VOLVO XC60 Test Drive

Our test car: Volvo XC60 D5 Summum
70 / 100
#

January 21st, 2009

users' rating

54 / 100


16 votes total
rate this car: 1/100


I. History
VOLVO XC60  - History

I. History

7 / 10
share:      
text size: A- A+
The fact that Volvo's main reputation was built on safety is now common knowledge to pretty much everyone, and it's also a bit of an understatement. Almost each person who hasn't been living under a rock for the last 50 years can most categorically say that “car safety” equals “Volvo”. Because of this, when the Swedish launch their newest model with the tagline “The safest Volvo in history”, you're kind of bound to expect that car to be as safe as a Kryptonite suit during a Superman-gone-bad attack.

The newly-launched XC60 compact SUV/crossover is based on the Volvo P24/Ford EUCD platform, the same one that can be found under another Swedish crossover, the XC70. So, a higher, wider but shorter XC70 that isn't quite a station wagon on stilts. Volvo themselves say that it “shares some technology” with other products from the Swedish car brand, which is another way of saying that once you “peel” an XC60 you're bound to find a smaller (or a bigger, in our case) car underneath.

Them saying that the XC60 is the safest Volvo in history is of course raising some obvious question marks. Taking into account it uses almost the same safety features that are to be found on almost any other modern Volvo, what does it have to make it so special? Well, they call it the “City Safety” concept.

Considering Volvo=car safety in most languages, the Swedish manufacturer somewhat lagged behind in the development of safety features involving laser or radar-based crash sensors a la Mercedes-Benz's Pre-Safe or Lexus' Pre-Crash System. With the launch of the XC60 crossover they've reduced that lag to a more acceptable level by adding the “City Safety” feature as standard.

Not to be taken exactly as it's being advertised, the system uses three lasers mounted on the windshield just in front of the interior rearview mirror to scan the road ahead and inform both you and the brakes if a collision is imminent with the vehicle ahead. Well, contrary to what the commercials might have made us to believe, the system doesn't quite makes the car brake by itself in those advertised situations. But more on that later, in the safety chapter of our test drive.

We drove the Volvo XC60 D5 with the Summum trim level specifications, minus some not-so-vital features such as the front passenger seat with electric adjustment. Apart from the ragged-ol' horse dynamics of the diesel engine, this seems to be a pretty good buying choice in the premium crossover market.

table of contents:

  your opinion about this car

send
comment
132,840 hits · Share · Send via email · Print

comments written so far

On 29 January 2009 at 00:36 UTC, Rudolf said:
Your primary complaint seems to be that the engine is underpowered. In the US, the only available engine is an in-line normally aspirated 6 cylinder. Is this version not available in your country? I am particularly fond of an in-line 6 configuration since it offers perfect primary and secondary balance.
On 29 January 2009 at 03:33 UTC, Alex.Oagana said:
I believe you are mistaking. In the US the only engine version available right now is the twin-turbocharged inline six cylinder T6, not natural aspirated. We didn't get the chance to drive that version yet (we also have it in Europe) but considering it has precisely 100 hp more than the D5 diesel we drove, I assume that's a bit far from underpowered. :)

The fuel economy on the other hand shouldn't be stellar, with Volvo expecting something like 16/22 mpg in city/highway, but at least it can run on regular gas.
On 2 February 2009 at 19:39 UTC, james blazen said:
the us xc60 comes w/ the 281 hp engine which is not a bit underpowered. and the pillars arent really that bad. my only complaint is the rear lights
On 15 October 2009 at 17:24 UTC, Gabi said:
I own this car. It's superb!
On 11 June 2010 at 03:21 UTC, Miksol said:
Perhaps a re-review is needed now that we have the 2010 model D5 AWD with a very tractable 150kW twin turbo diesel engine that pulls like an ox.
You do need to plan a little if you are going to tramp on the accelerator from idle as the turbo lag will put your heart in your mouth, until the punch in the kidneys pulls it back down into your chest. Added to that the highway fuel economy is even better. Best trip I did averaged 6.8L/100km, very good for a not so compact bus. This is a really excellent car. I love mine!
On 12 November 2010 at 13:05 UTC, Panakas said:
Its an absolutely beautiFul car. Fast spacious luxurious and prestigious enough. It is not overpriced as the Q5, X3, or GLK. As for safety, there is nothing more you can ask .
On 5 February 2011 at 21:13 UTC, Takis said:
Best car ever!
On 5 February 2011 at 21:14 UTC, Panos said:
Super good for the family!
On 16 February 2011 at 17:25 UTC, BBBBBB said:
Trendy, luxurious, reliable and sporty looks !
On 26 February 2011 at 15:55 UTC, Panos said:
Very very good but T5 engine is the best!
On 18 March 2011 at 17:48 UTC, ecce said:
This engine is slow? The editors should get a good education in environment protection, peak oil, sensible driving and rationality. This is an SUV, not a sports car. It is not meant to be fast. If there are faster SUVs that because of the distortion of the SUV idea. Faster, faster, faster, until an SUV becomes as fast as what?
On 7 April 2011 at 04:39 UTC, luxati said:
put some music on and press the accelerator
On 19 August 2011 at 02:38 UTC, David said:
interested in xc60d5 owners' comments on the clarity of the speedo when driving on a bright day or into the sun? With no back lighting the speed graduations are hard to read. According to Volvo the "forward" shining lights from above the speed/rev dials is a safety feature as it is less tiring on the eyes when driving at night. But what about during the day!
On 19 January 2012 at 18:43 UTC, badcyclist said:
This is a terrific car. The "guest stars" here are completely off their rockers, especially Mr. May B. Amoron. We have the AWD standard 3.2 engine (U.S.) and it has plenty of pep, handles great for a CUV, and unlike most other cars in the luxury small SUV/CUV category uses regular rather than premium gas. 23mpg in mixed driving, YMMV.