Volvo XC60 D5 2009 Review

Volvo XC60 D5

Road Test

Overall rating: 3.5/5.0
Engine/Drivetrain/Chassis: 3.0/5.0
Price, Packaging and Practicality: 3.0/5.0
Safety: 4.5/5.0
Behind the wheel: 3.5/5.0
X-factor: 3.0/5.0

It's rare that the opportunity arises to take a compact luxury SUV off the road. As a general rule, manufacturers would prefer that you don't subject these increasingly popular vehicles to anything steeper than a boat ramp or anything rockier than a rockery.

And don't be misled, Volvo's XC60 is not going to shake up the established order when it comes to bush-bashing, but it does raise the bar overall in respect of styling, comfort, on-road dynamics, and safety.

Compared with the other 'new chum' in this market niche, the Audi Q5, the XC60 is similarly priced, but rides and steers better. The five-cylinder diesel in the vehicle on test is nothing like as refined as the V6 diesel in the Q5 though. Furthermore, it falls between two stools, displacing 2.5 litres -- not quite as large as the V6 in the Q5 and not as economical as the soon-to-be-released (June 2009) 2.0-litre TDI variant of the Audi.

We averaged 9.5L/100km from the diesel-engined XC60 for the week it was with us -- not exceptional but indicative of what to expect during urban use.

Volvo has configured the drivetrain -- the five drives through a sequential-shift six-speed automatic transmission -- to hold higher gears longer and change up sooner if you just leave it in Drive. This allows for reduced fuel consumption most of the time, but you do find the XC60 labouring at an engine speed below 1500rpm -- a point where the five-cylinder engine is not happiest.

There's quite a bit of vibration at this sort of speed. Given some throttle, it emits a lusty bellow, which some will appreciate for its idiosyncratic five-cylinder note.

Compensating for the NVH, the Volvo's engine is fairly muscular; an engine that's willing to give its all overtaking a slower vehicle on a short section of uphill road with four people onboard. The transmission is refined and capable, slurring the changes without prolonging them. You won't lose much momentum on an uphill grade while the transmission drops engine revs for the next upshift.

Both engine and transmission combined to propel the Volvo up a steep offroad grade with a deep mud mogul near the top during our test of the car. The Volvo didn't make it all the way up over the mud mogul due to ultimate lack of grip from the tyres, but the engine and transmission were still battling gravity long after the tyres and the traction control system were overcome.

While the XC60 appears to ride at about the same height as the smaller Volkswagen Tiguan, it plainly tip-toes better over the same rough terrain. At no point did we ground the Swedish car, whereas the Tiguan did graze a couple of underbody points (we'll let you know how the Q5 goes on the same terrain soon).

Another distinction between these two cars is the Tiguan was driven through the deeply rutted section of track during the height of Victoria's summer. The same ruts were traversed by the Volvo after a full day's drenching downpour. About midway through the rutted section, the XC60 bogged down; with some drive and no traction. The driver kept the revs up and the Volvo's Haldex system thought for a couple of seconds before diverting torque elsewhere. The next thing we knew, it was pushing itself out of the deepest part of the muddy ruts -- much to the astonishment of the driver of a jacked-up HiLux who thought the Volvo was a goner.

But it's this slowish response of the four-wheel drive system that might bring XC60 drivers unstuck -- or stuck, in fact. While it worked effectively when needed, it only really hit its straps once the car was practically at standstill.

There were other circumstances too, when the system was a little late to the party. Approaching an uphill grade obliquely, the longer-than-Tiguan wheelbase of the Volvo and its relative lack of wheel articulation left diagonally-opposed wheels with limited traction.

Once again, there was the wait of a couple of seconds before the drive to the rear wheels picked up the slack as required. When it did, the XC60 continued on its way, but you could do without minties moments like those.

Although the XC60 is closer in size to the Q5 (and closer in price and specification too), it feels almost as nimble on the road as the Tiguan. Generally the XC60's steering is well weighted, but starts to feel just a little light at higher speeds.

There's substantially more feel in the XC60 than for the Audi Q5. Furthermore, with its fairly neutral handling the XC60 always feels lively and 'chuckable' -- meaning the turn-in is faster than the Audi's, particularly the Q5 with the 3.0-litre TDI V6.

The Volvo's ride is perhaps not quite exceptional, but it's both very well controlled and compliant -- certainly well ahead of the Q5's and without giving anything away in vehicle dynamics. The only way the Q5 can approach the XC60 for ride quality is when the 'Comfort' mode is selected using the Q5's optional Audi Drive Select feature. (Check out our local launch drive of the XC60 here and the Audi Q5 here.)

Passenger comfort has been a key priority for the XC60's designers. That's plain as soon as you enter the vehicle. From a packaging standpoint, the XC60 and the Q5 are very closely competitive. There's excellent headroom front and rear, in the case of both vehicles, and the XC60 only starts to become cramped in the rear if the front seats are adjusted as far aft as possible. Even then, there's adequate kneeroom for adults of average size. Topping things off in the Volvo's favour, it offers easy access and a relatively high H-point which is nonetheless not too high.

Kids in the rear may find the view better from the Q5 than the XC60, since the rising beltline obscures the view to the side for littlies. The XC60's triple-split rear seat is useful and, if the central seating position is unoccupied, it can fold down in two elements (centre armrest and cupholders).

From the driver's seat, the XC60 offers interesting styling and layout for the instruments and controls. The HVAC and audio system controls in the 'floating' centre fascia are angled slightly towards the driver. In keeping with similar design on other Volvos, it's all fairly simple to use and functionally elegant.

The vehicle on test was finished in a two-tone Espresso and Beige colour scheme for the soft fixtures, complemented by Nordic Light Oak woodgrain. In all, the XC60's ambience in this colour and trim combination was restful and practical.

The seats are both comfortable and supportive, plus they and the steering wheel are easily adjusted for driver comfort and command. Much like the Tiguan, the XC60's driving position does seem a bit lower than what many might expect of an SUV, but the very fact that it's more car-like is a bonus.

The Lane Departure Warning facility proved itself highly effective on what was admittedly a fairly well maintained country road. It did stumble on one of Melbourne's arterial roads, mistaking a trench dug and refilled in the road surface for an unbroken painted line -- and alerted the driver even though the vehicle was still in the lane. It might be a little too sensitive, unlike Audi's system which seems to be the reverse; not sensitive enough.

We're finding with a couple of cars recently that the crescendo of the reverse-parking acoustic guidance system escalates too quickly, forcing the driver to approach obstacles while reversing at slower speeds than has been the norm in the past. It may be deliberate or not, but it's something of an issue with the XC60. The car's system didn't fill us completely with confidence.

City Safety is another feature of the XC60 we didn't feel confident testing, but the Volvo did emit an audible alert when we anticipated a left-turning car leaving the path ahead of the Volvo and didn't slow enough to placate the car's built-in safety system.

Both the XC60 and the Q5 come with spacesaver spares, but the Audi's seems to contribute to luggage space better than the Volvo's does. If you plan to take the Volvo further afield, you'll probably want to investigate a full-size spare.

So which is the better of the two cars new to this market? It's really a question of personal preference. The Audi is quiet and refined with plenty of straightline performance and fuel efficiency, but the Volvo is just a little nicer in the bends and the ride/handling balance definitely scores points for Gothenborg.

In fact, the XC60 is impressively adept right across a range of conflicting design criteria. It's stylish -- as the Q5 is -- but it's perhaps just a little more user-friendly in day-to-day driving too.

Read the latest Carsales Network news and reviews on your mobile, iPhone or PDA at www.carsales.mobi