I am deciding between two comparably priced cars: BMW 328 x-drive wagon or the Volvo V60 RD. The major plus for the Volvo is that I can get far more non-essential options such as nav,rear camera, and blind spot for the same price as a BMW, where those options raise the price beyond my budget. The 328, on the positive side, comes with 4 years of free maintenance, has significantly better gas mileage, and will likely have a higher re-sale, and I prefer the interior, other than the Volvo seats which are fantastic. I also slightly prefer the handling of the BMW, although, the Volvo's power compensates for any loss of agility. I was wondering if anyone else has or is making a similar decision. Of course, if I do a similar post on Bimmerfest everyone will say buy the BMW, so, I know this is a biased audience. But, I am still very interested in the decision making process and perceived pros and cons of other shoppers.
des16
BMW 3-series small overlap crash: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/bmw/3-series#SmallOverlapFrontal1675
![Image]()
Volvo S60/V60 small overlap crash: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/volvo/s60#SmallOverlapFrontal1672
![Image]()
Volvo S60/V60 small overlap crash: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/vehicle/v/volvo/s60#SmallOverlapFrontal1672
I'd take the V60 RD over the 328XI, not being biased but overall you are saving more money and getting more standard features over the BMW. Volvo still has a 3yr/30,000 mile Maintenance Free program if you live in the US.
If all were maxed out with available options (not accessories):
BMW 328iX w/M Sport ~ $58,050
Volvo V60RD w/Platinum & Sport Pkg(19") ~ $52,525
Volvo V60 T5 AWD w/Platinum & Sport Pkg(19") ~ $48,375
Volvo V60 T5 FWD w/Platinum & Sport Pkg(19") ~$48,275
Now I'm not saying you would build both with all the options, but just from those figures you are talking about $6-10,000 difference in pricing for comparable features.
If all were maxed out with available options (not accessories):
BMW 328iX w/M Sport ~ $58,050
Volvo V60RD w/Platinum & Sport Pkg(19") ~ $52,525
Volvo V60 T5 AWD w/Platinum & Sport Pkg(19") ~ $48,375
Volvo V60 T5 FWD w/Platinum & Sport Pkg(19") ~$48,275
Now I'm not saying you would build both with all the options, but just from those figures you are talking about $6-10,000 difference in pricing for comparable features.
I just bought my first Volvo (the V60 T5 FWD with most of the tech options and Sport package, I skipped the climate package [live in Miami] and the Nav system [I don't like them]), and I considered all the available wagons on the market (Acura TSX, BMW xDrive, VW Jetta Sportwagen TDI, Audi Allroad, Volvo V60 [used to own a Subaru, never again]) with an open mind. After weighing all the variables, price, handling, MPG, safety, looks, features, comfort and quiet on the road, so on and so forth. The Volvo came out ahead. Way Ahead. Two caveats: AWD did not receive heavy weighting (again I live in Miami, don't need it, and I want good mileage) but MPG and safety did.
BMW. Car and Driver just did a comparison between the V60 R-Design, BMW 328i xDrive Touring, and Audi Allroad Quattro. Volvo placed last for its poor chassis tuning, overly sensitive throttle, and slow transmission. I'd post the comparo link but it's not online yet for obvious reasons. They do believe that if they got the T5 AWD instead with a slightly softer setup, the Volvo would have placed better. Also for Canadians who are financing, the BMW is significantly cheaper than the Volvo.
Also, if you don't need navigation and all that stuff, then save your money and don't get it. Why buy tech you won't use?
Also, if you don't need navigation and all that stuff, then save your money and don't get it. Why buy tech you won't use?
Bmw wagons are ugly, only other option would have been an allroad audi if it had the s4 supercharged motor
I dont understand the appeal of bmw suvs or wagons, they are known to make great rwd coupes and sedans but if you need a family hauler then you are certainly not tracking the car or back road canyon driving , there are simply other options out there that are cheaper
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I dont understand the appeal of bmw suvs or wagons, they are known to make great rwd coupes and sedans but if you need a family hauler then you are certainly not tracking the car or back road canyon driving , there are simply other options out there that are cheaper
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Poor chassis tuning? lol! I drive mine everyday and often pretty hard, and the chassis is just fine with maybe a tad more understeer than I prefer. So maybe I'll throw a $250 beefier rear sway bar on it. Actually I could do a lot of things with the $10K I saved.
For those of you who read C&D, has a BMW 3 series ever lost a comparison? Their articles are generally entertaining (cute play on words, cliches and metaphors), but the judging is so often skewed towards track performance and their obsession for perfect steering feel. Could they possibly be BMW's top North American marketing firm?
Everyone has their own criteria for buying a luxury sport wagon (the few of us left); track times and 20+ mph above the limit handling on windy roads are probably not near the top of those lists. Being yet another overpriced BMW driver is also low on mine.
For those of you who read C&D, has a BMW 3 series ever lost a comparison? Their articles are generally entertaining (cute play on words, cliches and metaphors), but the judging is so often skewed towards track performance and their obsession for perfect steering feel. Could they possibly be BMW's top North American marketing firm?
Everyone has their own criteria for buying a luxury sport wagon (the few of us left); track times and 20+ mph above the limit handling on windy roads are probably not near the top of those lists. Being yet another overpriced BMW driver is also low on mine.
Why would you compare the R-design vs. the 328? Do you need AWD? If yes, then you should compare the T5 AWD vs the BMW; it gets decent gas mileage, has similar (if not more) power, very good AWD system and still comes w/ 3 years or 30,000 miles free scheduled maintenance. For an extra $1,500, you can extend that to 5 years or 50,000 miles and you will still pay less money than you would for a 328 X-drive. On top opf that, the V60 goes without requiring premium gas whereas the BMW requires it. Add that to long term savings.
Of course, all that is a moot point when it comes to the superior safety rating of the V60...
It's all about setting priorities and breaking down the numbers.
Of course, all that is a moot point when it comes to the superior safety rating of the V60...
It's all about setting priorities and breaking down the numbers.
That comparison should have had a T5....waaaay different outcome then. Why the heck would you test a base engine 4 against a T6?!? Think of the price advantage the Volvo would have had with a T5 along with the fuel economy. Boo on them, why is it everyone only tests R-Design models (the most expensive) from Volvo in magazines....new customers immediately get the impression that's the price of most Volvos, when its not. Rarely do we ever see a Volvo review with a fair shake given, it's like they intentionally handicap it's review by picking the wrong model to compare.
Ja, the RD on 19's is not the fairest comparison of riding comfort and compliance, especially compared to the Bimmer on 18's. I also wonder if they had the full sport mode on by turning off the DSTC? Regardless, take just some of the $10K saved and put towards a bigger rear sway, maybe better front struts and what do you have? The brakes are more than fine for non-track duty.
I agree with some of the others, if we're going to compare apples to apples, the T5 AWD with the better gas mileage and probably lighter front-end on 18" rims would've been a more fair choice. However, I know these mag writers hate to deal with the price differential question all the time (especially around BMW & Audi), and most readers love the juicier (fantasy team) track measurables, so the pricier Bimmer kind of forced the RD into the test. With that said, what were those 0-60 and quarter mile times again?
I agree with some of the others, if we're going to compare apples to apples, the T5 AWD with the better gas mileage and probably lighter front-end on 18" rims would've been a more fair choice. However, I know these mag writers hate to deal with the price differential question all the time (especially around BMW & Audi), and most readers love the juicier (fantasy team) track measurables, so the pricier Bimmer kind of forced the RD into the test. With that said, what were those 0-60 and quarter mile times again?
C&D are full of it, we can leave it at that, I think. No wait, let me rephrase it. Even if they are right, they are not going to be the one daily-driving the car, so let's leave it at that.
I see the logic in comparing similarly priced cars with different features, though I think 335 x-drive with M-sport would be a fairer comparison.
It is hard to recommend one over the other because it's hard to know your preferences.
I chose RD because I test drove it and liked it... I also tried 335 and didn't like it at all... May be I was in a bad mood, or may be test drive route was bad, I can't say.... But none of that matters because you need to love it, not I
I see the logic in comparing similarly priced cars with different features, though I think 335 x-drive with M-sport would be a fairer comparison.
It is hard to recommend one over the other because it's hard to know your preferences.
I chose RD because I test drove it and liked it... I also tried 335 and didn't like it at all... May be I was in a bad mood, or may be test drive route was bad, I can't say.... But none of that matters because you need to love it, not I
Although more of a general review of wagons and not a direct review of the V60 RD per se, the Globe and Mail (a large Canadian newspaper) article noted below did praise the V60 RD's handling. For what it's worth, I've come to appreciate Peter Cheney's reviews over the years since they seem to correlate well with my own experiences for what I would describe as "real world reviewing". I realize that this will vary from individual to individual.
The Globe and Mail
April 21, 2014
In praise of the humble station wagon
By PETER CHENEY
Against all odds, the family hauler has survived - and may yet again thrive
I had a strange sense of déjà vu as I carved through a sweeping off-ramp in the new Volvo V60 R-Spec sport wagon. Why did this car feel so familiar? Was I recalling the station wagons my family owned when I was a teenager? Couldn't be – our Ford Falcon and Opel Kadett wagons had been slow, unassuming boxes. This V60 was slick and fast.
Then it hit me – the Volvo wagon reminded me of the Porsche 911 S that I took on a trip through Germany a few weeks ago. Seriously? Yes. The Volvo's steering was accurate and perfectly weighted, and the V60 stuck relentlessly through the long curve, hunkering down like a sports car. Beautiful.
This got me thinking about the state of the station wagon. Once upon a time, the wagon was a proletarian transporter that covered North American roads in the same way that bison had once blanketed the plains. Then came a series of changes that gradually rendered the wagon all but extinct: an oil crisis, the minivan and the rise of the SUV.
Against all odds, the station wagon has survived, but in an unexpected, mutant form: elite-level cars like my Volvo R-Spec tester (which was priced at just less than $59,000 before taxes). The wagon world has been turned on its head.
In the 1950s and 1960s, the station wagon was defined by machines like the Oldsmobile Vista Cruiser and the Ford Country Squire, lumbering highway arks that were nothing more than Detroit sedans with grafted-on tail sections, an extra set of seats and fake wood panelling applied to their bounteous flanks.
Today, the wagon market is ruled by upscale foreign machines like the Audi A4 Allroad, the Mercedes E350 and the BMW 3 Series Touring. The newest arrival is the Volvo V60 I tested. It was the top-of-the-line T6 R-Spec model, and it epitomizes the modern station wagon.
There was a turbocharged, 325-horsepower inline-six motor under this Volvo's hood, and a silken all-wheel-drive system with Haldex differentials (clever devices that seamlessly distribute power to each wheel). The V60 was fast, and it handled beautifully.
This was definitely not the station wagon I grew up with.
When I was a boy in the 1960s, the station wagon was a North American cultural fixture. Like the minivan that would later push it aside, the wagon made a lot of sense for a family. (I begged my father to trade in our Mercury Comet compact sedan for a Ford Country Squire wagon, and dreamed about trips where I wasn't jammed into a steerage-class back seat with my brother, sister and a sheepdog.)
There were some cool wagons back then. One of my father's friends turned the family Country Squire into a hot rod by tearing out the stock motor and bolting in a 440-cubic-inch V-8 from a crashed muscle car. I hoped my father would follow a similar path, but he opted for a used Falcon wagon, which had no sporting credentials whatsoever.
The sporting station wagon was a long-held dream, combining kid-hauling practicality with driving pleasure. If you watched the 1983 movie National Lampoon's Vacation, you may recall Chevy Chase ordering a new "sport wagon" for his upcoming family trip to Walley World (although he was hoodwinked by the dealer into accepting the hideous Wagon Queen Family Truckster instead).
As I piloted the new T6 Volvo, I realized that my 1960s dream of a high-performance station wagon had come true – and that modern reality exceeded anything I could have envisioned in those days.
The R-Spec Volvo is compact and cleverly engineered, packed with state-of-the-art mechanicals, advanced safety features and digital systems that include blind spot warning systems and radar cruise control. It has all-wheel drive, disc brakes and independent suspension. And the Volvo's three-litre turbo-six engine made more power than the 7.2-litre V-8 my father's friend wedged into his Country Squire, while burning less than a third as much fuel.
This is the state of the station wagon art. But my drive in the T6 begged a further question – where do new wagons fit in a market ruled by the SUV?
The wagon's decline in North America began in the 1970s, when the OPEC crisis drove up fuel prices. Sales plunged further when Chrysler introduced the minivan in 1984. The final nail in the wagon's coffin was the SUV, a super-sized station wagon. The market had spoken. Detroit's last full-sized station wagons, the Chevrolet Caprice and Buick Roadmaster, were discontinued in 1996.
Despite their decline, wagons offer several advantages over SUVs and car-based crossovers – they are lighter, more fuel efficient, and have superior driving dynamics.
In Europe and Japan, where fuel prices are far higher, station wagons make up about 50 per cent of the car market.
If fuel prices continue to rise in North America, the wagon may rise again. Could the mastodon SUV end up in the tar pits of history, pushed aside by smaller, nimbler wagons? Stranger things have happened.
The Globe and Mail
April 21, 2014
In praise of the humble station wagon
By PETER CHENEY
Against all odds, the family hauler has survived - and may yet again thrive
I had a strange sense of déjà vu as I carved through a sweeping off-ramp in the new Volvo V60 R-Spec sport wagon. Why did this car feel so familiar? Was I recalling the station wagons my family owned when I was a teenager? Couldn't be – our Ford Falcon and Opel Kadett wagons had been slow, unassuming boxes. This V60 was slick and fast.
Then it hit me – the Volvo wagon reminded me of the Porsche 911 S that I took on a trip through Germany a few weeks ago. Seriously? Yes. The Volvo's steering was accurate and perfectly weighted, and the V60 stuck relentlessly through the long curve, hunkering down like a sports car. Beautiful.
This got me thinking about the state of the station wagon. Once upon a time, the wagon was a proletarian transporter that covered North American roads in the same way that bison had once blanketed the plains. Then came a series of changes that gradually rendered the wagon all but extinct: an oil crisis, the minivan and the rise of the SUV.
Against all odds, the station wagon has survived, but in an unexpected, mutant form: elite-level cars like my Volvo R-Spec tester (which was priced at just less than $59,000 before taxes). The wagon world has been turned on its head.
In the 1950s and 1960s, the station wagon was defined by machines like the Oldsmobile Vista Cruiser and the Ford Country Squire, lumbering highway arks that were nothing more than Detroit sedans with grafted-on tail sections, an extra set of seats and fake wood panelling applied to their bounteous flanks.
Today, the wagon market is ruled by upscale foreign machines like the Audi A4 Allroad, the Mercedes E350 and the BMW 3 Series Touring. The newest arrival is the Volvo V60 I tested. It was the top-of-the-line T6 R-Spec model, and it epitomizes the modern station wagon.
There was a turbocharged, 325-horsepower inline-six motor under this Volvo's hood, and a silken all-wheel-drive system with Haldex differentials (clever devices that seamlessly distribute power to each wheel). The V60 was fast, and it handled beautifully.
This was definitely not the station wagon I grew up with.
When I was a boy in the 1960s, the station wagon was a North American cultural fixture. Like the minivan that would later push it aside, the wagon made a lot of sense for a family. (I begged my father to trade in our Mercury Comet compact sedan for a Ford Country Squire wagon, and dreamed about trips where I wasn't jammed into a steerage-class back seat with my brother, sister and a sheepdog.)
There were some cool wagons back then. One of my father's friends turned the family Country Squire into a hot rod by tearing out the stock motor and bolting in a 440-cubic-inch V-8 from a crashed muscle car. I hoped my father would follow a similar path, but he opted for a used Falcon wagon, which had no sporting credentials whatsoever.
The sporting station wagon was a long-held dream, combining kid-hauling practicality with driving pleasure. If you watched the 1983 movie National Lampoon's Vacation, you may recall Chevy Chase ordering a new "sport wagon" for his upcoming family trip to Walley World (although he was hoodwinked by the dealer into accepting the hideous Wagon Queen Family Truckster instead).
As I piloted the new T6 Volvo, I realized that my 1960s dream of a high-performance station wagon had come true – and that modern reality exceeded anything I could have envisioned in those days.
The R-Spec Volvo is compact and cleverly engineered, packed with state-of-the-art mechanicals, advanced safety features and digital systems that include blind spot warning systems and radar cruise control. It has all-wheel drive, disc brakes and independent suspension. And the Volvo's three-litre turbo-six engine made more power than the 7.2-litre V-8 my father's friend wedged into his Country Squire, while burning less than a third as much fuel.
This is the state of the station wagon art. But my drive in the T6 begged a further question – where do new wagons fit in a market ruled by the SUV?
The wagon's decline in North America began in the 1970s, when the OPEC crisis drove up fuel prices. Sales plunged further when Chrysler introduced the minivan in 1984. The final nail in the wagon's coffin was the SUV, a super-sized station wagon. The market had spoken. Detroit's last full-sized station wagons, the Chevrolet Caprice and Buick Roadmaster, were discontinued in 1996.
Despite their decline, wagons offer several advantages over SUVs and car-based crossovers – they are lighter, more fuel efficient, and have superior driving dynamics.
In Europe and Japan, where fuel prices are far higher, station wagons make up about 50 per cent of the car market.
If fuel prices continue to rise in North America, the wagon may rise again. Could the mastodon SUV end up in the tar pits of history, pushed aside by smaller, nimbler wagons? Stranger things have happened.
The 3-series is a very nice car. If there was a 335xi wagon, that would have interested me. The S4 Avant also would have interested me. But the V60 R-Design is somewhat unique and far less common than a 328 BMW, and I just didn't want to be another person with a BMW 3-series. I didn't even bother test driving the 328xi as a result. I didn't want a 4-cylinder wagon. I didn't want a car that was less safe just because it looked nicer (M Sport in Estoril Blue). I don't like BMW's modern interior much (mainly the center stack and stubby stalks), though I'm sure it would grow on me in time. The BMW 3-series sedans I sat in a few years ago were not nearly as comfortable as the current generation S60/V60.
For me, it came down to "screw the 3-series wagon, do I want a 4-series convertible instead of a wagon" and then it came down to trying my dog in a car seat and realizing it was not an enjoyable experience and he was a huge distraction as he spun himself around and tangled himself up and I worried about him breaking a leg or something.
If you don't mind just driving a BMW 328, then it's a great choice. Here are the reasons I would choose the V60 over it:
1. I wanted the safest car in the class.
2. I wanted something less typical.
3. I was in love with Volvo's styling.
4. I didn't want a 4-cylinder engine for therapeutic reasons.
5. I found the Volvo more comfortable (most people say they do).
For me, it came down to "screw the 3-series wagon, do I want a 4-series convertible instead of a wagon" and then it came down to trying my dog in a car seat and realizing it was not an enjoyable experience and he was a huge distraction as he spun himself around and tangled himself up and I worried about him breaking a leg or something.
If you don't mind just driving a BMW 328, then it's a great choice. Here are the reasons I would choose the V60 over it:
1. I wanted the safest car in the class.
2. I wanted something less typical.
3. I was in love with Volvo's styling.
4. I didn't want a 4-cylinder engine for therapeutic reasons.
5. I found the Volvo more comfortable (most people say they do).
I currently drive a 2011 BMW 328 xit, and since it has 98K miles on it, for my next car, I'm considering the same choices as the OP along with the Audi Allroad and the new Golf R. If the BMW still was offered with an MT, I wouldn't be considering the other brands, but since it ain't, I might as well. Some things the OP may want to consider:
-I really like the back window opening feature on the BMW. Sounds stupid, but that feature alone almost wins it for BMW. It's really convenient.
-The Golf R and the Audi have true spare tire storage, the BMW has nothing, and I keep a donut spare in the back. The Volvo has an option that raises the whole back platform up to accommodate the spare underneath. I'd probably just stick the donut spare in the back if I got the Volvo and not get the raised platform.
-The Audi has weird electronic steering. The BMW changed to electronic steering also, but it doesn't feel as weird. I'm waiting to drive the Volvo to compare.
-The Golf R is almost as big as the wagons. (We have a 2012 Golf R also, and I just drove a 2014/15 Golf TDI in France.)
-The MT option in the Golf R may be enough for me to go there, and that car is an absolute blast to drive. If the Volvo came in MT, I'd be buying it.
-The 3 wagons are VERY similar in size, and the looks, options, etc. are again, VERY similar to me, so those things aren't swaying me. I also put 110K miles on a 2007 328xit, so that is swaying me a bit towards BMW.
-I really like the back window opening feature on the BMW. Sounds stupid, but that feature alone almost wins it for BMW. It's really convenient.
-The Golf R and the Audi have true spare tire storage, the BMW has nothing, and I keep a donut spare in the back. The Volvo has an option that raises the whole back platform up to accommodate the spare underneath. I'd probably just stick the donut spare in the back if I got the Volvo and not get the raised platform.
-The Audi has weird electronic steering. The BMW changed to electronic steering also, but it doesn't feel as weird. I'm waiting to drive the Volvo to compare.
-The Golf R is almost as big as the wagons. (We have a 2012 Golf R also, and I just drove a 2014/15 Golf TDI in France.)
-The MT option in the Golf R may be enough for me to go there, and that car is an absolute blast to drive. If the Volvo came in MT, I'd be buying it.
-The 3 wagons are VERY similar in size, and the looks, options, etc. are again, VERY similar to me, so those things aren't swaying me. I also put 110K miles on a 2007 328xit, so that is swaying me a bit towards BMW.
I'm a converted BMW driver. I swore that I'll be a BMW driver for life and look at me now. Aside from any magazines, I can tell you that I love my Volvo as much as I loved my BMW, hands down one of the best cars out there right now.
I used to track my BMW, and I can tell you that, yes, it's one good track machine, but now that I'm older and wiser... BMW is no longer a car that I want to live with everyday. I've tested the 335 and 328 wagon before I bought my 12' T6 and even the 14' BMW 328 wagon before my 15' V60. I can tell you one thing, normal day to day driving, even spirited driving, I'd choose a Volvo over the BMW. The Volvo gives you the compromise of both comfort and performance/sportiness.
The 328 wagon with the turbo 4 compared to the T5 and even the T5 e-drive, is inferior in engine performance, it felt sluggish, and if you put the A4 All road in the mix, that 2.0L Turbo is not even a contender. The only thing I have to say about the handling between a BMW and the Volvo is that BMW has 50/50 weight distribution, so it feels more nimble and neutral around the corners. BUT, once you get used to how the Volvo dynamic chassis reacts to change in direction, it's quite confident around the corner, especially with the RD sort chassis, it feels GREAT around the corners. The V60 I believe has a better weight distribution than the S60, and I feel that the V60 handles way better, and is almost on par with the BMW wagon. If I may say this, the RD puts the power to the ground better than a 335 M-sport despite the fact that the 335 is lighter.
One thing for sure, the dynamic chassis and even the RD chassis is far more comfortable than the BMW with comparable stiffness. One thing for sure, coming from a guy that does a lot of road trips to the mountains, the seats in the Volvo is far superior than ANY competitors out there, never once have I complained of back pains in my Volvo. In my BMW, I had to stop ever so often cause my back would cramp up because the leather/seats are so hard, even the new BMW the seats are not as bolstered as the Volvo. The combination of the hard seats and the stiff suspension in the BMW makes it hard to stay in the car for a long period of time.
The reason why I had to buy a new car in 2011 was cause I was involved in an accident with my BMW, I walked out fine, but the car didn't fare very well. Safety was on top of my list. Newer BMW are not as solid and safe as they used to be 10 years ago. Volvo remained true to their moto of safety, and having been involved in an accident, safety was on top of my list. I felt safe in my BMW, and I feel even safer in my Volvo. Looking at the IIHS safety pictures up there, I would say hands down Volvo for the win. I drive quite spiritedly, and I also drive a lot of back countries. In the event that I have a date with wildlife, I'd want the sense that I am protected by my car and that I'd walk out alive. BMW has not given that sense since they redesigned their cars back in 2007.
If I'm comparing apples to apples 328 m-sport wagon with all options with my V60 RD fully loaded... I'd still say the V60 is a better bang for your buck. The power advantage is already a selling feature. If you're talking about the 335 GT M-sport... why would I spend $65G+??? I can get the fun that I want, the comfort and performance I want in the V60 for $10K less. OH AND I'LL BE SPENDING LESS TIME IN THE SHOP!!!! BMW loves to take care of you under their warranty for the first 4 months, and your car always comes out 'fixed'.. Then the warranty is over and you find yourself in the shop a lot.. the maintenance bill adds up. With both my Volvos, I reliability was top notch, I haven't had any electrical or mechanical issues with either of them compared to my BMW.
Am I biased? Maybe a little. Do I still love BMW's? Yes I do. Will I buy one again? Maybe not, maybe when I'm retired and I can afford a M3 or a M5. Do I love my Volvo? YES!!! Will I buy one again? YES.. I did.
Sorry gone off topic a bit there, just thought I'd put in my 2 cents.
I used to track my BMW, and I can tell you that, yes, it's one good track machine, but now that I'm older and wiser... BMW is no longer a car that I want to live with everyday. I've tested the 335 and 328 wagon before I bought my 12' T6 and even the 14' BMW 328 wagon before my 15' V60. I can tell you one thing, normal day to day driving, even spirited driving, I'd choose a Volvo over the BMW. The Volvo gives you the compromise of both comfort and performance/sportiness.
The 328 wagon with the turbo 4 compared to the T5 and even the T5 e-drive, is inferior in engine performance, it felt sluggish, and if you put the A4 All road in the mix, that 2.0L Turbo is not even a contender. The only thing I have to say about the handling between a BMW and the Volvo is that BMW has 50/50 weight distribution, so it feels more nimble and neutral around the corners. BUT, once you get used to how the Volvo dynamic chassis reacts to change in direction, it's quite confident around the corner, especially with the RD sort chassis, it feels GREAT around the corners. The V60 I believe has a better weight distribution than the S60, and I feel that the V60 handles way better, and is almost on par with the BMW wagon. If I may say this, the RD puts the power to the ground better than a 335 M-sport despite the fact that the 335 is lighter.
One thing for sure, the dynamic chassis and even the RD chassis is far more comfortable than the BMW with comparable stiffness. One thing for sure, coming from a guy that does a lot of road trips to the mountains, the seats in the Volvo is far superior than ANY competitors out there, never once have I complained of back pains in my Volvo. In my BMW, I had to stop ever so often cause my back would cramp up because the leather/seats are so hard, even the new BMW the seats are not as bolstered as the Volvo. The combination of the hard seats and the stiff suspension in the BMW makes it hard to stay in the car for a long period of time.
The reason why I had to buy a new car in 2011 was cause I was involved in an accident with my BMW, I walked out fine, but the car didn't fare very well. Safety was on top of my list. Newer BMW are not as solid and safe as they used to be 10 years ago. Volvo remained true to their moto of safety, and having been involved in an accident, safety was on top of my list. I felt safe in my BMW, and I feel even safer in my Volvo. Looking at the IIHS safety pictures up there, I would say hands down Volvo for the win. I drive quite spiritedly, and I also drive a lot of back countries. In the event that I have a date with wildlife, I'd want the sense that I am protected by my car and that I'd walk out alive. BMW has not given that sense since they redesigned their cars back in 2007.
If I'm comparing apples to apples 328 m-sport wagon with all options with my V60 RD fully loaded... I'd still say the V60 is a better bang for your buck. The power advantage is already a selling feature. If you're talking about the 335 GT M-sport... why would I spend $65G+??? I can get the fun that I want, the comfort and performance I want in the V60 for $10K less. OH AND I'LL BE SPENDING LESS TIME IN THE SHOP!!!! BMW loves to take care of you under their warranty for the first 4 months, and your car always comes out 'fixed'.. Then the warranty is over and you find yourself in the shop a lot.. the maintenance bill adds up. With both my Volvos, I reliability was top notch, I haven't had any electrical or mechanical issues with either of them compared to my BMW.
Am I biased? Maybe a little. Do I still love BMW's? Yes I do. Will I buy one again? Maybe not, maybe when I'm retired and I can afford a M3 or a M5. Do I love my Volvo? YES!!! Will I buy one again? YES.. I did.
Sorry gone off topic a bit there, just thought I'd put in my 2 cents.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-volvo-v60-t5-drive-e-test-review-agreeable-dynamics-page-2
Drive-e review, but you get the point.
Drive-e review, but you get the point.
As the owner of both a BMW 3 series wagon (2004, E46, xi, since new) and a Volvo sedan (2004, S60, since new), there are things to like about both...
BMW wins from a $$ point of view. It depreciates less and costs LESS to maintain than Volvo. My Volvo has easily cost me 3x the maintenance of the BMW over the same mileage since new. Some things on a Volvo need to be replaced repeatedly due to their use of a high percentage of recycled rubber - i.e control arms, spring seats, engine mounts. Design gotchas like rear parking brakes that delaminate and seize the hub, parking brake cables that fail early, ignition key cylinders that die too soon, and an easily clogged pcv system, are all things you you'll pay for on a Volvo that won't have to repair on a BMW. No timing belt on the BMW either. And when you go to sell it down the road it will still be worth a lot and sell quickly, the Volvo not so much. Besides that, the fit and finish is also very good, nothing rattles or makes noises, and the materials are very durable.
Volvo wins in comfort, styling, functional easy to use controls, safety in one particular type of crash, and Swedishness. I love the comfort, but I hate the endless repairs and the small things that want to rattle (even when new).
BMW wins from a $$ point of view. It depreciates less and costs LESS to maintain than Volvo. My Volvo has easily cost me 3x the maintenance of the BMW over the same mileage since new. Some things on a Volvo need to be replaced repeatedly due to their use of a high percentage of recycled rubber - i.e control arms, spring seats, engine mounts. Design gotchas like rear parking brakes that delaminate and seize the hub, parking brake cables that fail early, ignition key cylinders that die too soon, and an easily clogged pcv system, are all things you you'll pay for on a Volvo that won't have to repair on a BMW. No timing belt on the BMW either. And when you go to sell it down the road it will still be worth a lot and sell quickly, the Volvo not so much. Besides that, the fit and finish is also very good, nothing rattles or makes noises, and the materials are very durable.
Volvo wins in comfort, styling, functional easy to use controls, safety in one particular type of crash, and Swedishness. I love the comfort, but I hate the endless repairs and the small things that want to rattle (even when new).
I'm really surprised to hear a comment like that from someone who owns an E36 M3...
But the XC60 is very heavy and while I haven't gotten to take an XC60 R-Design over any really rough terrain after it was broken in, I think the V60 with 18" wheels rides much more comfortably. Haven't the US XC60's always come with the larger wheel size (20"?)?
But the XC60 is very heavy and while I haven't gotten to take an XC60 R-Design over any really rough terrain after it was broken in, I think the V60 with 18" wheels rides much more comfortably. Haven't the US XC60's always come with the larger wheel size (20"?)?
I loves my S60 r design. Right up to the day I was hit head on by an explorer going the wrong way. The passenger compartment was intact and the impact was at an angle roughy centered on the headlight. I have no doubt that the extra steel for small offset crashes absorbed a lot of energy and helped keep me alive.
The BMW is a nice car (if you don't have that kind of accident) but the Volvo gives you more power, similar on road cornering limits, a really wonderful interior with lots of comfort and sport, and all the bells and whistles for the price of a moderately equipped BMW. If you don't need the awd and aren't in a hurry - maybe you could get the t6 drive e in the V60 if they make it next year. It's fwd but still a ver very fast A to B car and very easy on gas.
The BMW is a nice car (if you don't have that kind of accident) but the Volvo gives you more power, similar on road cornering limits, a really wonderful interior with lots of comfort and sport, and all the bells and whistles for the price of a moderately equipped BMW. If you don't need the awd and aren't in a hurry - maybe you could get the t6 drive e in the V60 if they make it next year. It's fwd but still a ver very fast A to B car and very easy on gas.
Posted this reply to your post in the BMW forum, but will cross-post it here also:
If BMW sold the 335 wagon in the States, it would be a no brainer. With the only option being the 328 with automatic transmission, the choice becomes tougher. It really boils down to what your priorities are, and how long you intend to keep the car.
The Volvo's powertrain (at least in the AWD models) is a Turbo Inline 6 with a 6-Speed Automatic that has been installed for years without any major known issues. There's no direct injection, electric power steering, regenerative braking, or other new technologies that haven't been proven in the long haul yet. Likewise, the in-cabin electronics are nowhere near as cutting edge as the BMW's. (This will change for the '2015.5' models that are getting an updated control system.) Volvo's stability control and other safety features can't be fully disabled/controlled, which may or may not matter to you. The Volvo also carries a lot more weight over the front axle, and will handle more like a FWD car.
BMW has full maintenance included for the first 4 years / 50k miles, and the service will likely be better than Volvo (though that obviously varies greatly between dealers.) Volvo is also now under Chinese ownership, which, again, may or may not matter to you.
If possible, take both cars out for an extended drive to see which feels 'right' to you. It will probably take more than 10 minutes behind the wheel to know for sure. Happy shopping!
If BMW sold the 335 wagon in the States, it would be a no brainer. With the only option being the 328 with automatic transmission, the choice becomes tougher. It really boils down to what your priorities are, and how long you intend to keep the car.
The Volvo's powertrain (at least in the AWD models) is a Turbo Inline 6 with a 6-Speed Automatic that has been installed for years without any major known issues. There's no direct injection, electric power steering, regenerative braking, or other new technologies that haven't been proven in the long haul yet. Likewise, the in-cabin electronics are nowhere near as cutting edge as the BMW's. (This will change for the '2015.5' models that are getting an updated control system.) Volvo's stability control and other safety features can't be fully disabled/controlled, which may or may not matter to you. The Volvo also carries a lot more weight over the front axle, and will handle more like a FWD car.
BMW has full maintenance included for the first 4 years / 50k miles, and the service will likely be better than Volvo (though that obviously varies greatly between dealers.) Volvo is also now under Chinese ownership, which, again, may or may not matter to you.
If possible, take both cars out for an extended drive to see which feels 'right' to you. It will probably take more than 10 minutes behind the wheel to know for sure. Happy shopping!
It was great on our '77 Country Squire! We kids used to hang out the back and wave to folks, plus enjoy the exhaust fumes :facepalm: Of course this was way before those dang seat belt and booster seat laws took all the fun out of things...lol
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
