 vehicles CEM's that overheat and fail (05-07 had a heat sink added to the CEM). Just like they stood behind the XC90 T6 transmissions. Just like they stood behind 01-02 P2 wagon XC70 transmissions.

Seriously? Volvo is no different that other manufacturers. If there are a lot of issues with it, they will abandon the engine and move on leaving customers who own them to foot repair bills unless it's under warranty.

DSN - I would stay with the tied a true T5.

TonyJag · Apr 25, 2014

forkster said:
Just like they stood behind a design flaw in 01-04 P2 vehicles CEM's that overheat and fail (05-07 had a heat sink added to the CEM). Just like they stood behind the XC90 T6 transmissions. Just like they stood behind 01-02 P2 wagon XC70 transmissions.

Seriously? Volvo is no different that other manufacturers. If there are a lot of issues with it, they will abandon the engine and move on leaving customers who own them to foot repair bills unless it's under warranty.
.

Perhaps, but I think this is different because Volvo is no longer constrained by Ford and is betting their whole future on this new DRIVE-E 4 cylinder engine architecture, including the T6 as the base engine for the new XC90. It's hard to imagine them abandoning it.

TonyJag · Apr 25, 2014

Calhon said:
The T5 Drive-E is EPA rated on regular gas while the T6 Drive-E is rated on premium.
http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=34840&id=34842

Thanks for the clarification. Presumably, that applies to the HP and Torque ratings as well.

DSN · Apr 25, 2014

forkster said:
DSN - I would stay with the tied a true T5.

I think I'm going to go for the T6 Drive-E. Possibly against my better judgement but I think I'm just going to go for it. As long as family is in good health, relatively speaking it's only a car. I may lease for this reason, and if it turns out to be trouble at least it's temporary pain in the butt.

Thanks so much for all of your advice, everyone here is super helpful and all the various perspectives are appreciated!

XC60 T5 Drive-E or T6 Drive-E

DSN

Cyclops

TonyJag

brissim

TonyJag

salr

TonyJag

salr

TonyJag

salr

Pranner

Warpedcow

TonyJag

Calhon

Pranner

Pranner

forkster

TonyJag

TonyJag

DSN

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities