SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
My wife is set on a MY 07-09 XC90 3.2 and we plan to purchase one next month. I have spoken to some current owners, read 100's of consumer reviews and a few similar threads here. I appreciate swedespeed feedback above all!

Over the years I have heard enough negative press from early generation XC90's to be skeptical of this purchase. I would like to believe the early generation T6 transmission issues are less prevalent after 2006. I'm guessing an extended warranty might be a worthy investment.

Anyone care to chime in and share any knowledge or experience? Anything positive or negative would be greatly appreciated?

Cheers,

Andrew
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
T6's existed from 2003 to 2005. Transmission issues are irrelevant for 3.2's.

As the owner of the latter, all I can tell you is take the same due caution you would with any other used car purchase, as these cars have absolutely no problematic areas, at least thus far. The only thing you may want to consider is the fact that some '09's come with a USB port in lieu of a CD changer.

Whether or not to get an extended warranty is totally up to you. Putting that same cash away in a (tax-free) savings account can be a way to get to the same ends by different means.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
I have owned two XC-90 with the 3.2 Engines to include a 2007 and now a 2010. Both have been reliable cars. The 3.2 is a very dependable engine. It is a little short on power but with the 6 speed transmission it does fine for me. I have average approx 20 mpg on both car for over 90,000 miles total driving. One issue is the front end makes popping sounds that no one can ever fix. There have been numerous attempts by the Volvo dealers but it still pops.

I have had one rear wheel bearing to go out on my 2010 XC90 at approx 45,000 miles. The models you are looking at have the nivomat self-adjustable shock which are better for towing but ride a little rougher. They also increase the power by 5 hp in 2010 by redoing the computer programing.

As far as the 3.2 straight non-turbo six, I would have no problems buying another one as far as reliability and the trans have been bullet proof on the 3.2s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
My guess is that it's probably too early for that. I'll do my best to get there, though... :D
 

·
Registered
2021 Volvo S60 T5 AWD
Joined
·
7,283 Posts
as far as reliability and the trans have been bullet proof on the 3.2s.
Not true.

I see MANY oil burning/seal issues on the 3.2's on Volvos and LR2's.

I see about 3-5 cases of this per week.

I actually know of a 2009 XC70 that had a motor replaced during the original bumper to bumper warranty and is getting another motor under CPO and it doesn't even have 75k miles yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,972 Posts
Not true.

I see MANY oil burning/seal issues on the 3.2's on Volvos and LR2's.

I see about 3-5 cases of this per week.

I actually know of a 2009 XC70 that had a motor replaced during the original bumper to bumper warranty and is getting another motor under CPO and it doesn't even have 75k miles yet.
I've heard that problem was only with the early model 3.2 XC90s?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,329 Posts
I have owned two XC-90 with the 3.2 Engines to include a 2007 and now a 2010. Both have been reliable cars. The 3.2 is a very dependable engine. It is a little short on power but with the 6 speed transmission it does fine for me. I have average approx 20 mpg on both car for over 90,000 miles total driving. One issue is the front end makes popping sounds that no one can ever fix. There have been numerous attempts by the Volvo dealers but it still pops.

I have had one rear wheel bearing to go out on my 2010 XC90 at approx 45,000 miles. The models you are looking at have the nivomat self-adjustable shock which are better for towing but ride a little rougher. They also increase the power by 5 hp in 2010 by redoing the computer programing.

As far as the 3.2 straight non-turbo six, I would have no problems buying another one as far as reliability and the trans have been bullet proof on the 3.2s.


This is an accurate assessment, as I have also owned two XC90s, but only one with the 3.2 and so far it is a very nice package. I have asked my wife on several occasions which one she likes best, the 2.5 or the 3.2 and she said the 3.2 is her firm preference. I on the other hand did greatly appreciate the merits of the smaller turbo engine, but I do agree the 3.2 is a fine engine and one needs to understand what they are getting when they buy one. It has a power band higher up on the rpm range, therefore it is well suited for a 6-speed transmission that keeps the power band where you can use it in the event you need it, and again this is yet another safety feature from Volvo. The 2.5 seemed to be more of a bruiser and the 3.2 is more refined. Both are very safe family cars, and I ALWAYS feel good about seeing my wife drive away in one, knowing I put her in something very safe.

As for the insurance package.........................I never bite on those......................have saved a ton of money over the years, and I guess I have been lucky. I recall the compressor I purchased at Sears way back in the mid 1980s, they really wanted to sell me the extended warranty in the worst way. Darn thing is still running just fine today.

regards,

P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
reading about the 3.2L engine gives the goosebumps regarding the reliablity of these suckers.

How are the T6 vs the 3.2?

I just had the steering pump and the trip computer stalk (the same as the turn signal) replaced under CPO and total bill was over $2.5k!!!! the CPO just paid for it self for this visit (CPO costed $1,500)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
668 Posts
reading about the 3.2L engine gives the goosebumps regarding the reliablity of these suckers.

How are the T6 vs the 3.2?

I just had the steering pump and the trip computer stalk (the same as the turn signal) replaced under CPO and total bill was over $2.5k!!!! the CPO just paid for it self for this visit (CPO costed $1,500)
The T6 is good engine with bad tranny, the 3.2 is decent engine and tranny. Most everyone I have talked to that works on the volvo advise against the T6 because of the transmission.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,329 Posts
The power comparison between the T6 and 3.2 are obvious on paper but hardly noticed in reality because the 4-speed of the T6 chokes the response. 268 horses versus 240, but with the T6 comes two (2) turbochargers and the issues and potential maintenance issues. We replaced a turb bearing that was leaking oil inside the exhaust passage on our long departed 850 and it was quite expensive. Never had any turbo issue with our departed 2.5 XC90 in 135,000 miles, so maybe the T6 of similar vintage is as reliable. Just pointing out that with the 3.2 comes no turbo issues and a transmission that works well with the power band of that particular motor. Back in 2004 when I test drove a T6 4-speed versus the 2.5 5-speed, I could not sense ANY power difference but the 5-speed and smaller motor actually felt more responsive and more sporting, so that is what we selected (thankfully).

The 3.2 has less torque down low than the 2.5, but more power on the top end, therefore Volvo selected a 6-speed transmission to compensate or function with the 3.2. The results are fine, but I am not sure I would tow much of anything with an expensive 6-speed transmission, and if I did, it would not be on a regular basis.

regards,

P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
Not true.

I see MANY oil burning/seal issues on the 3.2's on Volvos and LR2's.

I see about 3-5 cases of this per week.

I actually know of a 2009 XC70 that had a motor replaced during the original bumper to bumper warranty and is getting another motor under CPO and it doesn't even have 75k miles yet.
You sir, have my attention! But what exactly are you saying? .... The engine is burning oil? The engine, or tranny, has the seal problem?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
The T6 engine is nice and torquey. While peak power difference isn't much different between it and the 3.2, the T6 engine has substantially more torque and retains about 80% of it's peak torque from 1800 RPM - 5000RPM, something a naturally aspirated engine just can't do. If you're going wide open throttle from stoplight to stoplight (unlikely) than the difference would be less noticeable but in real life driving, the extra torque from the TT Inline 6 and the V8 is very noticeable and now missed. Relative to that, you need to wind the 3.2 up to make power.

I purposely sought out a T6 because of the TT engine. I'm still debating whether or not I should raise the boost in it but I don't drive it enough and the 4T65 isn't exactly renowned for it's reliability even at stock power levels...

As far as reliability, the 4T65E is really the only issue and you're only going to find that in a T6. For how most people drive their SUV, the 3.2/ 6 speed is going to be plenty sufficient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
ok. what I am talking about it the NEW t6 vs the 3.2

How reliable is the engine and tranny?

The power comparison between the T6 and 3.2 are obvious on paper but hardly noticed in reality because the 4-speed of the T6 chokes the response. 268 horses versus 240, but with the T6 comes two (2) turbochargers and the issues and potential maintenance issues. We replaced a turb bearing that was leaking oil inside the exhaust passage on our long departed 850 and it was quite expensive. Never had any turbo issue with our departed 2.5 XC90 in 135,000 miles, so maybe the T6 of similar vintage is as reliable. Just pointing out that with the 3.2 comes no turbo issues and a transmission that works well with the power band of that particular motor. Back in 2004 when I test drove a T6 4-speed versus the 2.5 5-speed, I could not sense ANY power difference but the 5-speed and smaller motor actually felt more responsive and more sporting, so that is what we selected (thankfully).

The 3.2 has less torque down low than the 2.5, but more power on the top end, therefore Volvo selected a 6-speed transmission to compensate or function with the 3.2. The results are fine, but I am not sure I would tow much of anything with an expensive 6-speed transmission, and if I did, it would not be on a regular basis.

regards,

P
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
ok. what I am talking about it the NEW t6 vs the 3.2

How reliable is the engine and tranny?
I don't believe there is a new T6. Just the standard model with various option packages and the R design which has the same engine. There is only one engine/ transmission combination offered in the current XC90.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
I don't believe there is a new T6. Just the standard model with various option packages and the R design which has the same engine. There is only one engine/ transmission combination offered in the current XC90.
ok. not in the xc90. but generally, how is the NEW t6 in the other lines vs the 3.2? does the T6 have oil consumption problems like the 3.2?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
The new T6 is the one to have in the other lines. BTW, what oil consumption?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Informative feed back! I appreciate it!
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top