SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey guys:<p>Lurking here as I am going to be replacing my Pathfinder with a new SUV within a year. XC90 V8 is on my list. <p>I did a search for fuel consumption and haven't seen much posted since last year. <p>Has anyone tracked their MPG in the V8 fairly accurately? I'm trying to get a feel for how the thing does on fuel. I used to do a lot of highway driving (40,000 miles per year plus) but now I'm back to mixed mode, so all types of input is appreciated. <p>Thanks guys!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,740 Posts
Re: V8 Fuel Economy (needsdecaf)

I'm actually impressed with the numbers. <p>On the highway, if you're doing 60-65, I exceed the advertized mileage and get upto 23-24mpg. By 75-80, you're down to 20-21.<p>Towing my 3000lb boat/trailer combination (with a trailering cover), I still get 15mpg.<p>In city, it's lower. I don't really track it. Maybe 15-16mpg? That seems to be what the number usually is before I reset it on a long trip.<p>pat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,357 Posts
My wifes get about 22 on the highway and around 14 where we live which is a lot of stop-and-go. We do leave the engine running a lot because of the heat and we have small kids and it always seems one is asleep when we run errands. I have been really pleased with the highway mpg and sometimes get 23-24 mpg but average about 22mpg on a long drive. I drove the 2.5 for about two months and did not get much better at all and to me there is no comparison in the engines and the power, smoothness of the V8.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
Re: V8 Fuel Economy (needsdecaf)

I just took a trip from San Francisco to the Los Angeles area and got 22mpg at 70mph. The gas mileage increases quite a bit if you throttle down to 60mph. <p>Around the city, we get about 14-15 mpg. <p>Overall, I am very happy with the fuel consumption. It is much better than some of the other similar SUV's out there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
My fuel logbook for 2006 shows 436.676 gallons purchased with 6,421 mile traveled so far. That gives you a calculated (not average) of 14.7 miles per gallon.<p>We went to Niagara Falls recently and got 23.83 miles per gallon on the highway, and that's with four passengers and full of cargo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Re: (C130)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>C130</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My wifes get about 22 on the highway and around 14 where we live which is a lot of stop-and-go. We do leave the engine running a lot because of the heat and we have small kids and it always seems one is asleep when we run errands. I have been really pleased with the highway mpg and sometimes get 23-24 mpg but average about 22mpg on a long drive. I drove the 2.5 for about two months and did not get much better at all and to me there is no comparison in the engines and the power, smoothness of the V8.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Scott, would you say that the V8 gets similiar mileage as the R?<p>Thanks for your response guys, and keep 'em coming. I have long been of the belief in a bigger vehicle, a V8 with a good transmissions is as efficient as anything else in anything other than pure stop and go. My V8 Grand Cherokee was rated at 15 / 19, and I got a steady 17-18 in very mixed driving. On the highway, it was easy to return 20-21. My V6 Pathfinder, which is rated similar, struggles to get over a combined 16 because (even with the newer 3.5L) it's undersized and the 4 speed tranny sucks too much power out. <p>EPA ratings only tell you so much. My other top contender is the new Acura RDX (gotta love the bells and whistles!) and the ratings are supposed to be 19 / 24, which is pretty good for a full sized ute. But I'm worried that it's going to have to get flogged quite a bit and suffer for it.<p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,166 Posts
Re: (needsdecaf)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>needsdecaf</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Scott, would you say that the V8 gets similiar mileage as the R?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Sorry to butt in but I averaged 24.6 MPG with the A/C and highway cruising around 75 MPH on the latest trip.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>needsdecaf</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">My other top contender is the new Acura RDX (gotta love the bells and whistles!) and the ratings are supposed to be 19 / 24, which is pretty good for a full sized ute. But I'm worried that it's going to have to get flogged quite a bit and suffer for it.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I think you meant MDX. The RDX is the CRV based ute (ummm.....looks more like a Matrix) with the turbo 4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Re: (MagoonR)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>MagoonR</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>I think you meant MDX. The RDX is the CRV based ute (ummm.....looks more like a Matrix) with the turbo 4.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Nope, I meant the RDX. I should have called it a mid-sized ute, not a full sized one. It is about the same size inside as a Grand Cherokee and Pathfinder. Those are the estimated MPG's that they are marketing it under. <p>I do not like the MDX, too boxy and old tech. The RDX has all the toys. <p>The back end looks kinda funky, but overall I like it. Saw it in person at the auto show. Honestly it would be the ideal truck for me, but I like Volvos and I like the XC90 a lot. The interior space is amazing given the exterior dimensions. And the 3rd row is really usable....and you still have space behind the third row with it up. Great truck / car / crossover. <p>But I want the V8, hence the fuel economy question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,166 Posts
Re: (needsdecaf)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>needsdecaf</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Nope, I meant the RDX. I should have called it a mid-sized ute, not a full sized one. It is about the same size inside as a Grand Cherokee and Pathfinder. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>My wife drives a 2002 CRV so I know they have good size but I wouldn't call it mid.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>needsdecaf</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I do not like the MDX, too boxy and old tech. The RDX has all the toys. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>New and redesigned MDX is due out in the fall.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>needsdecaf</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The interior space is amazing given the exterior dimensions. And the 3rd row is really usable....and you still have space behind the third row with it up. Great truck / car / crossover. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>The new CRV does not have a thrid row and I thougt that the RDX does not either. And if it did, there would be no space behind it. Are you sure you didn't see the MDX?
 

·
Registered
2005 XC90 V8, IPD sways and endlinks, currently shod with Pirelli Scorpion Verde
Joined
·
540 Posts
Re: V8 Fuel Economy (needsdecaf)

24mpg Hwy, with AC on and windows up, doing steady 70mph.<br>14 around city, with lots of short trips and stop'n'go.<br>05 V8.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,307 Posts
Re: (needsdecaf)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>needsdecaf</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Nope, I meant the RDX. I should have called it a mid-sized ute, not a full sized one. It is about the same size inside as a Grand Cherokee and Pathfinder. Those are the estimated MPG's that they are marketing it under.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Everything I've read thus far of the RDX is that it comes in smaller than the MDX, is a 5 seater and is meant to compete for those who are considering a RAV4 or Hyundai Santa Fe.<br>Sounds about as small as a Jeep Liberty on the inside.<br>Lots of ooomph though with a turbo charged 2.3 litre 4 banger generating 240 hp and 260+ lbs of torque.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Re: (MagoonR)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>MagoonR</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>My wife drives a 2002 CRV so I know they have good size but I wouldn't call it mid.<p>New and redesigned MDX is due out in the fall.<p>The new CRV does not have a thrid row and I thougt that the RDX does not either. And if it did, there would be no space behind it. Are you sure you didn't see the MDX?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Sorry, I was confusing there. I changed midstream from talking about the RDX to talking about the XC90. My point was that as much as I like the RDX, the 3rd row of the Volvo is enticing, and I really like the XC90.<p>The RDX does NOT have a 3rd row seat. Also, it is based on a new platform (95% according to Acura) that will underpin the next generation CRV. It is larger than the current CRV. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>1sttimevolvo</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Everything I've read thus far of the RDX is that it comes in smaller than the MDX, is a 5 seater and is meant to compete for those who are considering a RAV4 or Hyundai Santa Fe.<br>Sounds about as small as a Jeep Liberty on the inside.<br>Lots of ooomph though with a turbo charged 2.3 litre 4 banger generating 240 hp and 260+ lbs of torque.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>At 6'2", 250, I do not fit in most cars, particularly with headroom but also shoulder room. I notice how much space a car has very quickly, and the RDX is larger than both my Nissan Pathfinder and Jeep Grand Cherokee. Sitting in it at the auto show, it has a bunch more head, hip, shoulder and leg room than the above two cars. Rear seat space is a bit tight, but cargo is larger than my Pathfinder. It is MUCH bigger inside than the Liberty. <p>And I'm not sure what you've read that would give you the impression that it's meant to compete against a Santa Fe or Rav4? It's clearly designed to go up against the X3. Acura brought a bunch of X3's to the launch in San Francisco, and it's almost exactly the same size, only a bit bigger which makes it similar ot the X5. Plus, priced at $32-$37k, it is not in the same price $. <p>The new MDX will be too much $$ for me when it comes out. The current one drives like a big SUV that it is. The XC90, to me, drives much smaller than the space it provides. <p>I know, apples to oranges. I love all the bells and whistles of the RDX, but the XC90 V8 is sweet and should be the better deal over the next two years as a CPO vehicle. Since we put over 100k miles on all our cars, the prospect of someone else taking the depreciation on the car in exchange for 15,000 or 20,000 miles is a nice prospect. <p>Sorry, off topic! <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/smile.gif" BORDER="0">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,307 Posts
Re: (needsdecaf)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>needsdecaf</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>At 6'2", 250, I do not fit in most cars, particularly with headroom but also shoulder room. I notice how much space a car has very quickly, and the RDX is larger than both my Nissan Pathfinder and Jeep Grand Cherokee. Sitting in it at the auto show, it has a bunch more head, hip, shoulder and leg room than the above two cars. Rear seat space is a bit tight, but cargo is larger than my Pathfinder. It is MUCH bigger inside than the Liberty. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Numerous auto magazine / websites have compared the RDX to the RAV4 and Hyundai as to competitors.<p>From info on this site, the RAV4 is 1 inch longer than the RDX, 1 inch taller and has 2 inches more headroom than the RDX. The RAV4 has 10 cu ft more luggage capacity and 13 cu ft more overall capacity.<p><A HREF="http://rdx.acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=218" TARGET="_blank">http://rdx.acurazine.com/forum...t=218</A><p><A HREF="http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/toyota/rav4/100673108/specs.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.edmunds.com/new/200....html</A>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,166 Posts
Re: (1sttimevolvo)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>1sttimevolvo</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Numerous auto magazine / websites have compared the RDX to the RAV4 and Hyundai as to competitors.<p>From info on this site, the RAV4 is 1 inch longer than the RDX, 1 inch taller and has 2 inches more headroom than the RDX. The RAV4 has 10 cu ft more luggage capacity and 13 cu ft more overall capacity.<p><A HREF="http://rdx.acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=218" TARGET="_blank">http://rdx.acurazine.com/forum...t=218</A><p><A HREF="http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/toyota/rav4/100673108/specs.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.edmunds.com/new/200....html</A></TD></TR></TABLE><p>From a size perspective yes. From a price perspective, Acura is aiming for the X3 buyer. The CRV is supposed to do battle with the RAV but without a V6 or third row seat (however useless it may be), its at a disadvantage. But then again, so is the RDX.<BR><BR>
<i>Modified by MagoonR at 9:21 PM 7-19-2006</i>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Re: (1sttimevolvo)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>1sttimevolvo</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Numerous auto magazine / websites have compared the RDX to the RAV4 and Hyundai as to competitors.<p>From info on this site, the RAV4 is 1 inch longer than the RDX, 1 inch taller and has 2 inches more headroom than the RDX. The RAV4 has 10 cu ft more luggage capacity and 13 cu ft more overall capacity.<p><A HREF="http://rdx.acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=218" TARGET="_blank">http://rdx.acurazine.com/forum...t=218</A><p><A HREF="http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/toyota/rav4/100673108/specs.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.edmunds.com/new/200....html</A></TD></TR></TABLE><p>All I have to say is I sat in the car. My Nissan has 39+ inches of headroom, and my hair literally hits the headliner (people note when they get in the car that if it didn't have a sunroof cutout, I wouldn't fit.<p>I had a good 2-3 inches of headroom in the RDX. <p>I had no such headroom in the RAV 4, which I sat in on the same day.<p>And I have yet to see a comparison with the Rav4 and Hyundai. I've read Road and Track, Car and Driver and Motor Trend articles regarding the car.<p>Anyway, back on the topic of Fuel Economy....you guys are getting some impressive results! <BR><BR>
<i>Modified by needsdecaf at 4:39 AM 7-20-2006</i>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,307 Posts
Re: (MagoonR)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>MagoonR</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">From a size perspective yes. From a price perspective, Acura is aiming for the X3 buyer. The CRV is supposed to do battle with the RAV but without a V6 or third row seat (however useless it may be), its at a disadvantage. But then again, so is the RDX.<p><br><i>Modified by MagoonR at 9:21 PM 7-19-2006</i></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yes, I was referring to the size perspective. The pricing for the RDX is expected to be 8 - 10k above that of the Santa Fe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,307 Posts
Re: (needsdecaf)

Yes, the fuel economy appears to be very good with the new V8.<p>I recall Yannis or someone touting that the V8 figures would be the same as or close to those of the 2.5T when the V8 was first announced.<p>Looks to be on the mark. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://********************/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
699 Posts
Re: (1sttimevolvo)

Our highway milage was 25-26mpg for the 2005 V8 (rated 20mpg)<p>Our highway milage is 22-23mpg for the 2006 V8 (rated 21mpg)<p>and for some reason the 2007 V8 is back to the 2005 rating of 20mpg, not sure why the differences, and funny how the actual 2006 milage is less than the 2005, but the rating went up on the window sticker?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,745 Posts
Re: (need4spd)

Well, I just got back from a 500 mile round trip with the cruise control set to 70 and I got calculated mileage of 26.4. And this is using the crappy California gas (reformulated, which usually exacts ~2 mpg penalty vs. non-RFG). I am certainly not complaining.... <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/smile.gif" BORDER="0">
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top