Re: Why not a T8? (Volvo_Captain)

Quote, originally posted by Volvo_Captain »

This is probably a dumb question. Why doesn't Volvo drop a twin turbo on the V8 for S80? The gap between 3.2 and V8 is good (from marketing view). Getting a T6 in between hurts either the 3.2 or V8 sales. BUT, if Volvo makes a "T8", that probably will allow Volvo to compete with MB AMG or BMW M-series. Maybe because S80 is FWD, so power must be limited?

I like the way you think!
ooooohhhhhhhh aaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh
Twin turbo V8 - YES!!!

PS - the S80 in V8 trim is AWD (with FWD bias unless needed) but I am sure you knew that...

 

Re: Why not a T8? (Volvo_Captain)

Quote, originally posted by Volvo_Captain »

This is probably a dumb question. Why doesn't Volvo drop a twin turbo on the V8 for S80? The gap between 3.2 and V8 is good (from marketing view). Getting a T6 in between hurts either the 3.2 or V8 sales. BUT, if Volvo makes a "T8", that probably will allow Volvo to compete with MB AMG or BMW M-series. Maybe because S80 is FWD, so power must be limited?

No, it is not a dumb question. Rather, wishful thinking.

First things first; the S80 T6 will not hurt S80 3.2 sales. The S80 3.2 will be meant as an intro car to those who do not care about performance nor AWD. Sort of the TENS OF THOUSANDS who bought S60 2.4s and V70 2.4s.

It COULD hurt S80 V8 sales but the V8 will distance itself more due to a price increase and also to some special packages/content in the near future.

I think that the current spread is very good.

Now, how about a turbo/supercharged V8? Sure, it would be wonderful. A car like that, with (let's assume) 390+ hp would just be awesome. But would you pay $65K+ for such car? Doubtful. As it would be doubtful if others would. Unless Volvo establishes a BONA FIDE performance division (like BMW and Mercedes-Benz have) that would cover at least 3 of its models and not a half-butt program like the "R" (look how "successful" others have been like Acura with their "S-type", etc.

) these type of cars will either fail (in the eyes of the public) or remain far distant dreams.

Yannis

 

Re: Why not a T8? (KeystoneVolvo)

Lets look at it at a proportionate perspective:

3.2L I6 = 235 HP
3.0L T6 = 281 HP
which is a 20% increase in HP

4.4L V8 = 311 HP + 20% would be 373 HP.

To compete with the M5/E63, we're looking at a minimum of 450 HP which means that it could possibly be feasible to bore out the 4.4L to a 5.0L and do a T6 on it??? Perhaps a $75k sticker, which is still cheap compared to the M5/E63.

Just my two cents worth

I'm not an engineer/engine builder/etc. so I'm just talking out of my rear end but nothing like a nice dream.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (njb8199)

Quote, originally posted by njb8199 »

To compete with the M5/E63, we're looking at a minimum of 450 HP which means that it could possibly be feasible to bore out the 4.4L to a 5.0L and do a T6 on it??? Perhaps a $75k sticker, which is still cheap compared to the M5/E63. Just my two cents worth I'm not an engineer/engine builder/etc. so I'm just talking out of my rear end but nothing like a nice dream.

Still, the car would have to have more...a LOT MORE than just killer HP and torque to even dream of competing with Ms and AMGs. These cars are SUPER cars in the sense that they offer the entire package; amazing transmissions that shift at least 35% faster than their stock counterparts, exotic suspension set ups, huge brakes (that make the R brakes seem like toy car brakes), special exhaust and a SEEMLESS interaction between the ECUs of the engine and the transmission; an area where past Volvos have not done very well.

Therefore, such set up (from Volvo) would not only cost hundreds of millions to develop and certify but would result in an MSRP of at least $80K...I doubt many people would pay that for a Volvo not to mention that, just for the prestige, these people would not ultimately opt for an M or an AMG.

This is not an arena that Volvo is even ready to think about competing.

Yannis

 

Re: Why not a T8? (njb8199)

Quote, originally posted by njb8199 »

To compete with the M5/E63, we're looking at a minimum of 450 HP which means that it could possibly be feasible to bore out the 4.4L to a 5.0L and do a T6 on it??? Perhaps a $75k sticker, which is still cheap compared to the M5/E63.

Trust me, they're not trying to compete nor are they capable with a FWD biased layout.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (Volvo_Captain)

Well, a turbo V8 does exist. It is a prototype.
Whether it sees the light of day is another matter.
Personally, I think it won't.

The powers that be at Volvo remain unconvinced that people will buy a high performance Volvo. Esp at the prices that would have to be charged.

Volvo Cars has ZERO interest in competing w/ AMG or M Motorsport.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (MagoonR)

Quote, originally posted by MagoonR »

Trust me, they're not trying to compete nor are they capable with a FWD biased layout.

Absolutely. They will have to commit to a RWD platform.

Yannis

 

Re: Why not a T8? (VolvoMax)

Quote, originally posted by VolvoMax »

The powers that be at Volvo remain unconvinced that people will buy a high performance Volvo. Esp at the prices that would have to be charged. Volvo Cars has ZERO interest in competing w/ AMG or M Motorsport.

And they are right on both counts.

Yannis

 

Re: Why not a T8? (KeystoneVolvo)

Quote, originally posted by KeystoneVolvo »

Absolutely. They will have to commit to a RWD platform.

Rotsa ruck with that too. Besides, a RWD platform does not automatically equal a performance sedan. By that definition, the Charger and 300 are performance sedans already.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (MagoonR)

Quote, originally posted by MagoonR »

Rotsa ruck with that too.

I never said it will happen. This is all BS talk here. We are just talking.

Quote »

Besides, a RWD platform does not automatically equal a performance sedan. By that definition, the Charger and 300 are performance sedans already.

Ocf course. But it is a PREREQUISITE to have a quality RWD platform if you are going to think of entering such arena. First, you establish a RWD that will be trued and tried over the years and you built upon that. So far, only BMW and MB have managed to succeed.

Yannis

 

Re: Why not a T8? (KeystoneVolvo)

absolutely. this is all just talk and dreaming........

If Volvo was to go this route, it'd be another 15-20 years before we see any productive results out of a high performance division.

ie: the first AMG Hammer came out in 1986 and its now 2007 and virtually all of MB's lineup has been AMG-ized.

Speaking of the V8; can any of the dealers on the forum specify what the changes are to the 2008 S80 V8 to justify the $2250 price premium over the 2007?

Does the $2k owner loyalty bonus for current Volvo owners expire at any time? I keep getting mailings from VCNA about the $2k bonus for the new S80 despite ALREADY having purchased two new Volvos this year.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (njb8199)

Quote, originally posted by njb8199 »

Speaking of the V8; can any of the dealers on the forum specify what the changes are to the 2008 S80 V8 to justify the $2250 price premium over the 2007?

Simple....T6

 

Re: Why not a T8? (MagoonR)

other than that.........

 

Re: Why not a T8? (njb8199)

Quote, originally posted by njb8199 »

...which means that it could possibly be feasible to bore out the 4.4L to a 5.0L and do a T6 on it???

Turbocharging the current block is about as good as it's gonna get. Unfortunatley that block is about as punched and stroked as it can be, bearing in mind that it started life as a 3.4L V8 in a Taurus, and its displacement was pretty much maximized then...

A twin-turbo S80 would be awesome, though..... I'm having visions of the Audi S8 in Ronin drifting through the streets of Paris... http://********************/smile/emthup.gif

 

Re: Why not a T8? (Volvo_Captain)

Why not a T8?

Because Volvo can't produce a angle gear worth a damn.

regards,
MAJ

 

Re: Why not a T8? (JayDub)

Quote, originally posted by JayDub »

Turbocharging the current block is about as good as it's gonna get. Unfortunatley that block is about as punched and stroked as it can be, bearing in mind that it started life as a 3.4L V8 in a Taurus, and its displacement was pretty much maximized then...

Different engine altogether....although both were built by Yamaha.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (MagoonR)

Quote, originally posted by MagoonR »

Different engine altogether....although both were built by Yamaha.

They have more in common than you know.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (MrTippy)

Quote, originally posted by MrTippy »

They have more in common than you know.

Or even care about.....though I did have a 94 SHO with the 3.2L V6.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (MagoonR)

Quote, originally posted by MagoonR »

Different engine altogether....although both were built by Yamaha.

The bellhousing and block architecture are identical to the old 3.4L. The head and valvetrain design is different from the 3.4L (thankfully), but the 4.4 uses the same crank. The change in displacement comes from Yamaha punching the cylinders out to 94mm, up from 82.4mm in the 3.4L. The entire engine development profile is outlined in an article out of my Automotive Engineering International magazine from about a year and a half ago.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (JayDub)

As a matter of limitation, Volvo do not have any transmission that can handle more than 450nm-330lb/ft and 470nm-350lb/ft with next Getrag/Ford double clutch. And I do think, they will never have fund to design a new one for a very limited high output engine.

A I6 HPT will do just fine for gas guzzler countries and a +200cv/350lb/ft diesel for the other.

 

Re: Why not a T8? (njb8199)

In fact, there is an Alpina Bmw with 4.4 supercharged engine and it has 500 PS. In all the comparisons (because this engine is put in 5,6 and 7Alpina series) it is much better than original BMW, so from the technical point of view it is possible. On the other hand, do You know anyone who associates Volvo with "sporty".

the transmission is also a problem. FWD cannot stand 500PS and I think that Haldex also cannot

 

Re: Why not a T8? (digital_dreamer)

but what about Volvo PUV, there was a 4.4 V8 turbo in this concept car

 

Re: Why not a T8? (Piotrunho)

Quote, originally posted by Piotrunho »

but what about Volvo PUV, there was a 4.4 V8 turbo in this concept car

No, three was not. If you popped the hood, you would see the old T6 engine in there.

Yannis

 

Re: Why not a T8? (VolvoMax)

Quote, originally posted by VolvoMax »

The powers that be at Volvo remain unconvinced that people will buy a high performance Volvo. Esp at the prices that would have to be charged. Volvo Cars has ZERO interest in competing w/ AMG or M Motorsport.

Why not? The R's were just FLYING off the shelves. What would give them the idea that people are not interested in an HP Volvo?

 

Re: Why not a T8? (njb8199)

Quote, originally posted by njb8199 »

ie: the first AMG Hammer came out in 1986 and its now 2007 and virtually all of MB's lineup has been AMG-ized.

The AMG "Hammer" 300 E wasn't even built by MB. AMG wasn't part of MB for quite some time.

MB has quite a history of factory hot rods, though, way back to pre-war times.

Regardless, I just can't see Volvo with the bad boy image to pull off such cars as a turbo V8. No one, including this R owner, would believe it.

I guess my reaction to the tread topic would be....."Why?"