SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner

5 cyl vs 4 cyl

17K views 17 replies 14 participants last post by  jcwade716  
#1 ·
I'm thinking I may like to go from the S60 to a V60 at some point, which would mean a different engine from the one I know and love, as well as a different transmission. You folks who have gone from the 5 cyl fwd to a 4 cyl fwd, what are your impressions? How's the relative oomph?
 
#2 ·
I've never owned the T5 5 cylinder but I driven them so many times. I however, own a T5 Drive-E. When I bought my S60, I test drove T5 AWD (5 cyl) vs T5 FWD (4 cyl). Not only was the 4 cyl cheaper but I found it much more enjoyable to drive imo. The transmission was so much smoother and in ways smarter. Gas mileage is another plus. I only drive in the city and am able to squeeze out 25 mpg which wouldn't be possible in the 5 cylinder given the same conditions. During the test drives I also noted that the 4 cyl is noticeably quicker and felt much more nimble and light. Whenever I drive a 5 cylinder model it always feels like I'm lugging a trunk full of bricks. The only thing to remember when looking at 4 cylinder models is to watch out for the 2015-16MY.
 
#3 ·
As a technician who has worked a lot on both variants I can tell you the 5 cylinder will give you more trouble free ownership, especially at higher mileage. I'm not a fan of the Drive-E engines in non-SPA cars. If you get one, I'd urge you to at least get a 16 or one that has already had pistons put in it. The 5 cylinder will probably give you a trip to the dealer for an oil trap or maybe a leak detection pump... the 4 cylinder (unless already addressed) will almost certainly bring you in a couple of times for fuel pressure sensor issues, EVAP purge line issues, oil trap, and for sure an o2 sensor. There's also undoubtedly going to be a start/stop issue. This might sound like I'm nagging a lot, but I don't think the VEA 4 cylinders are bad per se, I just think they had some teething issues in the P3 vehicles. I don't personally see much difference in power between the 5 and 4 cylinder (unless you get the supercharged version), the MPGs are slightly better because of the newer gearbox... but not extremely noticeable.

If I were you I'd probably look at a 3.0 T6 in those cars, way more fun than either.
 
#14 ·
hello, thank you for the response you posted.
I am currently shopping for 2013 through 2017 XC60s
I have narrowed it down to a few. I see 6 cylinder, 5-cylinder and 4 cylinder options.
based on the XC60 model, which one would you recommend? I don't particularly like engines that auto-stop/start at stop lights.
 
#4 ·
+1 on the 3.0 T6, especially in P* tune. Had three T5 Volvos before our ‘16 V60RD 3.0 including a V70R and have to say the well-tuned in-line straight six is likely to be remembered as the best all-time Volvo engine.

Drove a new-series V60 AWD Drive-E with the P* tune last year as a loaner - it goes t the job done but just didn’t have the refinement or low-end response.

Next one will likely be electric, but will wait until maybe the first Polestar 2s come off lease.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#5 ·
So the answer to the question seems to be a completely different option.

Useful.

Sent from my SM-T860 using Tapatalk
 
#6 ·
Answered my own question, as I replaced my '13 5 cyl with a '20 4 cyl, and this new one has at least as much fun and zip as the old one, possibly more, and it does it using less fuel. Also, as someone noted above, the 8 speed transmission is so smooth, I don't notice the shifts.
 
#7 ·
I drove an S60 with the 5 cylinder engine. I currently own a 2017 S60 T5 with the 4 cylinder engine. I like the 4 cylinder engine S60. In future my next car will be electric. Less engine maintenance activities to do. But for now I like 4 cylinder engine sounds, the mileage and power. I don't have any issues with the car since I owned it except replacing a radiator cap.
 
#8 ·
Coming from 20+ years of 5 cylinder volvo ownership, I can say I am the reverse on most folks. I find them extremely reliable. smooth and a total workhorse. Plus, you come to really enjoy the exhaust with the right downpipe and exhaust setup. If in the market for a V60 AWD, would only buy the 5 cylinder or 6 cylinder only. I personally find the 4 cylinder models very unrefined, (sounds like a tin can), and the transmission hunts for gears when pushed. The few extra mpg isn't worth the hassle of having to deal with multiple trips to the dealer for issues volvo should have refined before releasing the new engine.
 
#9 ·
Coming from 20+ years of 5 cylinder volvo ownership, I can say I am the reverse on most folks.
I think you'll find that liking the 5 cylinder is the accepted response, so you are in the majority in this case.

Unfortunately it was never an option in some countries, so consider yourself lucky.
 
#10 ·
I have both. My old 2005 V70 5 cylinder is a fine engine and will probably last a very long time. It is amenable to driveway fixing.
My 2016 V60 has the turbo 4 and is WAY faster, WAY smoother, and the 8 speed transmission is mostly a delight. At low speeds right off idle it can hunt a bit.
When the '16 is paid off it will have about a year of warranty left and at that point we will decide if the car is a keeper, it seems a bit much for DIY fixing.
 
#11 ·
The 4 cylinder is faster and the transmission is smoother. Neither one is the old red block, and frankly, most folks would find that to be an unacceptable in a modern car. I like the exhaust on the 5 cylinder but mostly just compared to a 4... If you're looking for DIY then the 5 is better, but technology always moves... Folks said performance Mustangs were dead when they went to a DOHC motor in the 1990s... clearly we learn how to work on the new stuff. Until 2019, you had to turn off the start/stop for the 4 cylinders for each trip if that bothers you. Franly on the SPA cars it's not that invasive, but again, in 2019 (which is when the body changed for V60) you can turn it off for good.
 
#13 ·
The choice between the legendary Volvo 5 cylinder engine and the Drive-e 4 cylinder engine is a tough one. I think picking one over the other depends on what you want.

The Drive-e 4 cylinder with the 8 speed transmission behind it is pretty nice - powerful and fuel efficient. To achieve that power level and fuel efficiency requires technology like direct fuel injection, an electric water pump and the whole auto stop/start system. Direct fuel injection is very reliable but when working on the high pressure side of the fuel system, one must consider that the high pressure fuel pipe must be replaced any time it is removed. Same with the high pressure fuel injector seals. The electric water pump is sure to be much more expensive than the belt driven water pump on the 5 cylinder and the 5 cylinder engines totally eliminate the whole auto start/stop system.

The 5 cylinder engine with the 6 speed transmission behind it is about as powerful as the Drive-e 4 cylinder engine but the Drive-e is quicker and more fuel efficient. The 5 cylinder has proven to be extremely reliable and the older technology makes for more simple repairs.

Considering only how the 2 powertrains drive, I would say I like the Drive-e better because it has better power and fuel economy - also I don't mind auto start/stop at all. Being that I have a tendency to keep my cars into high mileage though, I cannot ignore the bullet proof nature of the 5 cylinder engine but with the exception of the early Drive-e engines, I think they are proving to be pretty solid as well.

So ultimately, I think, by the slimmest of margins, I would choose a Drive-e powered Volvo if the choice were mine.
 
#15 ·
Hi Luke, I have a 2011 Volvo C30. Is there any significant difference in the shock absorbers made in North America vs those purchased in Sweden for the same model? Do they vary according to 4 vs 5 cylinders? My car is actually in Argentina. My mechanic there would order from Sweden. I would like to purchase them either in the US or Sweden and take them in my luggage. Because they are currently Insanely $$ in Argentina. Are the specs wildly different? Is the weight difference great enough to be a problem if the shock absorbers are specifically made for either a 4 vs 5 cylinder capacity?