SwedeSpeed - Volvo Performance Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
There are rumors floating that the 5 cylinder is not dead yet within Volvo. So how about it? Who would like to see a 5 cylinder offered here? Let's have your opinions. <p><br>Again, poll is open, so feel free to add your (mature) choice. <br>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (Needsdecaf)

Myself I think it would be foolish to bring over the RS's 5-Pot. I think there's more potential for a HPT6 version (look at IPD's tune). <p>I think that the range would be better served by:<p>5 Cylinder / DSG combo for mileage. <p>LPT T6 (de-tune it a bit to maybe 260 HP to get good "middle of the road" mileage)<p>HPT T6 with 300 HP plus for a V70 R replacement
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,780 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (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">Myself I think it would be foolish to bring over the RS's 5-Pot. I think there's more potential for a HPT6 version (look at IPD's tune). <p>I think that the range would be better served by:<p>5 Cylinder / DSG combo for mileage. <p>LPT T6 (de-tune it a bit to maybe 260 HP to get good "middle of the road" mileage)<p>HPT T6 with 300 HP plus for a V70 R replacement </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Not bad, Needsdecaf. However, I would like the 5 cylinder mileage champ to be the 2.5T. Put whatever tranny on it you want.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,839 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (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">There are rumors floating that the 5 cylinder is not dead yet within Volvo. So how about it? Who would like to see a 5 cylinder offered here? Let's have your opinions. <p><br>Again, poll is open, so feel free to add your (mature) choice. <br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Given the new DI SI6 and new turbo 4's coming the 5 cyl doesn't seem like a viable option for a gas engine in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (V70 Brad)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>V70 Brad</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Not bad, Needsdecaf. However, I would like the 5 cylinder mileage champ to be the 2.5T. Put whatever tranny on it you want.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>DSG really saves compared to the losses through a slushbox.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (VolvoMax)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>VolvoMax</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Given the new DI SI6 and new turbo 4's coming the 5 cyl doesn't seem like a viable option for a gas engine in the future.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The V70 is a pretty fat boy. I'm not sure a 4 pot would have enough motivation to properly move it! Not in this market at least. <p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,839 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (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"><p>The V70 is a pretty fat boy. I'm not sure a 4 pot would have enough motivation to properly move it! Not in this market at least. <p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>No, but the new DI SI6 or the new Turbo 6 should be plenty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,166 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (Needsdecaf)

IMO, new V70/XC70 is too portly for the I5 as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,839 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (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">IMO, new V70/XC70 is too portly for the I5 as well.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The one advantage if the Turbo 5 is the instant torque.<br>When we got the I5 in the old S80 it was noticeably quicker than the 2.9 it replaced.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,780 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (VolvoMax)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>VolvoMax</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>The one advantage if the Turbo 5 is the instant torque.<br>When we got the I5 in the old S80 it was noticeably quicker than the 2.9 it replaced.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>IMHO, it was a mistake to make the I6 the base engine in the new V/XC70 and S80. I think that they should have used the 2.5T with perhaps 1 or 2 more pounds boost. I believe that this would have eliminated a LOT of the gripes you get here.<p>PERSONALLY, I'm used to driving a N/A V70, so the low end torque isn't as meaningful to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,839 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (V70 Brad)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>V70 Brad</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>IMHO, it was a mistake to make the I6 the base engine in the new V/XC70 and S80. I think that they should have used the 2.5T with perhaps 1 or 2 more pounds boost. I believe that this would have eliminated a LOT of the gripes you get here.<p>PERSONALLY, I'm used to driving a N/A V70, so the low end torque isn't as meaningful to me.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Well, there were complaints about the harshness of the I5, and some consumer resistance to a turbo engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,340 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (VolvoMax)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>VolvoMax</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Well, there were complaints about the harshness of the I5, and some consumer resistance to a turbo engine.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The resistance is by name only, as those who are used to the torque cannot give it up. <p>100% the reason that my in-laws bought an '07 XC70 over an '08 (pre-T6). <p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,839 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (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"><p>The resistance is by name only, as those who are used to the torque cannot give it up. <p>100% the reason that my in-laws bought an '07 XC70 over an '08 (pre-T6). <p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>The resistance came from people who had no prior exposure to Volvo.<br>Which was about 90% of the people who bought XC90's.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
39,263 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (V70 Brad)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>V70 Brad</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>IMHO, it was a mistake to make the I6 the base engine in the new V/XC70 and S80. I think that they should have used the 2.5T with perhaps 1 or 2 more pounds boost. I believe that this would have eliminated a LOT of the gripes you get here.<p>PERSONALLY, I'm used to driving a N/A V70, so the low end torque isn't as meaningful to me.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Again, not that the 3,2L engine is a scorcher but I have no complaints; my last two + current company cars had/have this engine (V70, XC70, XC90, in that order); not once have I had issues with merging, passing, etc. Especially after each car got about 1,200 miles on its legs, things got loosened up. Perfect engine, also, for the highway; lots of power passing, cruising, etc.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,780 Posts
Re: Who would like to see a 5 cylinder V70? (GrecianVolvo)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>GrecianVolvo</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Again, not that the 3,2L engine is a scorcher but I have no complaints; my last two + current company cars had/have this engine (V70, XC70, XC90, in that order); not once have I had issues with merging, passing, etc. Especially after each car got about 1,200 miles on its legs, things got loosened up. Perfect engine, also, for the highway; lots of power passing, cruising, etc.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Don't worry Yannis. I may have engine PREFERENCES, but the 3.2 isn't going to be a deal killer when I buy a new wagon. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/biggrin.gif" BORDER="0"> Doggie doesn't care if "his" car has a turbo. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://www.vwvortex.com/vwbb/tongue.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>Having said that, I would be willing to pay extra for a turbo motor in a V70. I'm not sure that I want to jump to a XC70 to get one...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,945 Posts
how about all the fat people loose some weight along with these new overweight cars and the the I5 we all know and love that works perfect would be perfectly fine .... <p>oh wait :rollseyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
714 Posts
Re: (Chilled Man)

I seriously gave the 3.2 some thought before I got mine. I was concerend about the power. All in all, I decided that for the money, the 3.2 would do. After the first 1000 miles though, the car really seemed to adapt to my driving style, loosened up and my fuel mileage actually went UP. Keep in mind the car already had 23,000 miles on it when I bought it. I've also noticed that in Western Washington on some of the longer grades, the transmission does a fantastic job of holding gears and not hunting. <p>I can't help but notice though that the 3.2 in my car feels like it has much better torque characteristics than the P3 cars. Anybody else feel that? Yannis?<p>T
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,780 Posts
Re: (T Schroeder)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>T Schroeder</b> »</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> <p>I can't help but notice though that the 3.2 in my car feels like it has much better torque characteristics than the P3 cars. Anybody else feel that? Yannis?<p>T</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I know that the 3.2 has MUCH better torque than the 2.4i in the V70 that I have. Compared to my car, the new engine puts out roughly 60 - 70 lbft more torque at 1600 LOWER rpm (3200rpm vs. 4800 in the 2.4i). This should make for a NOTICEABLE difference. I know the acceleration numbers are considerably improved over the 2.4
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top