S90/V90 [Renders] 2015 Volvo S90/V90

[Giannis]

Erm, and that's where the FWD fun starts and ends - with cars like the Fiesta ST.

While I generally agree...

I'm not seeing an S90 owner pulling off a lift-off oversteer slide nor would I expect Volvo's engineers to imbue the S90's suspension tuning with such a propensity towards throttle adjustability.

I would like to state that at least the previous platform that Volvo used for the upper part of their line-up, the P2, was extremely capable for what it was, yet tuned to more beige-Volvo-like standards.

I was stunned to discover the degree of adjustability of the front suspension set-up of my mkI S60 and the rear axle was something that was only bettered by the A4's double wishbones.

While the S60 was a heavily understeering sedan, by adjusting the front suspension you can turn it into something a bit more playful and controllable. I kid you not, but lift off oversteer is possible. Scary, but possible!

 

[martinbo]

Giannis, bud. Let's be reasonable about this. You are the only recorded example of a beige Volvo saloon owner adjusting its front suspension for the purpose of lift-off throttle adjustability!

 

[Porsche Guy]

Are we comparing a tiny hatch to a big sedan here?

Are we assuming that big luxury sedan have to be sporty and that's why there's disappointment that the S90 is FWD? Should we be upset that it doesn't have 700hp V12 that revs to 9,000rpm as well?

The point is it's a luxury sedan with an emphasis on safety. While everyone loves a sports car, let's be realistic for a minute. No one tracks an S63 or does much beside speed on the freeway in one. BMW doesn't even bother to make an M7. I could go on...

 

[martinbo]

Who says that RWD's sole purpose is for sportiness? RWD is not applied in luxury saloons to make them sporty.

 

[Gianclaudio]

Are we completely sure is fwd, by the way?

 

[W201]

We are, but you can always opt for the AWD. Personally, I think Volvo should become Audi-esque in terms of FWD/AWD offerings.

 

[KiwiRob]

I would like to state that at least the previous platform that Volvo used for the upper part of their line-up, the P2, was extremely capable for what it was, yet tuned to more beige-Volvo-like standards.

When I bought my V70 R Design my brother in law brought a Mondeo Titian X 2.2TCDI Wagon, both cars had 18 inch wheels but the Ford rode and handled so much better, it amazed me that Volvo could screw up the suspension tuning on the exact same platform that Ford did such and excellent job on.

 

[KiwiRob]

Are we completely sure is fwd, by the way?

It's using Volvo SPA platform, same as the XC90, it's FWD/AWD only, the engine is transverse which makes it bloody difficult to make RWD.

As far as I know Ford were the only people who have ever tried to use a transverse engine with RWD and that was for the Mondeo BTCC car way back in the 90's it was a failure so they stuck with FWD, and there was the Ford T drive concept, also from the 90's. T drive was interesting they played with straight 6's & 8's.

http://www.drivingenthusiast.net/sec-ford/FMC-engines/t-drive/default.htm

 

[Rolf]

I think most people would bet that the S90 will be tuned more for comfort than sportiness so opting for a front wheel drive chassis will be the most cost effective route as it will be sharing platform with the XC90. Audi seem to have good ratings with its FWD chassis in the A6, but ultimate driving pleasure of better driving balance and ride/handling perfection will be with a RWD chassis. AWD will improve all weather performance and also should be a better drivers car than the FWD models.

 

[martinbo]

Guys, let's focus here; RWD is not about handling perfection or driving pleasure hyperbole when it comes to luxury large saloons. It is so much more about refinement and, if I could use the word, decorum. Front wheel scrabble under stern acceleration is most undignified.

 

[W201]

For a car enthusiast, sure.

For the rest of the people, I think they don't really care. (They are probably not aware that all four wheels are not powered by the engine).

I do, however, agree that FWD is just not appropriate for a luxury/premium car, no matter the segment. Audi without quattro is simply not an Audi, end of story.

So, for the Volvo to be premium without RWD means only one solution - AWD. Which, incidentally, fits perfectly in the Volvo's safety ethos.

 

[martinbo]

For a car enthusiast, sure.

For the rest of the people, I think they don't really care. (They are probably not aware that all four wheels are not powered by the engine).

I do, however, agree that FWD is just not appropriate for a luxury/premium car, no matter the segment. Audi without quattro is simply not an Audi, end of story.

So, for the Volvo to be premium without RWD means only one solution - AWD. Which, incidentally, fits perfectly in the Volvo's safety ethos.

Absolutely agree. There is nothing wrong with AWD being applied in the luxury car idiom.

 

[Giannis]

When I bought my V70 R Design my brother in law brought a Mondeo Titian X 2.2TCDI Wagon, both cars had 18 inch wheels but the Ford rode and handled so much better, it amazed me that Volvo could screw up the suspension tuning on the exact same platform that Ford did such and excellent job on.

There should be something wrong with your V70.

Guys, let's focus here; RWD is not about handling perfection or driving pleasure hyperbole when it comes to luxury large saloons. It is so much more about refinement and, if I could use the word, decorum. Front wheel scrabble under stern acceleration is most undignified.

The premium factor of RWD comes from two reasons, the fact that almost everyone on the road is front driven so you are different, and what you said, understeer is an undignified and embargoing way to behave under full throttle.

Driving pleasure come from controlability and being able to make the most out of what you have. It's about the road to Ithaca, not the island itself.

So, for the Volvo to be premium without RWD means only one solution - AWD. Which, incidentally, fits perfectly in the Volvo's safety ethos.

May I also add the neccesity for engines with more than 4 cylinders?

You can't expect to rival others' turbocharged V6 & I6 with a varying volume of batteries.

 

[hoffmeister_fan]

May I also add the neccesity for engines with more than 4 cylinders?

You can't expect to rival others' turbocharged V6 & I6 with a varying volume of batteries.

Not having driven it, I can't really make heads or tails of Volvo's powertrain philosophy of nothing bigger than a 4-cyl. In the XC90 T6 guise, the turbo/supercharged 4-cyl accelerates pretty decently. (http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-volvo-xc90-is-the-motor-trend-suv-of-the-year/) My concern though is still with regards to the degree of refinement of how the power is delivered, and how ponderous would the upcoming S/V90 T8 be with additional batteries and an electric motor.

That said, I am finding these new Volvos very fascinating. Their approach to design is very much unique to themselves without having to resort to gaudy flourishes. I had such major reservations when Geely bought them, but thus far I have been proven wrong and glad that's the case.

 

[KiwiRob]

There should be something wrong with your V70.

.

Yup there was, Volvo didn't use Fords suspension settings. Apart from that it was a very satisfying car to own and drive.

 

[HUTSUTAo]

Not having driven it, I can't really make heads or tails of Volvo's powertrain philosophy of nothing bigger than a 4-cyl. In the XC90 T6 guise, the turbo/supercharged 4-cyl accelerates pretty decently. (http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-volvo-xc90-is-the-motor-trend-suv-of-the-year/) My concern though is still with regards to the degree of refinement of how the power is delivered, and how ponderous would the upcoming S/V90 T8 be with additional batteries and an electric motor.

That said, I am finding these new Volvos very fascinating. Their approach to design is very much unique to themselves without having to resort to gaudy flourishes. I had such major reservations when Geely bought them, but thus far I have been proven wrong and glad that's the case.

It could be because of the tax structure in China. Iirc taxes in China rises exponentially when the engine capacity exceed it's band. This current xc90 has the Chinese buyers in mind

 

[hoffmeister_fan]

It could be because of the tax structure in China. Iirc taxes in China rises exponentially when the engine capacity exceed it's band. This current xc90 has the Chinese buyers in mind

That does play a major role. If I recall correctly, engine capacity that's 3-liters or more are subject to heavy taxation. I think that's why Mercedes-Benz will be offering their new 6-cyl engines at 2.9L. Also there was discussion that Ferrari would develop a modern-day Dino that would utilize Alfa's 2.9L V6 from the Giulia Quadofoglio as that would be more appealing to Chinese customers.

But I think the approach of not exceeding 4-cyl also had to do what was happening in 2009-2010. Oil prices were high and there didn't seem like there was a point that prices would fall. People were becoming more conscious of their gas consumption so, like with most other manufacturers, downisizing was the name of the game. Also emissions standards were becoming increasingly stricter. So when Volvo started to develop their new SPA platform, the engineers had in mind that gas prices would continue to increase and to appeal to the ever important Chinese market, there would be no need to have an ICE exceed four cylinders.

 

[Rainer271]

 

[Centurion]

That does play a major role. If I recall correctly, engine capacity that's 3-liters or more are subject to heavy taxation. I think that's why Mercedes-Benz will be offering their new 6-cyl engines at 2.9L. Also there was discussion that Ferrari would develop a modern-day Dino that would utilize Alfa's 2.9L V6 from the Giulia Quadofoglio as that would be more appealing to Chinese customers.

But I think the approach of not exceeding 4-cyl also had to do what was happening in 2009-2010. Oil prices were high and there didn't seem like there was a point that prices would fall. People were becoming more conscious of their gas consumption so, like with most other manufacturers, downisizing was the name of the game. Also emissions standards were becoming increasingly stricter. So when Volvo started to develop their new SPA platform, the engineers had in mind that gas prices would continue to increase and to appeal to the ever important Chinese market, there would be no need to have an ICE exceed four cylinders.

Very good points. Engine options is certainly the biggest deterrent to buying flagship Volvo. Currently Volvo's equivalent of 6 cylinder engine is the T8 Twin Engine that combines electric and gasoline propulsion.

So far the engine has had positive reviews and comes with the benefit of lower emission tax. However it's not practical for those without easy access to parking with plug-in points.

Given that Volvo just re-surged, they could introduce a larger engine in the coming years.

 

[Giannis]

Given that Volvo just re-surged, they could introduce a larger engine in the coming years.

Volvo seems to prosper under the Chinese. Their attempt to become mainstream luxury, if I may use @KiwiRob 's term, seems to have succeeded!

In my opinion, though, they don't only need a 6 cylinder engine. They need a RWD platform as well, if they want to rise above Alfa Romeo (in the pre-Giulia status) and its likes.