S60R - Are they any good ?
Discussion
These cars are a depreciation disaster area and very costly to maintain once the warranty has lapsed.
If you can do without the illusive benefits of AWD, and appreciate the looks of the S60, then you are much better off with an S60 T5 which is not troublesome at all and can be modified to 300bhp plus without any problems.
You can buy a T5 specced up with practically all the stuff available as standard on the R, if that is your bag, plus if you go for an '05 MY onwards you will get the very latest in the T5 engine series with stronger components, bigger turbo (same as R) etc.. They also depreciate like buggery....
Worth a look as www.volvoclub.org.uk where you will find more on these cars from UK owners......
Regards, Don.Norchi
www.kalmar-union.com
If you can do without the illusive benefits of AWD, and appreciate the looks of the S60, then you are much better off with an S60 T5 which is not troublesome at all and can be modified to 300bhp plus without any problems.
You can buy a T5 specced up with practically all the stuff available as standard on the R, if that is your bag, plus if you go for an '05 MY onwards you will get the very latest in the T5 engine series with stronger components, bigger turbo (same as R) etc.. They also depreciate like buggery....
Worth a look as www.volvoclub.org.uk where you will find more on these cars from UK owners......
Regards, Don.Norchi
www.kalmar-union.com
I've got an 03 plate V70R 6-speed which I bought secondhand 2.5 years ago. I'll agree with Don about the depreciation (mine was £42500 new and bought for £25000 in Nov 2004 !), and they are expensive to maintain if there's no warranty on it. Handling is far superior to the FWD versions, especially in wet conditions, but the 4C system can be upset by the road surface sometimes (at the rear more so when loaded), mines been back to the dealer a number of times, but still comes back the same. Fuel consumption isn't bad at 31 - 34mpg on a run, and 22 - 24 knockin about (better than both my previous R's).
Don't believe Volvo's hype about them being equivelant to an M3 / S4 because they aren't, at about 168bhp/tonne the power to weight ratio isn't much better than a T-5 version. There was a lot of speculation when they first came out as to whether or not the engines actually produced the figures that Volvo published (see the "swededemon" site). All in all an R version will out perform / handle / brake a standard T-5, its a matter of whether you can justify the greater depreciation / running costs.
Oh, and don't get a 5-spd geartronic version, cos they don't do what it says on the tin.
Hope this helps.
Don't believe Volvo's hype about them being equivelant to an M3 / S4 because they aren't, at about 168bhp/tonne the power to weight ratio isn't much better than a T-5 version. There was a lot of speculation when they first came out as to whether or not the engines actually produced the figures that Volvo published (see the "swededemon" site). All in all an R version will out perform / handle / brake a standard T-5, its a matter of whether you can justify the greater depreciation / running costs.
Oh, and don't get a 5-spd geartronic version, cos they don't do what it says on the tin.
Hope this helps.
Gassing Station | Volvo & Polestar | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff