Volvo S60 T5 R-Design 2012 Review

Our judges praised the S60 for its tactile throttle response, linear acceleration and well-calibrated six-speed dual-clutch transmission -- even if the combination of this transmission type with a turbocharged engine did present a little turbo lag when getting away from a standing start. We also noted more ‘creep’ when parking and reversing compared to the seven-speed unit in the Audi.

Unfortunately for Volvo the car’s front-wheel drive dynamics made their presence known when driven back-to-back against its quattro and rear-wheel drive contemporaries. The electrically-assisted steering was heavy by comparison to some on test which drew mixed reactions from our pundits.

The Volvo was also marked down for its considerable turning circle, the largest on test at 11.9 metres, and firm strut (front) / multilink (rear) suspension -- even if this did go some way towards improving the car’s cornering dynamics. S60 stopped well, its well-modulated pedal offering excellent control over the car’s four-wheel disc brakes.

Without an idle stop-start system Volvo’s fuel consumption was compromised on paper. Interestingly, though, in the real world it was the second-most efficient vehicle sampled (11.1L/100km), despite being second-last on paper (8.6L/100km).

Inside, the floating console and expansive dashboard date the S60. The simplistic design lacked warmth and some found the numerous small buttons of the centre stack to be at odds with the user-friendly indictor and wipers stalks, simple steering wheel buttons and easy-to-access trip computer.

Fortunately, the cabin was clean and well assembled, the leather upholstery also drawing positive feedback both for its beautiful presentation, natural feel and rich “real leather” aroma.

It's worth noting Volvo makes much of its cabin material selection procedures. It seeks to present the healthiest interiors possible – something more 'sensitive' buyers make wish to research further.

Good outward visibility and an excellent driving position matched to comfortable and supportive seats gave the driver a perfect command over the helm, even if the large, plasticky steering wheel was a letdown in comparison to others on test.

The contouring of the Volvo’s seats were praised for being slightly ahead of those found in the Lexus, through perhaps just behind the BMW’s. Some taller drivers did, however, note a lack of front knee room in the Swede.

The Volvo S60 offered the second smallest boot on test (430 litres) which saw it sit considerably behind the three German rivals (c. 480 litres), but comfortably ahead of the Lexus (378 litres).

Our test car was equipped with both a temporary mobility kit and space saver spare wheel. The wheel, zipped into a vinyl sleeve, was strapped to the boot floor, consuming even more precious space.

S60’s easy-to-use Bluetooth telephony package was another highlight. The audio package was on par with Audi and BMW for quality, even if all comers were eclipsed by Lexus’ excellent Mark Levinson audio system.

As mentioned earlier, the interface between the driver and those controls found in the centre array was not of the standard of, say BMW, even if the use of the trip computer and cruise control systems were markedly simple by comparison.

The instrument panel felt a bit ‘Star Trek’, according to at least one judge, even if its metallic twin dials were effective and legible. In contrast, the dot matrix centre displays were noted as ‘daggy’.

Volvo S60 scored high marks for safety. Its comprehensive array of safety equipment including standard City Safety autonomous braking (but ignoring the optional Blind Spot Information System at $2075) is still to be matched by its rivals.