New V50 D5 180
Discussion
Yes. drove a D5 and a 2.0D back to back at the bigining of the month.(see my post on the V50 or V70 thread)
The D5 is a rocket ship. the gearbox is good, and the acceleration very smooth. almost feels as quick as the T5.
Plus, if you missed the left foot rest in the Manual V50's, the D5 Geartronic has one.
Did find the ride in the SportSE was a little hard, but the SE was better.
Im going to wait 6 months and get a low mileage used car
The D5 is a rocket ship. the gearbox is good, and the acceleration very smooth. almost feels as quick as the T5.
Plus, if you missed the left foot rest in the Manual V50's, the D5 Geartronic has one.
Did find the ride in the SportSE was a little hard, but the SE was better.
Im going to wait 6 months and get a low mileage used car
I tried one five weeks ago, before the test drive I asked the sales man what he thought and was taken back with his response that he thought that it didn't go much better than the 20d.
I have to say I was very dissapointed as it didn't seem to go that well, it had 1,400 miles on the clock so was not brand new.
I would be very interested in the response from anyone else as I would still like the S40 d5 as my next car, i'm just hopeing that it was a one off with perhaps something wrong.
Imagine it with a chip, 200+bhp?
I have to say I was very dissapointed as it didn't seem to go that well, it had 1,400 miles on the clock so was not brand new.
I would be very interested in the response from anyone else as I would still like the S40 d5 as my next car, i'm just hopeing that it was a one off with perhaps something wrong.
Imagine it with a chip, 200+bhp?
We are due to change the other halfs, Passat 130 TDi sport Estate. It now look like diesel engines have moved on to another level! with the Passat 170 and now this 180 D5.
As she will not be covering as mutch on the mileage front...... we had considered going back to a petrol engine, but now I'm not so shure.
As she will not be covering as mutch on the mileage front...... we had considered going back to a petrol engine, but now I'm not so shure.
OK so the weekend hoon verdict.
Executive Summary:
Drove several hundred miles, mixture of roads plus took it round one of the Advanced 1 test routes. This covers everything from city traffic through suburban, some tight nadgery rural lanes plus open road and motorway. At times beans were indeed given.
Firstly no diesel auto estate is going to be quick in the overall scheme of things compared to a true performance car, though that will not stop the bar room declaration of Johnny Sales rep claiming that his Mundectrasis50 has slingshot acceleration.
Nevertheless there is no denying that this V50 D5 is quick when compared to its ilk. No question that this is noticeably quicker than the 2.0D, but can understand why the comments made above that certain individuals were disappointed.
The way it delivers is the difference and is mostly down to the slush effect of an auto box and torque converter, even complete with all the whooshing and un-diesel like noises.
A very modest pressure on the not very loud pedal and the revs build to 2300-ish and the car doesn’t accelerate, it more sort of gathers pace. Plus it does so in such a fashion that if not careful soon into serious licence losing territory. Plant the gas, and there is that delay while skirts are gathered and again it doesn’t accelerate, but it does build speed effectively.
That’s just in D mode, put it in ‘manual’ and the response is better but there is still that delay factor while the torque convertor winds up, less so if the revs are up and the tc is locked of course.
The ‘manual’ mode prevents upchanges but does not stop downchanges so you need to be aware at what speeds it changes down even in ‘manual’ mode. 4 > 3 @ ~25mph 3 > 2 @ ~5mph 2 > 1 @ dead stop. Basically that means if you so desire you can stick it in 3rd approaching a roundabout and unless you come almost to a stop the 3rd gear is still good to go. In fact you can actually start from rest in 3rd and the pick up is not so dusty. In D on dry tarmac you can squeak the tyres away from rest if somewhat coarse with the accelerator.
Usual comments about lack of engine compression braking with auto boxes, even when on ‘manual’, so brakes need to be good and they are, much more progressive; or maybe that was rose tinted specs as I’m not enamoured with the brakes on mine despite the Volvo TADTS response.
So in essence it goes rather well, and silver, offblack leather, SE, Sport pack, Medusa 18” alloys, twin pipes like the T5 got quite a few admiring glances.
As mentioned above the main issues I have with mine are fixed except one, lack of interior cubbyhole storage is the same, no left footrest is cured, and the fuel tank has been increased from 52 to 60 litres.
Which nicely brings us to fuel consumption. Not able to do a proper brim to brim check, so the comparison is based on the fuel computer readout. Prior to the run round the advanced test route the computer was showing ~0.5mpg better than my normal day to day in the 2.0D 6-sp manual.. After the :ahem: make best possble progress run :ahem: the cumulative was now 1 mpg below the norm. Considering bigger more powerful engine, auto box and the use that was impressive, and consider that at times the ‘instantaneous’ read out was ~7.5 mpg
Recommended.
Executive Summary:
Drove several hundred miles, mixture of roads plus took it round one of the Advanced 1 test routes. This covers everything from city traffic through suburban, some tight nadgery rural lanes plus open road and motorway. At times beans were indeed given.
Firstly no diesel auto estate is going to be quick in the overall scheme of things compared to a true performance car, though that will not stop the bar room declaration of Johnny Sales rep claiming that his Mundectrasis50 has slingshot acceleration.
Nevertheless there is no denying that this V50 D5 is quick when compared to its ilk. No question that this is noticeably quicker than the 2.0D, but can understand why the comments made above that certain individuals were disappointed.
The way it delivers is the difference and is mostly down to the slush effect of an auto box and torque converter, even complete with all the whooshing and un-diesel like noises.
A very modest pressure on the not very loud pedal and the revs build to 2300-ish and the car doesn’t accelerate, it more sort of gathers pace. Plus it does so in such a fashion that if not careful soon into serious licence losing territory. Plant the gas, and there is that delay while skirts are gathered and again it doesn’t accelerate, but it does build speed effectively.
That’s just in D mode, put it in ‘manual’ and the response is better but there is still that delay factor while the torque convertor winds up, less so if the revs are up and the tc is locked of course.
The ‘manual’ mode prevents upchanges but does not stop downchanges so you need to be aware at what speeds it changes down even in ‘manual’ mode. 4 > 3 @ ~25mph 3 > 2 @ ~5mph 2 > 1 @ dead stop. Basically that means if you so desire you can stick it in 3rd approaching a roundabout and unless you come almost to a stop the 3rd gear is still good to go. In fact you can actually start from rest in 3rd and the pick up is not so dusty. In D on dry tarmac you can squeak the tyres away from rest if somewhat coarse with the accelerator.
Usual comments about lack of engine compression braking with auto boxes, even when on ‘manual’, so brakes need to be good and they are, much more progressive; or maybe that was rose tinted specs as I’m not enamoured with the brakes on mine despite the Volvo TADTS response.
So in essence it goes rather well, and silver, offblack leather, SE, Sport pack, Medusa 18” alloys, twin pipes like the T5 got quite a few admiring glances.
As mentioned above the main issues I have with mine are fixed except one, lack of interior cubbyhole storage is the same, no left footrest is cured, and the fuel tank has been increased from 52 to 60 litres.
Which nicely brings us to fuel consumption. Not able to do a proper brim to brim check, so the comparison is based on the fuel computer readout. Prior to the run round the advanced test route the computer was showing ~0.5mpg better than my normal day to day in the 2.0D 6-sp manual.. After the :ahem: make best possble progress run :ahem: the cumulative was now 1 mpg below the norm. Considering bigger more powerful engine, auto box and the use that was impressive, and consider that at times the ‘instantaneous’ read out was ~7.5 mpg
Recommended.
chrisk said:
Does anyone know if they're going to bring the D5 V50 out with the 6spd Manual?
They're cutting off a few potential buyers just offering the geartronic....
They're cutting off a few potential buyers just offering the geartronic....
Seems odd to me too.
2.0D 6spd manual as std but no geartronic
D5 geartronic as std but no 6 spd manual
T5 available with both.
If you look at power, torque figures and where they are on rev range from my viewpoint there cannot be an engineering reason for this.
If you look at the Swedish website, which still has the "build your own V50" link there you can only get V50 D5 auto, hence it's not just related to UK market.
Therefore it has to be marketing. Beats me.
Could it be a pricing issue, justifying the increase in price?
For example in Sweden the D5, and the T5 iirc, do not come with the sports pack and the fancy 18" Medusa wheels that they do on UK spec. Difficult to compare as the trim levels are different.
The thinking/logic behind this (according to my local dealer) is that due to the size/shape of the ford sourced 2 litre diesel, there isnt enough space to fit an auto gearbox. I used to own a 2 litre mondeo automatic, and the same engine is fitted to the volvo, focus and jaguar x-type albeit in different state of tune. And none of those cars can be had as an auto.
I'm guessing that the D5 was designed and always intended to be made with the auto gearbox and therefore space could be created so that this could happen (I'm only guessing as I'm no engineer), although that would mean that the D5 is a more compact engine than the 2.0 surely?
I first heard about this car about 4 months ago, but they werent sure when it was going to be available to buy, which is why I've got a thirsty, but quick and lovely sounding 2.4 petrol automatic!
I'm guessing that the D5 was designed and always intended to be made with the auto gearbox and therefore space could be created so that this could happen (I'm only guessing as I'm no engineer), although that would mean that the D5 is a more compact engine than the 2.0 surely?
I first heard about this car about 4 months ago, but they werent sure when it was going to be available to buy, which is why I've got a thirsty, but quick and lovely sounding 2.4 petrol automatic!
You can get the Mondeo TDCi with the 5 speed Duratronic auto nowadays. I have absolutely no idea if this transmission is the same as the Geartronic Volvo tranny but looking at the selector appears very similar. DNRP in one plane and across to right for manual with pull back for up and push forward for down, so the same.
OK the V50 is significantly smaller than a Mundano but is the D5 going to be significantly bigger and different than the 2.5l T5 of even the 2.4l 5cyl petrol where both man / auto available?
OK the V50 is significantly smaller than a Mundano but is the D5 going to be significantly bigger and different than the 2.5l T5 of even the 2.4l 5cyl petrol where both man / auto available?
I drove it for about a 100 km and was fairly disappointed. It's just sterile. The engine is nice but the chassis hides it's relationship with the focus completely in being fairly understeery and not particularly exciting.
After the 850 and S80, which we have, the interior in the S40/V50 is disappointing. The new leather they are putting in looks like it came off SnM cows and there doesn't seem to be a soft leather option anymore. And the buttons on the centre console are tiny and much harder to operate blind than on the other Volvos. The floating console is fairly pointless IMHO, I haven't really found anything useful you can put behind it. Plus the gear lever obstructs several buttons (is too close to them).
After the 850 and S80, which we have, the interior in the S40/V50 is disappointing. The new leather they are putting in looks like it came off SnM cows and there doesn't seem to be a soft leather option anymore. And the buttons on the centre console are tiny and much harder to operate blind than on the other Volvos. The floating console is fairly pointless IMHO, I haven't really found anything useful you can put behind it. Plus the gear lever obstructs several buttons (is too close to them).
V50/S40 D5 will be availble with Manual either end of this year or early next year.
Fuel consumption will be similar if not better than the 2.0D (its a better engineered engine than the peugot 2.0 one) and offers much better performance. Its too smooth for its own good in a way as it doesnt seem that quick but is!
Comments above about interior quality compared to an S80, your comparing top end saloon to effectively budget saloon so what do you expect? Its still better built and better equiped than its competitors. Floating dash is a design, items can be stored behind i.e glasses mobile etc but you like it or you dont, Volvo has to move with times and that was its response inside.
Fuel consumption will be similar if not better than the 2.0D (its a better engineered engine than the peugot 2.0 one) and offers much better performance. Its too smooth for its own good in a way as it doesnt seem that quick but is!
Comments above about interior quality compared to an S80, your comparing top end saloon to effectively budget saloon so what do you expect? Its still better built and better equiped than its competitors. Floating dash is a design, items can be stored behind i.e glasses mobile etc but you like it or you dont, Volvo has to move with times and that was its response inside.
after_shock said:
V50/S40 D5 will be availble with Manual either end of this year or early next year.
Fuel consumption will be similar if not better than the 2.0D (its a better engineered engine than the peugot 2.0 one) and offers much better performance. Its too smooth for its own good in a way as it doesnt seem that quick but is!
Comments above about interior quality compared to an S80, your comparing top end saloon to effectively budget saloon so what do you expect? Its still better built and better equiped than its competitors. Floating dash is a design, items can be stored behind i.e glasses mobile etc but you like it or you dont, Volvo has to move with times and that was its response inside.
Fuel consumption will be similar if not better than the 2.0D (its a better engineered engine than the peugot 2.0 one) and offers much better performance. Its too smooth for its own good in a way as it doesnt seem that quick but is!
Comments above about interior quality compared to an S80, your comparing top end saloon to effectively budget saloon so what do you expect? Its still better built and better equiped than its competitors. Floating dash is a design, items can be stored behind i.e glasses mobile etc but you like it or you dont, Volvo has to move with times and that was its response inside.
I wasn't only thinking of the quality of materials but the quality / ergonomics of layout and found the latter disappointing (as well as the former). On my first test drive of the new S40 it creaked like it was 10 years old already and none of the others I have driven so far (not just with one dealer, 4 dealers in 3 countries) have been really faultless as far as execution goes (that all the buttons work, no creaks and squeaks). Definitely a step back from the old days and not necessarily the right direction IMHO.
When you say better built than its competitors, which ones? I find it a bit hard to compare, since it sits between classes, I'd say, smaller than the 3 series / A4 / C-class but definitely larger than the 1 series / A3.
The only interior quality competitor I would say is Audi, BMW has gone downhill of late.
The initial cars did have the odd problems but the newer 2007 spec cars are much better, similar interior quality as the C70, as with any car the initial builds arent as good as they could be.
Personally I find the interior design just as easy to use as the previous generations but as its a big change from before some people naturally wont like it.
The initial cars did have the odd problems but the newer 2007 spec cars are much better, similar interior quality as the C70, as with any car the initial builds arent as good as they could be.
Personally I find the interior design just as easy to use as the previous generations but as its a big change from before some people naturally wont like it.
For the record mine has been bomb prrof so far, nothing wrong or broken or rattly or loose.
There are some nice touches in the interior design, eg the storage cubby in the load space cassette, the way the dog / luggage guard goes with the 2/3 seat back when you tilt rear seats.
Main complaint is lack of cubby hole storage. Doesn't help that the glove box is largely taken up by the STI navigation system. Door pockets so small as to be almost useless, but have adapted to suit, and no big deal.
For interior storage I definitely like our new Octavia Estates, especially with the stacker / sat nav and various electrical gubbins mounted in a rack ns rear wing. The under boot floor hidden storage, including a full size spare. But it is a bigger car so more space not unexpected. And the VRS versions go man go.
There are some nice touches in the interior design, eg the storage cubby in the load space cassette, the way the dog / luggage guard goes with the 2/3 seat back when you tilt rear seats.
Main complaint is lack of cubby hole storage. Doesn't help that the glove box is largely taken up by the STI navigation system. Door pockets so small as to be almost useless, but have adapted to suit, and no big deal.
For interior storage I definitely like our new Octavia Estates, especially with the stacker / sat nav and various electrical gubbins mounted in a rack ns rear wing. The under boot floor hidden storage, including a full size spare. But it is a bigger car so more space not unexpected. And the VRS versions go man go.
Gassing Station | Volvo & Polestar | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff