Joined
·
158 Posts
Re: (Nebor)
Volvo's sales pitch has been they redesigned the engine to decrease it's width. They did this to maintain the crush zones in the smaller S40/V50 cars.
This link is to a comparison test including a Subaru Legacy 2.5GT Limited and an S40 T5 (FWD).
http://www.caranddriver.com/co....html
A real eye opener to the low end torque advantage of the Volvo. The Subaru was a full second quicker from 0-60 yet the Volvo was a half second quicker in the rolling 5-60 run.
0-60 mph 5.7 6.7
rolling 5-60 mph 7.6 7.1
On top of that the Subie is rated 19City/25Hwy as opposed to the S40's 22City/31Hwy. Of course if you have to have the AWD S40 you lose a lot of that mpg advantage.
Quote, originally posted by Nebor » |
An S40 with a real T5 motor, like from the S60 T5, would be pure sex. It'd run 13s with a chip. And it would fit too! Why Volvo felt the need to develop a whole new engine for the S40 T5 I'll never know.
![]() |
Volvo's sales pitch has been they redesigned the engine to decrease it's width. They did this to maintain the crush zones in the smaller S40/V50 cars.
This link is to a comparison test including a Subaru Legacy 2.5GT Limited and an S40 T5 (FWD).
http://www.caranddriver.com/co....html
A real eye opener to the low end torque advantage of the Volvo. The Subaru was a full second quicker from 0-60 yet the Volvo was a half second quicker in the rolling 5-60 run.
0-60 mph 5.7 6.7
rolling 5-60 mph 7.6 7.1
On top of that the Subie is rated 19City/25Hwy as opposed to the S40's 22City/31Hwy. Of course if you have to have the AWD S40 you lose a lot of that mpg advantage.