There's an option for me to buy a Volvo S60 2.0T auto or 2.4T SE auto, both 53-pate with 100k on the clock. I have read through the car-by-car breakdown and the previous posts of potential issues. I'm interested to hear from those who owns a higher-mileage S60 or knows about repairing high-mileage S60 on following subjects.
1) What have been repaired on your car? How much are the repair costs?
2) What's the fuel economy like between the 2.0 and 2.4? I use the car in central London and I heard that the 2.4 is significantly more thirsty in traffic.
3) Is the auto-box reliable?
4) As the 2.0 is only 20hp less than the 2.4, is the 2.0 similar to drive to the 2.4?
Thank you very much.
Regards, Gazza
|
Can't really help with the higher mileage questions but feel suitably qualified to give you some MPG figures. Got a 2004 2.0T auto and live in central London. Not great numbers :-( but bought the car for long distance work and it was much less that the cost of an similar D5.
Worst figures were around 18mpg which was after a 2.5 hour journey across London with an average speed of less than 8 miles an hour. Generally I get 22-25 mpg around town and around 30ish on the motorway. The car is so relaxing and insulated on the motorway. Sticking below 80 it is possible to get 32mpg +
Only driven a 2.4T V70 and it seemed to have slightly more pull in the mid ranges but you could never call the 2.0 slow. The 5 speed auto box can be a bit clumsy (don't have geartronic) at times but the 5th gear is a very tall over drive and unless you are really pushing it the changes are smooth.
Posted previously - had a new steering rack under warrenty to fix some heavy steering. New rain sensor as well due to a botched windscreen replacement.
|
Although the 2.0T 180 is much better - with a much fatter torque curve - than the anaemic normally aspirated 2.4i 170, although not sluggish I find it a little lacking compared to the 2.4T 200; the latter has one of the best real-world usefulness torque deliveries I've come across with useful shove from 1500 RPM, a peak at 1750RPM, and an engine that will rev out and smoothly pull to the limiter at 6300RPM instead of a diesel's sudden death between 4000 and 5000 RPM. The MPG advantage of a diesel is not an issue for me so this combination of turbo diesel grunt and smooth petrol engine revability suits me perfectly.
I chose my 2.4T over a T5 having tried both, and especially having now software tuned from 200bhp/285NM to 258hp/444NM have not regretted my decision; a superbly able machine. Since tuning, my fuel records for the Inland Revenue show an improvement from about 27 MPG to about 29MPG. My driving is a mix of all types except city. My last GPS 80MPH run on the cruise control to Stansted Airport gave 32.6 MPG, this being the highest I have seen (and am likely to see after a near uninterupted journey). In contrast, I recall that a GPS verified 158 MPH in Germany last summer gave less than 10 MPG!
|
|
16 gallons an hour. Ouch!
|
16 gallons an hour. Ouch!
I wonder where the crossover point is where the time taken by fuel stops outweighs the advantage gained by the higher speed!!
|
|
Well, a Mercedes McLaren SLR will empty its (90 litre?) fuel tank in something like a quarter of an hour at maximum speed, and a Bugatti Veyron will likewise empty its 100 litre tank in twelve and a half minutes.
|
|
|
![2024 Volvo S60 2.0 T8 [455] RC PHEV Ultimate Dark 4dr AWD Auto](http://images.honestjohn.co.uk/imagecache/url/crop/90x60/https/assets.heycar.co.uk/t_default-export/f_auto/application_assets/vehicles/pictures/4d8f506a43e7f4e47c85b533a677b5c1/3605e62a124576c1afc846bc775be556.jpg)
